This weekend I learned these things:
– Including our computers and cell phones, we have over 25 timepieces in my house. Funny how the computers and cell phones know all about daylight savings.
– There is an intriguing but unsubstantiated rumor floating around the Internets that David Horowitz secretly ghost-wrote Going Rogue.
– Betty no longer loves Don. Also, Kennedy was shot in Dallas. You knew the Draper marriage was going to come apart somewhere around November 1963, right? You just thought, as I did, that it would be the season finale.
– I cannot watch more than fifteen minutes of the film version of The Sound and the Fury. I’d always heard that it sucked in over 25 different ways, but I was curious as to whether this wasn’t just anti-adaptation snobbery at work, so yesterday I checked to see if someone had uploaded it to Ye Youtube, and sure enough, there it was. At the fifteen-minute mark, I said to myself, “by Moloch’s cognitively disabled brother, this movie might actually be worse than The Spirit. I didn’t know you could adapt a novel this badly. Yul Brenner as Jason? Jason and his mother are not Compsons? What are all these competing Accents From Around the World? Caddy’s daughter Quentin does voiceover, after spending the night—riding a bus round-trip to Memphis? And what is going on with that lunatic soundtrack? In short, W? T? F?” I peeked ahead, after reading on an IMDB board that Margaret Leighton’s Caddy was the one redeeming feature of the movie, only to find Margaret Leighton playing Caddy as Blanche DuBois. And Jason kissing Quentin! Sweet mother of Zuul, make it stop! So I did. I made it stop. I mean, I’ve wasted time on the Internets before. I’ve even read entire Townhall columns from start to finish. But this movie was melting my eyeballs and making the vitreous humor run down my face.
And why was I anywhere near the film version of The Sound and the Fury in the first place? Because last year I had a Bright Idea®. I had grown tired of trying to sneak a few moderately whimsical or experimental or just plain fun novels into American literature survey courses, where they inevitably went over badly with everyone except my most talented and intellectually curious students. (Though this was a pretty good way to find out which of my students really like reading.) I’m still not sure why “survey” seems to mean “varieties of domestic realism” to so many people, but this year I figured, eh, what the hell. I’m going to offer a class called “Stranger than Fiction” in which I teach a bunch of challenging things with the appropriate surgeon general’s warning posted in the course description, beware, this class consists of one challenging novel after another. I decided not to go hardcore, which meant that Nightwood and The Third Policeman didn’t make the final cut. And I didn’t want anyone to get the impression that the twentieth century had cornered the market on weird, so I opened with Wuthering Heights and The Confidence-Man, promising students that WH would in fact be much weirder than its various film versions (and general reputation as a “romance”) would lead one to believe. (Indeed, it appears that one of the standard features of film adaptations of the novel is that Heathcliff must be whitened. Yes, he’s played by dark brooding Byronic hero types, sure, but he’s whitened. The only adaptation I can find that gets Heathcliff right is this one.)
Anyway, so the next two novels were those high-modernist classics, To the Lighthouse (Ross Douthat, white courtesy phone) and The Sound and the Fury, and for the next five classes I have the great privilege of teaching ... dang, now I’ve forgotten the title. Help me, Will!
I hear the film version is kind of odd—hard to tell just what’s going on at the end. But I’m planning on enjoying the next few weeks, this much I know.
This too has a whitened Heathcliff but beats any film version I’ve seen.... (starts at 1:04..)Posted by on 11/02 at 11:32 AM
I’d always heard that it sucked in over 25 different ways, but I was curious as to whether this wasn’t just anti-adaptation snobbery at work
Wait, why would you think that? Sure, it’s a cliche about film adaptations, and many internet commenters (such as myself) are insufferable snobs about just about everything. But as you know, Bob, some books are intrinsically difficult to adapt in any meaningful fashion. TSATF would superficially seem to me to be one of those that would be extremely tricky, especially in 1959. On the other hand, there are those who argue that A Cock and Bull Story was actually a good way to treat Tristram Shandy, which makes TSATF’s narrative structure look like Die Hard. So what do I know?*
Perhaps a reasonable approach in these cases would be to ask Scott Eric Kaufman. Then again, he’d probably enthusiastically endorse the TSATF** adaptation because there’s this one really great camera angle involving Yul’s shoes.***
Kudos, though, for forcing collegechildren to wrestle with Wuthering Heights, about which they know much less than they think. (The semaphore code adaptation, though? Totally on target.) And thanks to your mention, I’m putting The Confidence-Man onto my primitive “e-reader” device, because it’s Melville time again. (I will studiedly skip over Virginia Woolf, whom I have already wasted far too many electrons ranting about. See “insufferable snobs” above.)
*Much less than I pretend to.
**Yes, the first T also stands for “The.” It’s an homage to Mystery Science Theater 3000’s screening of Attack of the the Eye Creatures.
***I kid because I love.Posted by on 11/02 at 11:48 AM
Clare, the WH version you linked to is but a pale-fire imitation of the one I linked to. I mean, your Heathcliff bears no Zemblans at all to mine.
mds, yes, of course TTSATF would be hard to adapt to the screen. But it’s the utterly gratuitous changes, the ones that have nothing to do with translating an experimental novel to film, that make the movie so exceptionally full of fail. (Despite that amazing shot of Yul Brenner’s shoes, which totally violates the rule of thirds and shows the airplane actually going backwards in time before Superman arrives.) Enjoy your Melville. Sorry about the Woolf. Maybe a three-Woolf t-shirt would help you out with that?Posted by Michael on 11/02 at 12:16 PM
"And I didn’t want anyone to get the impression that the twentieth century had cornered the market on weird, so I opened with Wuthering Heights.”
So true. My problem (and it’s really more of a “problem") with WH is, I heard the Kate Bush song first, which led to 2 weeks of reading with it on repeat in my head. Talk about 4 minutes singly ruining an entire book (though I just don’t really care for that genre/period of literature anyways, so it wasn’t a major loss - after all, I did get to listen internally to Kate Bush for 2 weeks).Posted by Mr. Trend on 11/02 at 12:16 PM
Maybe a three-Woolf t-shirt would help you out with that?
I genuflect in your general direction. (generflect?)Posted by on 11/02 at 12:28 PM
Ah, yes, the Kate Bush song. Now that my eyes have been pulverized by the film version of TTSATTF, you’re trying to melt my ears, are you? Suffice it to say that I told my class, on opening day, that the profound chthonic weirdness of WH has been remade into the stuff of bodice-rippers, and for this, I blame Bush.
No, I really said that. Don’t be telling David Horowitz on me, now.Posted by Michael on 11/02 at 12:29 PM
I had grown tired of trying to sneak a few moderately whimsical or experimental or just plain fun novels into American literature survey courses, where they inevitably went over badly with everyone except my most talented and intellectually curious students.
Lattice o’ coincidence, just picked up As I Lay Dying for the first time. One thing stands out—back in the days before VHS and Beta writers had different expectations of readers. Who are all these people with names like Jewel and Darl and Vardaman? More important, who is the “I” laying dying? This kind of reading doesn’t mesh well into a lifestyle where you have a few minutes at the end of the day to catch up on your reading. Worked better when one had blocks of hours sans commercial interruption to dig and delve.
In real time to an seventh grader the Kennedy assassination and surrounding events didn’t have the odd and unreal quality of last night’s re-visitation. Especially Oswald’s press conference/ gut shooting.
captcha: early. Getting the worm.Posted by on 11/02 at 12:30 PM
By the way, where will the Brian Boyd review be published?Posted by on 11/02 at 01:33 PM
Hard to believe there’s no film version of The Third Policeman. If ever there was an Adam Sandler vehicle ...Posted by on 11/02 at 01:43 PM
Phew, I’m glad I’ve been too much of a snob to even try and watch that film version. Based on my experience with film versions of novels, even bad ones have the unnerving tendency to displace my memory of the novel - sometimes if I re-read one I suddenly realize that this-or-that isn’t actually in the novel, it just migrated into my memory of it from the film version. Does anyone else ever have that happen?
Also, I’d like to get everyone’s speculation on what the Senate Democrats will do to Joe L. if he single-handedly stops health insurance reform. I’m trying to decide between “nothing” and “give him a better committee assignment”.Posted by on 11/02 at 02:05 PM
I’m trying to decide between “nothing” and “give him a better committee assignment”.
As usual, you’re much too cynical, professor h. There’s plenty of room between those two extremes for “offer him another standing ovation.”Posted by on 11/02 at 02:16 PM
MB@6 you’re trying to melt my ears, are you?
Hmmm, this was one of several songs from The Kick Inside that caused me to fall head over heels in love with Kate Bush’s voice way back in the day (especially her voice as pictured on the cover of the American release of TKI.) But musical tastes aside, who would ever suspect that a song with the following provenance might miss some nuance.
Kate Bush [18 at the time - JP] was inspired to write the song by the last ten minutes of the 1970 film version of Wuthering Heights. She then read the book and discovered that she shares her birthday (July 30) with Emily Brontë. Bush reportedly wrote the song, for her album The Kick Inside, within the space of just a few hours late at night.
So adaptations upon adaptations.
I was the shadow of the dark man slain by the false allure beyond the windowpane.Posted by on 11/02 at 04:15 PM
where will the Brian Boyd review be published?
If the book review editor does not decide that it sucks worse than the film version of TTTSATTF, it will appear in American Scientist.
Hard to believe there’s no film version of The Third Policeman. If ever there was an Adam Sandler vehicle....
I’ve got Judd Apatow on the other line, Chris. We’re going to make this happen.
Also, I’d like to get everyone’s speculation on what the Senate Democrats will do to Joe L. if he single-handedly stops health insurance reform.
I’m sorry, is it grammatical to use the verb “to do” in a sentence whose subject is “Senate Democrats”?
And I see we have more than one fan of Kate Bush’s “Wuthering Heights” here. Perhaps someone could do a master-mix of that song and Anton Karas’s zither from The Third Man? Because that would kill me dead and then totally disembowel me for good measure.Posted by Michael on 11/02 at 05:16 PM
black dog buzzkill: In real time to [a] seventh grader the Kennedy assassination and surrounding events didn’t have the odd and unreal quality of last night’s re-visitation. Especially Oswald’s press conference/ gut shooting.
For me, the re-visitation captured the odd and unreal quality all too well. Maybe it’s a sixth-grade thing… Or maybe that our household was only two months into the experience of having a television.
I’d assumed until the teaser for next week was shown that this past Sunday’s episode was the season finale.Posted by Nell on 11/02 at 05:20 PM
And quite a teaser it was, huh? Here, for all you MM fans who complain about next week’s teasers ... a teaser that consists entirely of scenes from earlier episodes!!! Bwah hah hah hah!Posted by Michael on 11/02 at 05:36 PM
Has there ever been a decent film adaptation of any Faulkner? I can’t think of any.Posted by on 11/02 at 06:00 PM
Well, his cameo in Barton Fink was tolerable.Posted by Michael on 11/02 at 06:28 PM
I know a lot of Kate Bush fans, but she doesn’t do it for me. Speaking of which what does Betty see in Henry? He’s not nearly as good looking as Don. And there is nothing about his personality that seems to overwhelm.
But heck I’m just a guy, so what do I know?
captcha “black” as in I see a red door and I....Posted by on 11/02 at 06:39 PM
Because that would kill me dead
And then we’d have Mazzy Star play Fade Into You at your funeral. Or maybe *this* adaptation of the Wuthering Heights* song.
Actually, it was the “Kite” song and a couple of others that really enchanted me on that album.
There is a very loud amusement park right in front of my present lodgings.
*It occurred to me that Wuthering Heights would make a great subdivision name, and sure enough there does seem to be one just outside of Morristown, Tennessee with a Heathcliff Rd.Posted by on 11/02 at 06:43 PM
I so thought Heathcliff was red, or maroon? perhaps cardinal? He certainly was the terror of the neighborhood, but that Mel Blanc voice was just so over the top.
For me, the most contrived moment in last night’s episode was the framing of the Cronkite announcement. As a high school junior at the time, i recall that day all too well. No one would reasonably have turned off the TV, in the middle of that catalytic moment of international insanity, for sex, no matter how hot Peggy may be (good week for her though, as she married an SNL comedian).Posted by on 11/02 at 09:30 PM
Or maybe *this* adaptation of the Wuthering Heights* song.
See, as usual, the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain makes even that cool by association (though it can’t compare to their version of the theme from Shaft). Playing their cover at the funeral would retroactively keep Professor Bérubé from being killed by the zither remix in the first place. Much like a Large Hadron Collider* in reverse.
And OT, but does anyone know where I could find a book about the fractures in the American Left arising from recent US foreign policy? Ideally with a little burning person on the cover?
*Chick… Actually, that one has already been way overdone, hasn’t it?**
**Yes, I’m aware of the irony in suggesting that a joke has been done to death in the very midst of a CWCWW.Posted by on 11/02 at 10:23 PM
I just finished “The Great Midland” by Alexander Saxton, a surprisingly compelling book about Communist labor organizers in the 1930s in Chicago, but really about a proto-feminist who is the daughter of one of the workers, and is getting her PhD as a scientist.
Plus, I just started Booth Tarkington’s “The Magnificent Ambersons” and am finding it surprising for the reason that Tarkington is sharp witted and probing about the class issues. Still, he is very politically incorrect, talking about “darky” servants. But as this is Indiana he is describing at the end of the 19th Century, and since we know Indiana is a Southern State posing as Midwestern one, well, I guess on that score, no surprise.
Have you ever taught either of those in the last decade, and if so, how has the reaction been...?Posted by Mitchell Freedman on 11/03 at 01:46 AM
Stephen Colbert tonight advocated for the WAAGNFPN first principle: a nuke in every garage!!Posted by on 11/03 at 03:58 AM
Enough with the Wuthering Heights stuff, what about baseball?
And as an afterthought: They made a movie of The Sound and The Fury? Why? And they cast Yul Brenner in it? WTF? What’s next - an adaption of “Gravity’s Rainbow” starring Jet Li? or will you tell me they filmed “Ulysses” with Buddy Hackett as Buck Mulligan?Posted by rev.paperboy on 11/03 at 09:48 AM
Has there ever been a decent film adaptation of any Faulkner? I can’t think of any.
I’m no scholar, but I thought The Reivers was a pretty good movie made from a pretty good Faulkner novel.Posted by Gary Oxford on 11/03 at 03:42 PM
Far be it from me to interrupt the fun had with notionally extraneous articles, but mds’s “the TSATF** adaptation”, despite its doubly asterisked disclaimer, is actually quite correct. The book is called The Sound and the Fury. We might speak of a hypothetical adaptation of The Sound and the Fury, saying, for instance, “a The Sound and the Fury adaptation is impossible to do well”, or, speaking of the adaptation thereof that actually exists, say “the The Sound and the Fury adaptation they made way back when is awful”.
Actually we would be unlikely to say these things, preferring in oral communication to say “the Sound and the Fury adaptation is awful”, but really, that is the less correct locution. We can always transform “the adaptation of X” to “the X adaptation”.Posted by ben wolfson on 11/03 at 05:28 PM
Thanks, spyder! And that’s why we love Colbert!
Also, I’d like to get everyone’s speculation on what the Senate Democrats will do to Joe L. if he single-handedly stops health insurance reform. I’m trying to decide between “nothing” and “give him a better committee assignment”.
Christian - exactly. Here’s something excellent from David Rees (h/t DKos)
I don’t know if it’s really way out in left field stream of consciousness or there’s really a relationship there, but this thread is making me think of The Prisoner, which AMC is currently re-running (via On Demand) in advance of their upcoming “re-visioning” of that show which stars Sir Ian McKellan. I remember in the mid/late 80’s The Prisoner enjoyed a resurgence in popularity when a whole bunch more people discovered it when it ran on PBS (I think it was PBS). I’m down for watching the new version simply because I love McKellan, whom I didn’t discover until 1995 via this movie, where he totally kicked ass.Posted by on 11/03 at 05:29 PM
I’m all for kids to have an education in the humanitites whether multicultural or whatever. Sometimes it will “take” sometimes it won’t. With Douthat it obviously didn’t.Posted by on 11/03 at 06:54 PM
And the really sad thing is that Douthat’s imperviousness to great writing totally derailed what could have been a promising career in print media. Already, people are asking, “whatever happened to… ?”
Mitchell, I’ve never taught either of those novels in any decade, though I did see (and was impressed by) The Magnificent Ambersons when I was a young thing.
Enough with the Wuthering Heights stuff, what about baseball?
You’re right, who cares about these lousy subdivisions? The thing about baseball is that even though I grew up with the Yankees (indeed, came in at the weird moment when they were a sixth-place team with a largely black lineup whereas the Mets were busy purging themselves of Agee, Jones, and Clendenon), and enjoyed ‘78 about as much as anyone, I just can’t root for them anymore. It was one thing to root for the team and against Steinbrenner. That was easy. But then it turned out that Steinbrenner had sons, Uday and Qusay, and everyone like Christian who scoffed at “humanitarian intervention” failed to consider what would happen if one of the younger Steinbrenners took the reins. Then there is the Giuliani factor: it is very difficult to root for a team that is being cheered on by Skeletor in a box seat (come for the Yankees, stay for the ghoulish fascism!). Then there was the decision to dump Torre, who should have been offered a lifetime contract—or, like Don Draper, no contract at all. So all I can manage to do these days is to tweak the Yankee-haters, and even then my heart isn’t really in it.
Whereas the Phillies might just have the worst logo and the worst uniforms in all of baseball. I mean, that flouffy sans-serif P is just a disgrace—it’s like 1974 forever. And their uniform numbers are just as bad. On the plus side, their lineup is actually pretty good, and over the past two years they’ve demonstrated that they don’t actually need to have the Mets play .150 ball in September in order to win the division. My stars, that Chase Utley can hit.
Still, you know the rule on this deeply sports-knowledgeable blog: we choose champions by uniforms. The Yanks will wrap it up tomorrow night, just as I predicted.Posted by Michael on 11/03 at 07:33 PM
I bow before the brilliance of the answer-man who has predicted the most accurate predictions of late. I thought for sure the Yankees could pull it out last night and ruin the “in 6” prognostication. Yet young Mr Utley has a record to break (he is currently tied with some former Oakland A traitor), and since Maestro Lee can’t pitch anymore games, it definitely looks like the sixth game is it.
It is also worth noting in sports, that Stephen Colbert is leading his Colbert Nation as the official sponsor of the US Olympic speedskating team. You can donate to the team on the Colbert Report website. The morale of this story appears to be that no one can trust banks anymore, it is better to rely on truthiness.Posted by on 11/03 at 08:21 PM
But then it turned out that Steinbrenner had sons, Uday and Qusay, and everyone like Christian who scoffed at “humanitarian intervention” failed to consider what would happen if one of the younger Steinbrenners took the reins
Do I hear Michael advocating the destruction of major league baseball in its entirety just to get rid of the Steinbrenners? And what then, I ask? Sports building? Permanent first bases? Introduction of the DH in real baseball, a.k.a. the National League?Posted by on 11/03 at 10:01 PM
Christian, I’m just saying your position is objectively pro-Selig. If we need to destroy major league baseball in order to save it, we’ll just do it with a coalition of the willing. And maybe Curt Schilling.Posted by Michael on 11/03 at 10:35 PM
And maybe Curt Schilling.
Oh, Deity, I’m even a notional Red Sox fan, and I’d gladly drop him onto Western Pakistan from a bomber.
Far be it from me to interrupt the fun had with notionally extraneous articles, but mds’s “the TSATF** adaptation”, despite its doubly asterisked disclaimer, is actually quite correct.
You commented on this blog in the middle of the afternoon just to tell me I was right?
</von Neumann>Posted by on 11/03 at 10:53 PM
Is that not done? I’m new around here.Posted by ben on 11/03 at 11:26 PM
Christian h. said: Do I hear Michael advocating the destruction of major league baseball in its entirety just to get rid of the Steinbrenners?
Eggs, omelettes, small price to pay, etc.
And then what?
And then it is hockey season.Posted by rev.paperboy on 11/04 at 12:08 AM
I thought there was a general consensus that Steinbrenner (George) was already responsible for the destruction of major league baseball. It used to be the great American sport. Now it’s just a bidding war.Posted by on 11/04 at 12:22 AM
See Elliot, by blaming it all on Steinbrenner, you once again try to whitewash the system behind him. Replacing Steinbrenner with Jerry “Cheap” Reinsdorf won’t make any difference in the big picture.Posted by on 11/04 at 12:31 AM
I see that once again, questions of Yankee sovereignty override all considerations of women’s rights.
Besides, how is dropping Curt Schilling onto Rudy Giuliani from 30,000 feet not a win-win?Posted by Michael on 11/04 at 12:47 AM
Is that not done? I’m new around here.
Oh, I’m just being silly, as usual (and making an oblique reference to my favorite story about John von Neumann). You’re perfectly welcome to note that I am correct whenever you wish.
Besides, how is dropping Curt Schilling onto Rudy Giuliani from 30,000 feet not a win-win?
Because the resulting mess would apparently have a good shot at getting elected governor of New Jersey?Posted by on 11/04 at 01:06 AM
I’m no scholar, but I thought The Reivers was a pretty good movie
Me too. Never read the book but the movie lives in memory. As for Wuthering, I remember reading it in high school and wondering how the hell anybody thought it was romantic. No comparison to Jane Eyre, which unfortunately Jean Rhys ruined for me forever (another wonderful movie, Wide Sargasso Sea was).
And as for the Jankees, as my taco truck buddy calls ‘em, it is faintly possible that Andy Pettitte will have another meltdown in Game 6 ... which alas is probably the only hope for Cliffie and the Phils. Sigh. Still, Cliffie’s 1st World Series game was a keeper!Posted by on 11/04 at 01:28 AM
Best line of late night TV tonight, with Jason Sudeikis on Jimmy Fallon, discussing attending a special wedding last week:
“When you have the cast of Mad Men and Saturday Night Live drinking together, you are going to have a lot of dancing.”
And now back to our regularly scheduled captcha: WHYPosted by on 11/04 at 05:13 AM
I am somehow reminded of the discussion at EoTAW of the The Beatles review that some folks liked and some did not.Posted by on 11/04 at 08:54 AM
Sounds like a great course, but why no Pynchon? Of course, I want to teach The Crying of Lot 49 every chance I get, but it would seem perfect for a course designed, at least in part, in opposition to the overwhelming tendency for survey courses to reduce fiction to “varieties of domestic realism,” opening with a parodic (or, rather, hyperbolic) semblance of domestic realism via a suburban housewife’s return from a tupperware party but immediately exposing that we’ve entered the looking glass by naming her Oedipa Maas.
‘Cmon, Michael. Do what’s right. Think of the children. Put it on your syllabus.
Oh yeah, and Tristram Shandy too, just to cement the fact that all things weird did not spring, Athena like, from the head of the 20th c.Posted by on 11/04 at 09:44 AM
Don’t pick on Jerry. We had the Jordan years here in Chicago. For that I will be eternally grateful.
captcha “higher”Posted by on 11/04 at 10:27 AM
Eric JD: Because I last taught Lot 49 in 2007—quite recently. Whereas I haven’t taught these six novels in 15 years to ever. That’s also why neither John Henry Days nor The Intuitionist is on there. I’d love to teach Pynchon’s latest, though ... and as for Tristram Shandy: on my original draft syllabus, it did indeed open the course. But 100 pages in, I realized I would be asking students to spend three weeks on a Cock-and-Bull Story whose weird and delightful metafictional aspects (like Don Quixote‘s) I’d be better off discussing during the first week.Posted by Michael on 11/04 at 11:44 AM
Well, if you’re going to ACTUALLY think of the children when planning your syllabus then you’ve put me at a real disadvantage, sir.
I have yet to read Pynch’s latest but plan to rectify that over Christmas. Must read John Henry Days one of these days. I hear that Colson Whitehead’s quite a talented young man. Too bad he Got Where He Is Only Because He’s Black.Posted by on 11/04 at 02:59 PM
What about Vanishing-Point? (<a href="http://poundemonium.blogspot.com/2009/08/book-review-vanishing-point-by.html">This one, though that “review” doesn’t at all communicate why it’s such a weird read.)Posted by ben wolfson on 11/05 at 12:31 AM
I kinda messed up the formatting there a bit I guess.Posted by ben wolfson on 11/05 at 02:04 AM
I’d love to teach Pynchon’s latest, though ...
And then Palin’s ghastly ghost writer will be all up in your grill for indoctrinating innocent minds with the promotion of seriously dangerous stuff. Sounds like win/win to me; much like your perfect prediction.Posted by on 11/05 at 05:55 AM
Coming in late, but: I have a copy, in a book on Faulkner and Film, of Faulkner’s treatment and parts of a screenplay for Spirits of the Earth, a proposed adaptation of Absalom, Absalom. I’ve never been able to bring myself to read it--it apparently makes the film of The Sound and the Fury look like Diva.Posted by Kevin J. Maroney on 11/05 at 11:33 PM
If you can get ahold of it, check out Buñuel’s unofficial WH adaptation, “Abismos de Pasion,” with a Mexican desert taking the place of the moors. Wacky.Posted by Glenn Kenny on 11/08 at 11:57 AM
I second the Buñuel recommendation: “Abismos de Pasión” is the best version I’ve ever seen, real romantic love and hate, hilariously over-the-top, and the explosive Spanish makes it seem like the only possible language for the novel.Posted by on 11/11 at 12:49 PM
And this was such a helpful way convincing us to be relevant with what was around us and vigilant with actions that put into words because you don’t know what will happen when these things that surround us will be going to ruin us one of these days. Being bold is better!Posted by Jordan on 10/18 at 10:58 PM
It’s really funny but true, gadgets often knows more than the person carrying it. LOLPosted by ann arbor carpet cleaning on 04/08 at 02:56 PM
I hope many also will adopt this idea.Posted by best cases for ipad on 03/29 at 11:28 AM