1. I finished reading the intriguing book, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil first thing today. I only had about twenty pages to go.
This book came out thirty year ago. I left it wondering, knowing that many of the principal figures in the book (but not its author) have died, whether the commitment to preserving itself, whether adamant resistance to change continue to be a prominent social value in Savannah.
I didn't have this question on my mind at all in 2016 when I traveled to Savannah. My mind was mostly on the task of officiating Scott and Cate's wedding. In 2016, I wandered in the historic district one day, took some pictures, but I didn't have an understanding of what I was seeing or of the history of the place.
If I discovered a book or an article examining Savannah in the 2020s, looking at the similarities and differences between this city in the 1980s, when most of this book took place, and now, or even the last ten years, I'd read it.
2. I was very curious to see how Clint Eastwood, as director and producer, in collaboration with the movie's screenwriter, John Lee Hancock, adapted the book Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil into a movie.
I'm not going to, nor am I able to, say which is better, the movie or the book.
I'm more interested in the adaptation itself.
I think what Hancock/Eastwood did tells viewers, especially those who've read the book, what Hancock and Eastwood see as making a movie work.
First of all, there is the challenge of time, of the movie's length.
Hancock and Eastwood condensed and rearranged episodes in the book to tighten up the story. Otherwise, they would have had to make a season or two worth of hour long episodes, that is, make a series out of the book.
Therefore, the movie had fewer characters and changed some characters' names. The book featured four trials, three in Savannah, the last one in Augusta, and the movie condensed them into a single trial in Savannah. The movie created a lukewarm love interest, an addition to the story.
Tighten. Rearrange. Add in some kissing and hand holding.
The movie took us inside some of the vintage homes/mansions, brought us into Savannah's black cotillion, took us into a graveyard at night (the garden of good and evil), but, did not extend the movie by taking us to several locales the book did.
The trial was, to me, the center of the movie.
Savannah was the center of the book.
Trials make better movies, but the book's exploration of Savannah's quirkiness, spirit, and darker dimensions were perfect for the book.
I enjoyed both, but I cannot compare them -- can't say if the movie "lived up" to the book.
The movie was its own work, based on, but not wholly dependent on, John Berendt's book.
Again, I enjoyed both.
3. Debbie made a superb dinner tonight that featured canned salmon, pasta boiled in chicken broth, garlic, green onion, sour cream, and maybe other ingredients into a spaghetti dish that we both loved. When I eat canned salmon, I don't compare it to fresh salmon. They are two different food items connected only by both being a kind of salmon. Not comparing canned to fresh opens the way for me to enjoy canned salmon for what it is for me, a delicious, versatile, and convenient food item that always works.
No comments:
Post a Comment