ladymirth: (yay kermit)
ladymirth ([personal profile] ladymirth) wrote2008-12-17 04:24 pm
Entry tags:

I haz X-mas prezzie!

HERE LIES BRILLIANCE!

And the Awesomesauce Award of the Year goes to.... [profile] pgwfolc !

Paul, you sweetheart!! (♥ x squishes) millionty! 

Indeed, going so long in ignorance of Inigo Montoya is pop-cultural blasphemy. Thanks for helping me correct this gaping flaw in my education. 

*dances with Kermit*







 
ext_3159: HatMan (Default)

[identity profile] pgwfolc.livejournal.com 2008-12-20 10:07 am (UTC)(link)
It's like this... The movie cut out all reference to Morgenstern, the old country, and the "original version." Which means that you don't get the thing about the hats and the quest for the Holocaust Cloak and all that stuff.

(And there are some other changes, too. Humperdink is still an expert tracker, but he's also a skinny pompous coward. And there's no menagerie. Some other stuff, too.)

But without those interruptions, the story truly flows. And, more, the film brings it to life. There's a difference between reading the battle of wits and watching it play out. And... you know how they always say to writers "show, don't tell"? The book tells you about Miracle Max's relationship with his witch, but the movie shows you... and there's nothing like watching him being chased around the hut while she goes "Humperdink!Humperdink!Humperdink!" Oh, and the Albino gets introduced to us with a classic gag that you just can't pull off in words.

Having read the book, you'll know more about the background of things. You'll understand where the four white horses came from and why Max hates Humperdink and why he calls his wife "witch" and so on. Little things, ultimately, but hopefully they'll serve to give you a deeper appreciation for the movie. But, IMHO, there's little question... the movie tells the story better.

[identity profile] never-evil.livejournal.com 2008-12-20 09:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Thing is though that I LOVED those references. Actually, I figured the movie would have cut them and I don't think it would have worked well in the movie in the first place but still that is one of the things in the book I adore. I started loving it even more when I realised that I had actually been fooled by the framing devise: I actually went on Google to find the whole version of the book to buy because I wanted to read 32 pages on how the princess packed and unpacked her toilette.

I have no doubt the movie would have a better flow to the book but sometimes one loves book because of its flaws and its stuttering. Not that I ever thought that of the book. But you are right I should give the movie a try on its own merit and like I always try to do not view an adaptation critically just because things have been changed from the original written form. I will one day for sure. Meanwhile I hope that the people who saw the movie first can still come and appreciate the wit and charm of the book.

Another thing is that the book had little pieces like the Unexplained Inigo Fragment which I love, love, love but I am sure never would make it into the movie.
ext_3159: HatMan (Default)

[identity profile] pgwfolc.livejournal.com 2008-12-21 03:38 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, they were fun, I grant. I don't think I enjoyed them quite as much as you did, but I liked the idea. And there were some very nice moments in them. Was just trying to give you a feel for the movie, I guess. Which, yes, needs to be viewed on its own terms.

Anyway, I can provide you with the movie download links, if you want.

[identity profile] never-evil.livejournal.com 2008-12-22 03:01 am (UTC)(link)
Fair enough.

Oh I already have the movie - downloaded it with much enthusiasm when I had just finished the book but then my brain began to over-think it and I thought maybe I don't want to see it lol. But I think I will one day when I am in the mood.