Re: [MOPO] Films better than the books?

[Craig Goebel]

Combining both matters -   Jacob Two-Two Meets the Hooded Fang 1978, from the story by the late, great Mordecai Richler both fine efforts, with Alex Karras as the Hooded Fang and then remade, poorly, in 1999, perhaps because the Hooded Fang was performed (?) by Gary Busey!   How about novels considered unfilmable but made into films? Here are some of my favorites.                                Novel                               Movie                                                Posters Candy                   cheeky fun                         cringe-inducing but can't look away     busy, fun Catch 22                sardonic, HILARIOUS      cutdown, to mildly ironic                    too hairy The Magus             cerebral, moralistic            dull, sanctimonious                             colorful Myra Breckinridge  unreadable, vulgar             cringe-inducingly awful                        Raquel! Seven Minutes        prurient                             dull, overwrought                               too wordy Slaughterhouse 5    effervescent, pointed         disturbing, disjointed                           bit dull Steppenwolf           portentous                        boring                                                 too cool   The two Candy posters are fine and I am looking for a unique Argentine version. The better Catch 22 is the French poster of Yossarian caught on the Catch 22 rather than the naked Yossarian with his medals. The Magus has the small pix and a good color scheme. Myra has Raquel - 'nuff said. 7M had Edy Williams and didn't exploit her - how shortsighted was that. S5 has a good pictorial theme, but the black wavy lines are a bit distracting. Steppenwolf is psychedelic fun.       Craig   ----- Original Message ----- From: Craig Miller To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 5:27 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] Films better than the books? At 05:07 PM 5/5/06 -0700, David Kusumoto wrote: >** More than "Star Wars," Spielberg's "Jaws" -- for better or worse -- began >the concept of opening "wide" (gasp, 400 theaters vs. today's 4,000 >screens!) -- hastening the demise of single-screen movie-houses and the >"blockbuster" mentality that nearly buried Hollywood in the late 1970s. Since Star Wars opened on 32 screens, it had quite little to do with the concept of "opening wide".  Prior to the 1970s, there were lots of "wide" openings.  In fact, one of the things that killed true Technicolor and resulted in the dismantling of the old imbubition machines is that studios stopped doing wide openings.  They did platform releases, regional rollouts and roadshows.  The old machines weren't economical for striking that few prints.  It wasn't until a few years into the '80s, I believe, that the studios really started trying to do big wide releases, to the point that they were taking out trade ads announcing just how wide they were opening. Craig. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Craig Miller         Wolfmill Entertainment        [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~          Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com    ___________________________________________________________________               How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List                                            Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]             In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L                                         The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/327 - Release Date: 28/04/06 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.