Our BetterMost Community > Chez Tremblay
Ennis, Cassie and the Twists (revised title)
serious crayons:
Oh, I guess you're right! I must have picked it up just hanging around here, because I don't have STS. It's still a little odd, though, because how many viewers are going to read the book and know why it's there, compared to those who, like you at first, will just think WTF?
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: latjoreme on May 12, 2006, 09:20:03 am ---Oh, I guess you're right! I must have picked it up just hanging around here, because I don't have STS. It's still a little odd, though, because how many viewers are going to read the book and know why it's there, compared to those who, like you at first, will just think WTF?
--- End quote ---
You should seriously consider adding Story to Screenplay to your library, and I'm not jokin'. No Brokie should be without it. My copy lives next to my PC.
For one thing, it makes a handy reference, with the Annie Proulx story and the screenplay together under one cover (always bearing in mind, however, that we do see and hear things in the film that aren't in the published screenplay).
For another, the essays by Annie Proulx and Diana Ossana are interesting and enlightening. AP discusses the background to the creation of the story, and the section of her essay on earlier attempts to get the story made into a film (aka, "The Wyoming Death Trip") is very funny. As you know from our previous discussion, Diana Ossana's essay has been key for me in fashioning my own understanding of what the screenwriters were trying to convey.
I think perhaps I need to study Larry McMurtry's essay more to do it justice because my initial impression of it was disappointment because of its short length, though interesting for his placing the story of Ennis and Jack within longstanding American literary tradition.
Story to Screenplay wasn't yet available, at least not in Philadelphia, when I first began to see the film. It was a relief to learn that white wine was a Cassie leftover and that Ennis wasn't a secret white-wine drinker!
Penthesilea:
--- Quote ---You should seriously consider adding Story to Screenplay to your library, and I'm not jokin'. No Brokie should be without it.
--- End quote ---
I second that :)
--- Quote ---My copy lives next to my PC.
--- End quote ---
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: Hey Jeff, how come you're able to look into my room? That's where my copy of StS always is: directly besides the keybord.
I also second your reasons for having the StS. And I also couldn't get much out of Larry McMurtry's essay; whereas I appreciate Proulx's and Ossana's essays much.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on May 12, 2006, 11:03:21 am --- It was a relief to learn that white wine was a Cassie leftover and that Ennis wasn't a secret white-wine drinker!
--- End quote ---
LOL. That's hard to picture.
I'm sure you're right about the book, Jeff (though I don't even have the DVD!). But as I've probably mentioned before, I get uncomfortable with so-called real-life commentary on Brokeback (except all of ours, of course). I rarely watch those making-of things. I'm not sure I'm going to watch the special features on my rental DVD. A couple of days ago I happened across a link on this board to an interview with Heath. I called it up and it looked really good, but still -- and despite my crush on Heath! -- I had to close the window before he even started talking.
Yes, I know, I'm very neurotic about this. I should add that somewhere I have read AP's essay, at least in part, and it was good, and I'm sure the others probably would be very enlightening. Maybe my reluctance has to do with destroying the illusion of the film's reality. Or maybe it goes back to our earlier discussion of Diana's comment and my disagreement with it -- maybe I'm afraid I'll hear or read something that will conflict with my understanding of the movie, and I'm pretty happy with my understanding as it is.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: latjoreme on May 12, 2006, 11:44:57 am ---I'm sure you're right about the book, Jeff (though I don't even have the DVD!). But as I've probably mentioned before, I get uncomfortable with so-called real-life commentary on Brokeback (except all of ours, of course). I rarely watch those making-of things. I'm not sure I'm going to watch the special features on my rental DVD. A couple of days ago I happened across a link on this board to an interview with Heath. I called it up and it looked really good, but still -- and despite my crush on Heath! -- I had to close the window before he even started talking.
Yes, I know, I'm very neurotic about this. I should add that somewhere I have read AP's essay, at least in part, and it was good, and I'm sure the others probably would be very enlightening. Maybe my reluctance has to do with destroying the illusion of the film's reality. Or maybe it goes back to our earlier discussion of Diana's comment and my disagreement with it -- maybe I'm afraid I'll hear or read something that will conflict with my understanding of the movie, and I'm pretty happy with my understanding as it is.
--- End quote ---
Well, I haven't watched the special features on the DVD either. In fact, I've only found the time to watch the film once since the DVD came out. Add to that, I'm so technically inept it's a wonder I can play the movie, let alone find the special features.
I hate to sound like a book salesman, but I still find Story to Screenplay useful as a check rather than trusting my memory--though, as I said, there are some differences between the screenplay and what we actually see and hear on screen, and some of them I wouldn't consider minor. So buy the book and don't read the essays.
I understand what you're saying about not destroying the illusion of reality. For me, I'm glad to have every piece of "evidence" relating to this masterpiece that I can get my hands on, including what is known as the 2003 screenplay. I bought that on e-Bay in the mistaken impression that it was actually a "script" for the film as we have it; it isn't. And don't I wish I had a script for the film as we finally have it!
But this is the way I "build" my interpretations and understandings. I look to the story, the screenplay, and the film. Not to reopen an old debate, but, just as an example, this is why I'm so confirmed and content in my understanding of what Ennis and Jack actually did when they had sex, and why I believe they didn't alter their routine in twenty years: I see no "evidence" that convinces me "beyond a reasonable doubt" that they ever did anything other than what they did "the first time" (though I hope they took more time and it wasn't always so rough. ;D )
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version