The authorial voice between The Apartment, E.T. and Adaptation are three clear contrasts to me.
First off, I did indeed enjoy reading Adaptation. After reading it I did however do some research into the movie to better understand what was going on in the actuality of everything going on. The different scenes and events, though confusing, unraveled seamlessly and with reason. The authorial voice compared to The Apartment seemed more sincere towards the protagonist and the events taking place. The actions and dialog were presented in a way that made me identify with each character and there motifs. The Apartments authorial voice seemed almost like an observant/description of the actions and evens, and at times the dialog. E.T. however felt a little closer to the style Adaptation was written in save the technical camera cues. It therefore seems, to me, that the authorial voice has more to do with the selective writing style and a conscious taking care of how the character actions and dialog unravel more than technical writing such as slug lines and technical camera cues. That is my observation between The Apartment, E.T. and Adaptation.
Michael Carrington
Q1. For those who haven't seen the movie (and knew utterly nothing of), did the first few scenes seem confusing?
Q2. Does anyone know where the story discards fact and meets fiction?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Well I think you mean between the book and the film. Charlie Kaufman isn't fat or bald, he doesn't have a twin brother. Susan Orlean did not have any type of sexual relationship with Laroche or do drugs, pose naked or threaten to kill anybody for that matter.
I had never seen this movie, nor had I ever heard anything about it. While reading the script I wondered the entire time what the first scenes had to do with anything. Then very slowly, piece by piece, it came together wonderfully.
Post a Comment