BOOK VS MOVIE: Sweet Bird of Youth

Being the admirer of Tennessee Williams that I am, I have picked up on the many common roles in his plays: the woman on the brink of self-destruction, the young man striving to make a name for himself, and the small posse determined to keep everyone's morals intact.

These characters are showcased in Sweet Bird of Youth. All of them long to have their met, but of course that isn't always the case. Knowing Williams' sense of nihilism, he never goes for the happy ending. (Well, with the exception of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.)

With Sweet Bird of Youth, all of the characters long for the past. They want to find a way to remember their glory days, but it's no use. They also want their futures to contain tints of their pasts.

Richard Brooks' adaptation of Williams' play stars Paul Newman and Geraldine Page, both the stars of the original stage production. Both are at the top of their game here. Newman's Chance Wayne strives to be famous, Page's Alexandra Del Lago wants to be forgotten. Both are fantastic in their roles.

Of course knowing Hollywood from this time period, they demanded a happy ending. (The play's ending was much more violent.) However, comparing the two endings, I liked the movie's ending more. Also, apart from the ending change and an added scene or two, the movie's very true to the play.

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the movie.

Blackboard Jungle

There are movies that showcase prominently what period of time they're from. Sometimes it works, other times not so much.

Blackboard Jungle practically screams out that it was made in the 1950's. Don't get me wrong. It's a good movie, but it's just that the subject matter is something that could only be pulled off in the 1950's. It wouldn't have worked in any other decade.

Compare Blackboard Jungle to Rebel Without a Cause, which was released the same year. Both focus on the subject of juvenile delinquency, but they're from different perspectives. Blackboard Jungle is from the adults' point of view while Rebel Without a Cause is from the teenagers' point of view. Either way, both movies depict how misunderstood teenagers during the 1950's were.

Blackboard Jungle, as I mentioned, is good but it's too 1950's. What's shown isn't relevant to today's standards, however one could view this as an exploitation movie (or something of the sort). All in all, it's worth checking out to those who are curious.

My Rating: ****

Elmer Gantry

Once the 1960's rolled around, you could tell that the rules of censorship for movies were starting to fall apart. Dialogue became vicious, performances more ruthless and movies had no boundaries.

That statement can definitely be applied to Elmer Gantry. It shows the intense nature of people's religious beliefs of the time the movie's set.

Burt Lancaster, as we all know, was a powerful presence on screen. His performance reminded me of Robert Mitchum in The Night of the Hunter. Both men are wolves in preacher's clothing, but they also have a chilling aura when they stand at the pulpit. It's an excellent piece of acting from Lancaster, but it pales in comparison to the ruthlessness of J.J. Hunsecker.

It's clear on how Lancaster (and, to a lesser extent, Shirley Jones) won an Oscar, but I don't understand how Jean Simmons wasn't even nominated. She gives honestly one of the best performances I've seen. She may be one of the many corrupted by Gantry's views, but she keeps her morals intact.

To sum things up nicely, Elmer Gantry is an excellent movie. Wonderful work from Lancaster and Simmons as mentioned above. If you ask me, it's a really powerful movie.

My Rating: *****

BOOK VS MOVIE: In Cold Blood

I've recently taken an interest in criminology. I don't know why, but I find it very fascinating.

On November 15, 1959, the peace of Holcomb, Kansas was shattered by the brutal murder of the Clutter family. The killers, Dick Hickock and Perry Smith, manage to evade the law for several months after the crime is committed. The crime would've remained unsolved had Floyd Wells, a prisoner who once celled with Dick, hadn't reported who the killers were.

Truman Capote successfully manages to create a whole level of creepy just with his writing. Richard Brooks' movie was also creepy, but not on the same level with Capote's book. There's one line uttered by Perry that scared the hell out of me:

"I thought he was a very nice gentleman. Soft-spoken. I thought so right up to the moment I cut his throat."

(shudder) Scary.

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the book.