But I'd like to see another go at it, maybe even starring Paul Newman as Henry.The film is based on Ken Kesey's complex novel of a contemporary family of lumberjacks who stubbornly maintain 19th-century frontier values, and whose motto is "Never Give a Inch." The Stamper's patriarch, Henry (Henry Fonda), his son Hank (Newman) and nephew Joe Ben (Richard Jaeckel) alienate the entire community by refusing to participate in a local strike, because they're anti-union and want to honor their contract to deliver lumber They overcome hostility, sabotage and violence, but succumb to nature Hank is another of Newman's tough, macho individualist, somewhat like "Hud." He brawls, hunts, drinks beer constantly, has no social conscience, and is coldly sarcastic, especially toward the strikers and his half-brother Lee (Michael Sarrazin), a hippie with pro-union and women's lib ideas Hank shares his father's professional pride, rigid conservatism and purpose in life: 'To work and eat and sleep and screw and drinkthat's all there is." The women play a marginal role, as is customary in male adventure filmsthey cook, clean and are passive sex objects Despite the ideological schizophrenia, ill-defined relationships and implausible plot resolutions, the film is surprisingly stirring Newman captures with zest the details of logging and the robust family life, as well as the kind of exhilarating camaraderie and professionalism that characterized the best thirties adventure films This extroverted masculine adventure contrasts sharply with the two introverted, confined, feminine dramas he has directed, but, interestingly, the combination of toughness and sensitivity constitutes Newman's own screen image. It would have to be a rather long movie, three hours or so, to portray the texture presented in the novel.
SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION IMDB MOVIE
Obviously, a novel needs to be pared in order to fit into the standard movie length. There is a little second person narrative at the beginning of most chapters that pull the reader out of the story to offer additional flavor for the surroundings. The novel is written, mostly, in the first person from various points of view. One small portion of the novel is actually narrated by a dog. Also missed was the passing of narrative from character to character. Also missed were a lot of great scenes when Henry and Leland were children (Henry rescuing Leland from the Devil's Stovepipe, for one). We needed to see young Henry take charge ("we're gonna whup her") and begin the logging business that becomes the crux of the story.
We needed to see Jonah fail and surrender to the dampness of the Pacific Northwest and desert his family. We needed to see Johah Stamper "heading west" with young Henry and his brother. But more to the point, the movie needed more back-story. Sarrazin probably could have pulled it off, but back in the early 70s, actors were into looking like people from the early 70s. I always pictured a sort of geeky-looking, bespectacled, beatnick-looking guy with scruffy hair, but still fairly short, and sideburns. But Michael Sarrazin didn't quite do it for me. I think Paul Newman, Henry Fonda and Lee Remick were perfect, as were many of the supporting cast. It hits the major point (brother returns to hometown to exact revenge on older sibling), but misses a lot of the flavor.
The movie only captures the novel in broad strokes.
While I see some merit in this movie version, I'd like to see someone have another go at it. I have read Kesey's novel several times over the last 30 years or so.
0 kommentar(er)
