![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Requiem for a Dream is one of those rare films about drug use that actually make sense. It deals rather nicely with the usual logic of becoming a dealer being a get rich quick scheme too which is a complete departure from most material covering the same topic. The boom period where the main characters are doing well through their drug dealing is shown as profitable but also transient; usually in films like this the situation is far too polarised where the viewer is only shown desperate junkies or successful, morally bankrupt dealers taking advantage of them. There doesn’t tend to be any kind of illustration of that middle ground where there’s temporary success founded on a rather unstable economy so Requiem for a Dream covers that nicely.
Having not read the novel I can’t comment on the faithfulness of the adaptation but it was a riveting watch. It’s the sort of film that shows the negativity of drug addiction without the sometimes excessively gritty realism of things like Trainspotting or the daft educational preaching of things like Reefer Madness. There’s a detachment about watching Requiem for a Dream, a surreal quality that had me thinking about the film long after I’d watched it which aids its impact. It’s the sort of film you consider afterwards, if only in remembered visuals and that makes it sit with the viewer long after the fact.
Overall it’s a bleak yet brilliant film because unlike plenty of others in the genre nobody gets saved at the end, each character heads down their own path to damnation but there’s little pathos to them, and no noble dignity to save any of them at the end of the line.
Bret Easton Ellis’ novel Less Than Zero is magnificent: the film adaptation on the other hand is just very, very odd. Barely anything makes sense about the film. For starters the characterisation is typical teen movie slock which makes the cinematic counterparts of novel characters jar already. Then due to the characterisation the events that unfold and the reactions to them are just bizarre.
The film adaptation of Less Than Zero is consistent with its own internal logic certainly but it’s nothing like the novel. It’s not even a new and interesting twist on the novel, it entirely misses out the novel's main theme and instead gives the viewer a somewhat ‘gritty’ teen friendship drama with a rather overt dose of anti-drugs message. In fact possibly one of the most bizarre parts of the film was watching the main character of the novels giving what can only be surmised as an anti-drug speech, though his protestations of love to a character that he canonically states he’s not even sure about come a close second.
This is the sort of film that I’m glad I’ve watched just because otherwise I might be of the mistaken and anticipatory opinion that it might be of some good. It’s not, it’s bizarre and you know just how bad it is when you find yourself empathising with the film’s reprehensible villain. Of the three film adaptations of Bret Easton Ellis’ novels that I've seen so far, Less Than Zero should have been filled with beautiful despair instead it was reduced to a handful of characters in common with the novel, a few settings and a name. Even the adaptation of The Rules of Attraction didn’t twist the story out of shape quite this badly.
Having not read the novel I can’t comment on the faithfulness of the adaptation but it was a riveting watch. It’s the sort of film that shows the negativity of drug addiction without the sometimes excessively gritty realism of things like Trainspotting or the daft educational preaching of things like Reefer Madness. There’s a detachment about watching Requiem for a Dream, a surreal quality that had me thinking about the film long after I’d watched it which aids its impact. It’s the sort of film you consider afterwards, if only in remembered visuals and that makes it sit with the viewer long after the fact.
Overall it’s a bleak yet brilliant film because unlike plenty of others in the genre nobody gets saved at the end, each character heads down their own path to damnation but there’s little pathos to them, and no noble dignity to save any of them at the end of the line.
Bret Easton Ellis’ novel Less Than Zero is magnificent: the film adaptation on the other hand is just very, very odd. Barely anything makes sense about the film. For starters the characterisation is typical teen movie slock which makes the cinematic counterparts of novel characters jar already. Then due to the characterisation the events that unfold and the reactions to them are just bizarre.
The film adaptation of Less Than Zero is consistent with its own internal logic certainly but it’s nothing like the novel. It’s not even a new and interesting twist on the novel, it entirely misses out the novel's main theme and instead gives the viewer a somewhat ‘gritty’ teen friendship drama with a rather overt dose of anti-drugs message. In fact possibly one of the most bizarre parts of the film was watching the main character of the novels giving what can only be surmised as an anti-drug speech, though his protestations of love to a character that he canonically states he’s not even sure about come a close second.
This is the sort of film that I’m glad I’ve watched just because otherwise I might be of the mistaken and anticipatory opinion that it might be of some good. It’s not, it’s bizarre and you know just how bad it is when you find yourself empathising with the film’s reprehensible villain. Of the three film adaptations of Bret Easton Ellis’ novels that I've seen so far, Less Than Zero should have been filled with beautiful despair instead it was reduced to a handful of characters in common with the novel, a few settings and a name. Even the adaptation of The Rules of Attraction didn’t twist the story out of shape quite this badly.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-14 05:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-20 04:45 pm (UTC)