The Princess Bride

[jpskewedthrone]

I have just finished reading the book "The Princess Bride" by William Goldman and thought I'd take a moment to talk about books, movies, and just stuff.

First off, I saw the movie a long time ago (and have seen it repeatedly since) and so reading the book turned out to be . . . disappointing. Oh, it was certainly well written, but in the end, the movie and the book are close enough in plot and character that it became just another version of the movie. There were a few things in the book that weren't in the movie of course. In fact, there was one entire scene near the beginning of the book where I burst out laughing and couldn't stop for the next page or two because the hilarity continued. But most of the good points of the book were also in the movie, so these "extra" moments were rare and few and far between. Of course, this got me thinking about whether movies or books are better, and why, and wherefor, and then of course the obvious question anyone will ask at this point: Was the book or the movie better?

And of course I'll say the movie. But I only say the movie because I saw the movie first and didn't read the book first. It's impossible for me to "remove" the movie experience from my head and attempt to place a judgment on the quality of the book without that experience there . . . but I'll try anyway. *grin*

If I had read the book before seeing the movie . . . I'd say that the book was good. I'd recommend it to friends. I would not have said that the book was spectacular.

So in a strange case (because typically it's obvious that the book was better than the movie or vice verse), I'd say that the book and movie were both good and that they complement each other. I think this is extremely rare. If you've seen the movie, you should read the book; and if you've read the book, you should really see the movie. They go well together.

As an aside, in the edition of the book I bought, there's the first chapter of the sequel to the Princess Bride called "Buttercup's Baby" and I'd have to say that the sequel did not feel the same as the rest of the book. Goldman actually points out that it's different in tone and feel because Morgenstern wrote them so many years apart, which is of course the reason they feel different. But based on what I read of the "sequel", I'm not sure I would pick it up if it ever came out. (This is a little tongue-in-cheek here, since that's what the tone of the entire book is like.) I mean, there were moments where I felt like I was back in The Princess Bride again, but there were also quite a few moments that didn't have the same feel, the same . . . ease and innocence of The Princess Bride. Or perhaps I mean the same simplicity. The story of The Princess Bride is excellent because it is so simple, in such a complex way. The sequel (the one chapter provided) just didn't have that same simplicity of plot. In one chapter, it already felt more convoluted and complicated than the entirety of The Princess Bride.

In any case, I'm glad I read the book. If you haven't already, you should. If you haven't seen the movie . . . blasphemy! Everyone should have seen the movie!! It's a classic that will never die!!!

(Memorable Quotes from The Princess Bride here.)

Comments

[jpsorrow.livejournal.com]

I'm usually more about the book as well.