I've recently seen the movie - The Host.
It's based on the book by Stephenie Meyer. I've mentioned previously that I was both
looking forward to seeing the movie and dreading it. We all know that the movie version of a
decent book loses a lot in the transmogrification from word to image. The translating can be good or bad, the
necessary alterations might even change the tale. Some attempts are best forgotten.
What's interesting in this, is first, seeing a trailer for the movie, I
thought it would be decent. I like the
young actress chosen to play Melanie/Wanderer, Saoirse Ronan. Then seeing the second trailer I realized
they'd needed to add some action and drama and… it didn't sit well with my
impression. Of course it only added to
my mixed feelings approaching a viewing.
I almost skipped it.
I'm glad I saw it in a theater.
I liked it. I like the book
more, but the movie did a decent job and told the story.
There is no way to know how I'd think of the movie if I hadn't read the
book first. It's not possible to forget
the book to let the move stand separately.
So, I can't know if so many people are so critical of the movie because
they didn't read the book, or they all wanted something on the Twilight level. A lot of people get turned off as soon as the
idea of Science Fiction comes up, alien invaders and what-all. And of course if you have Science Fiction you
need a lot of action and explosions or shoot-ups or something rather than just
a story.
Going back to the book, it is a story.
The development of a character like Melanie isn't a cookie cutter
process, given the conditions she must live in and deal with. Our empathy for Melanie is something that
needed to be developed. We had to watch
her grow into the character. Then we
had to learn of Wanderer. We had to
watch their struggle, their friction and then their cooperation. Stephenie did a great job of it in the book,
it still took a lot of words, but it worked.
In the movie you can't explain every little nuance of characterization,
you had to watch it unfold. Saoirse
Ronan did an excellent job with the dual nature of herself. The abbreviated story lines, from book to
movie, are the elements of difficulty… again.
Each point in the book is developed with well-crafted verbiage, each
trial, each footstep on whatever path is deliberate.
The movie holds the same deliberation but the brevity thwarts the
needed compassion that carries the audience into the story. For example - the imprisonment of Wanderer
(It) in the cell-like cave - in the book it's a trial, she's cramped for space,
in a little cubby hole where she can't stand upright, can't stretch out, can't
lie comfortably. The psychological
torture that she goes through is painful.
The struggle with Jared hating her while she loves him, both of her, and
what that does to her. All of it (in the
book) unfolds through days she can't count in the dark. (with no exchange of words with her brother). Of course in the movie you need to show
something so it's lit (rather than pitch dark). And you need a
faster progression.
When they first deal with Wanderer (in the book) they treat her with
contempt, keeping her in the tiny, tiny cell.
Then they learn of her. As she
tells about herself, tells of her different lives on other planets, most of them
learn compassion for her, or at least acceptance. So when they later capture the Seeker (Diane
Kruger) they automatically treat her with more compassion, even though she's
nastily and tedeously tenacious (in the book), putting her in a larger cell. Wanda/Melanie's reaction to that
juxtaposition (even though she taught them) is telling and nicely told.
I don't know.
I can't decide.
Since I read the book a number of times I couldn't not know what was
going on in the movie.
Okay… decision time… YES.
Reading the book, liking it, makes a difference in enjoying the
movie. I did enjoy it. I loved how they had Saoirse play her
role. The 'voice' of Melanie was nicely
done.
The FX of the Soul, when put into Melanie, was better than when they
took the Seeker out of Lucy (the Seeker's human host). Making it into a luminous FX creature… awww…
I don't know. I would've preferred a
silvery look with a little bit of luminosity, but that's just me, I had an
image left over from the book, my imagination.
Thinking through the movie there are so many parts where the brevity
lessens or negates the emotional impact that I would recommend reading the book
AFTER seeing the movie, if you didn't before.
One reason, of course, is that you now have character images to use
while reading, even though Diane Kruger doesn't match the Seeker character
(from what I remember). I refuse to open
the book to test myself. The last time I
did that I wound up reading the entire book again.
So, read the book. See the
movie.
If you saw the movie and didn't really like it, read the book, I think
it will make you appreciate the story all the more.
Or, maybe, see the movie and then read the book.
I can't try that.
Aaargh, there's just so much, every time I flash to an image of the
movie, I'm caught thinking of how the book told more about it, more depth, more
emotion… It's one thing that Stephenie captures… emotions. She does it by making characters to care for.
Crap… I'm going to have to read that book again… I feel it coming on…
Hopefully I'll get back to my main topic in my next blog, which (I
hope) won't be so freaking long in coming.
