Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/02/26/watch-trailer-for-hbos-fahr.html
…
6 Likes
Boy I don’t know… Great lead actors, so I think the performances will be good… But Having recently read the book… it’s so much about the inner life of the fireman and they way media/entertainment alienate everyone (especially the fireman and his wife)- I just don’t see that in the trailer.
It’s also fundamentally ironic that this material be adapted to TV when one of its most prescient predictions is that people will become addicted to television that exists everywhere inside the home.
7 Likes
I find that movie and TV based on books are usually best seen as interpretive adaptations. The mediums are simply too different for direct translation and very few books I’ve read would work well on screen without altering how much of the story is delivered. As long as it’s true to the spirit of the book, I consider that a good foundation, even if the details are substantially altered.
7 Likes
Yeah you’re right: its probably not a good idea to expect the same thing from film/tv adaptations. But sometimes it begs the question why are they doing it if it changes the fundamental themes involved? We’ll just have to see if that’s the case in this instance…
4 Likes
The thing that’s need I think is a filmmaker who can successfully interpret those themes within the constraints of a new medium. I’d argue that there are more failed adaptations of written works than successful ones because a successful adaptation is its own new work of art, which is no more guaranteed than the original one was. But without the failures, which we can ignore, we wouldn’t get the occasional successes. It’s just Sturgeon’s law: ninety percent of everything is crap.
5 Likes
This looks awful. The original worked because of the sense of disaffected normalcy, juxtaposed with the horror of what the firemen were doing. This looks all amped-up.
4 Likes
whistles innocently also nsfw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1IxOS4VzKM
5 Likes
The novel is a cautionary tale about everybody (except the special few) quitting books in favor of teevee. But who has teevee any more? Now it’s the internet, right?
“You know what’s inside these books? Insanity! The internet is sane, okay?”
3 Likes
The 1966 film version is nothing to sneeze at. Quite stylish.
12 Likes
For the record I’m not opposed to a film adaptation of Fahrenheit, or any other works as long as the main message is preserved. There are tons and tons of people who are illiterate, dyslexic, or otherwise unable or not inclined to read important literature and they should be able to enjoy and understand it as well as anybody.
Come on though, it was just too good for me to not snark at it 
2 Likes
No criticism intended. I just wanted to throw the 1966 version out there for consideration; I’m sure that many have not see it.
1 Like
Conveniently, also serves as a trailer for What’s Coming…
LOL “on your person or within 1-3 feet nearly 24/7/365” would have been more accurate, although thinking of it as a “television” was also so, so narrow… heheh
1 Like
Speaking of which, I wonder what temperature Kindles burn at?
5 Likes
Will there be a tremendously overwrought Mechanical Hound? I might at least hope for an elaborate Parlor Wall. I seem to recall that even Mr. Bradbury was a little disappointed that something more imposing could not be developed for the 1966 version.
Maybe just some long rambling passages from Ecclesiastes. That ought to play well.
And whatsoever mine eyes desired I kept not from them, I withheld not my heart from any joy; for my heart rejoiced in all my labour: and this was my portion of all my labour. Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun.
3 Likes
Especially in this case since Bradbury himself claimed the story was intended as a warning about the evils of TV instead of a story about censorship.
I got to briefly meet Bradbury on a couple of occasions. For a guy popularly known as a “science fiction” writer (another popular consensus he disagreed with) he was quite the Luddite. If I had to describe his personality I’d probably go with “lovable curmudgeon.”
5 Likes
I’m just happy that Michael Shannon will finally get a chance to play a sadistic government authoritarian with a twisted sense of piety bordering on fanaticism.
7 Likes
1 Like
