In this post I want to cover two things. The first: After seeing some clips from the movie in class today, I noticed a few differences between the movie and the book. The second: Many people have been posting about what a bad person Anse is, and, although he does deserve criticism, I don't think he deserves it to such an extent.
1. I get the feeling that the Bundrens aren't really portrayed as eccentrically in the movie. Of course, I only have several minutes of material to make this judgement about. Perhaps it was the fact that the movie really lacked the comedic aspect of the book. The book often ridiculously portrayed the Bundrens, and since movies have a harder time combining comedy with more serious material, the filmmakers were forced to eliminate some of this ridiculousness. I also think that the movie clarified some aspects of the plot. I think the scene where Darl is taken away was a lot more clear in the movie than in the book. I also got a clearer picture of what was going on during the river crossing.
2. In case you are unfamiliar with some of the criticism of Anse, I recommend you read Shaleen's latest post. His post was well written and really made some great points. I understand people's frustrations with Anse, and let me make clear that I hold no respect whatsoever for the man. I do not, however think he is as bad as some people portray him in their posts. Remember that Anse Bundren always had luck against him. He may not have been the smartest of men, or even at all rational, but that is something we need to accept in some people. The decision to go bury his wife was not a very good one, but really he did not really hurt his family until the river crossing. Sure, he should have turned around, but Anse is not smart. Once he crossed the river, most of his actions were justifiable. He had to buy a new team. What choice did he have? He couldn't simply leave the wagon and all the stuff. Once he got to town, his actions become a bit more difficult to justify. He took Dewey Dell's money, but he didn't know she was pregnant. He almost certainly blamed Addie for his troubles both before and after the journey. Perhaps he believed he deserved some compensation for his troubles. If nothing else, it at least justified his acquisition of a new wife. Anse definitely does not come across as malicious. We get no such sense from his narration. Sure, Anse was not the brightest of men. Sure, Anse could be somewhat inconsiderate of his family's needs. Sure, he made some bad decisions. Sure, he could have been a better husband and father. He just does not seem to me like that terrible of a guy.
Poor Anse--it's tough when one of your most ardent defenders qualifies his comments by saying that he "holds no respect whatsoever" for him! But your view of Anse in some ways is mirrored in the views of his neighbors--there's an exasperation, and even a lack of total respect, but a neighborly impulse to acknowledge he's "doing the best he can" and to try and help out in some way. Rolling their eyes all the while.
ReplyDeleteI think that James Franco decided to really focus on a lot of the tragedy that surrounds the Bundrens. Most of it may be self inflicted but some of it just seems bad luck. His portrayal of the river scene with the log coming out of nowhere really shows this. Other than that I felt as if the movie may have been more of an artistic outlet for Franco. Unlike some of the others, I found it to be a little to "artsy". I think it could have done without the split screen and tried to show who the characters were with their actions and not with the inner monologues.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious to know if you liked the movie more than the book, because although both have the same plot, the way the characters and settings are portrayed are very different. I want to say I like the movie more, because I'm usually one to draw towards visual things. But honestly, I enjoyed the book more. This is because I appreciated the sly comedy and the way we see Darl's "craziness" evolve.
ReplyDelete