Skip to main content

My concerns for the adaptation of The Goldfinch

An editorial by Brooks Rich

September is the start of Oscar season. All those high profile films that will be vying for the big prize of best picture, (it's never the true best picture of the year, but I won't get into that here,) are released starting in September. The first major contender will be the adaptation of the Pulitzer Prize winning novel The Goldfinch, releasing on September 13 and directed by John Crowley, who gave us the film Brooklyn in 2015, which was very good. Roger Deakins is the cinematographer and the cast is stacked, maybe the most stacked cast of the year. All signs point to a major Oscar contender. 

Personally I don't think the film is going to work. Now I do have some amount of bias because this is one of my favorite novels. I adore this book and have read it a ridiculous amount of times. The plot, in the very basic of terms, centers on thirteen-year-old Theodore "Theo" Decker, an adolescent growing up in New York City who loses his mother to a terrorist bombing at an art museum. While escaping the museum, Theo is given a painting his mother was admiring earlier. A painting of a gold finch. The rest of the novel is a startling, in-depth coming of age tale as Theo travels from New York to Las Vegas and back to New York, all the while holding onto this painting. It's an impressive and staggering piece of literature and if I ever create a book blog, that'll be the first book I cover. 

So why do I think this film won't work? There's two main concerns I have with adapting this film to the screen. The first could possibly be fixed if it was a series on Netflix or HBO. The novel is so large and intense and there's so much to dive into that I find it hard to believe it can be justified in two and a half hours. Even if this film is three and a half hours, it'll have a hard time establishing the characters and situations. Boris in Las Vegas alone should get his own film for God's sake. 

My second reason is not a slam on any of the actors. This is an impressive cast and they all have their merits as actors. But I don't see how anyone can properly portray Theo. He's the narrator and his growth and development in the novel is the main driving force...... the establishment of his moral code and his love for art. He's a character we spend a lot of time listening to as he goes inside his own mind. How does any visual adaptation of that work? Boris is another character which I have a hard time believing can be justifiably performed. He's a very complex character in the novel, arguably the most important person in Theo's life, and relegating him to a supporting actor in a film doesn't seem right. 

Maybe I'm wrong. I could come on this blog after seeing this film and call it the best film of the year and say the Academy is crazy if they don't reward it Best Picture. Or I call it an unworthy piece of pretentious crap that bit off more than it could chew. Or it falls somewhere in the middle. Who knows? But I feel somewhat protective of a novel I have loved and cherished and gotten absorbed in time and time again. I don't want to see Hollywood come and just water it down and yet I am getting those vibes from the trailer. 



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

John Travolta month: Saturday Night Fever

 A retrospective by Brooks Rich So this was not the big start of John Travolta's career. That would be the classic sitcom Welcome Back, Kotter. But this did elevate Travolta to another level. For any of you going oh come on. This silly movie with a disco soundtrack? Come on, Brooks. Just wait. Have you ever actually seen this? This isn't about disco. Disco just happens to be the music of choice. This about the kind of people who are kings at the dance clubs and then losers the rest of the time. There is a lot of darkness and truth in this film. So if you've never seen it please. Do yourself a flavor and check it out. Just watch it and then come back to read this.  This is a movie about the different types of people we become between our real lives and our weekend lives. Tony Manero is a regular working class guy in a Brooklyn neighborhood, struggling to make ends meet and dealing with his loving but at times overbearing family. He lives in the shadow of his priest brother. ...

John Travolta month

 Get your dancing shoes on! Order a Royale with Cheese! Blow millions in an overblown sci-fi disaster built around a weird Hollywood religion! Because for the month of June we are discussing the filmography of the one and only John Travolta. A man saved from being a laughing stock in the early '90s by a director making one of the greatest American masterpiece. A man who then had a stunning run of films before blowing all his goodwill not once but twice. But we of course do not disparage the great John Travolta. We want to celebrate him like we do with all of our monthly subjects. 

Forgotten Film Friday: Absolute Power

Clint Eastwood stars as Luther Whitney, a jewel thief who works in the Washington DC area. One night while he is stealing from a mansion he is forced to hide in a secret compartment with a two way mirror. From there he observes a sexual rezendevous with the wife of a powerful man and the President of the United States Alan Richmond (Gene Hackman) Suddenly the president gets aggressive and while defending herself the woman is shot to death by two Secret Service agents. Luther manages to get away with a letter opener the woman stabbed the president with. At first Luther plans to flee the country. But when he is disgusted by a statement the president makes, Luther decides to expose the crime. I miss these kind of films. The nineties was a great time for thrillers exactly like this. They are not the flashiest films but they are also not obsessed with big action scenes. It's all plot and character with them. Sure this plot might be a little out there but Eastwood makes it work. He's...