This title is a takeoff on Flowers for Algernon, a short story/novella about a simple-minded man who undergoes an experiment to increase his intelligence. It’s written as diary entries and you can see the change in his sentence structure as the story progresses like you see the changes in penmanship in the comic. Unfortunately, the intelligence boost doesn’t last. I remember reading it and almost gasping when he started misspelling words again. BTW, Algernon was the name of the mouse who underwent the experiment before the narrator. The movie based on it is called Charlie I think
Also, “Triniton” was a model of television set manufactured by Sony.
How old is this strip, though? Cathode-ray television? Magazines? Typewriter? A commentary on the mindlessness of TV and not cellular phones?
I suppose it likely dates to the time period when [i]Home Improvement[/i] was airing new episodes… namely 1991–1999. (And to be honest I didn’t know [i]Tom the Dancing Bug[/i] was that old.)
This is PROOF that there are microphones/cameras in this house and my searches are being monitored. Not a few days ago, because of a book I read, ‘But Have You Read the Book?’, Hubby and I were thinking of other movies that were adapted from books (52 were covered in the book). ‘Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil’ and ‘Charlie’ was another, as well as ‘Awakenings’, based on Oliver Sacks’ Book, ‘The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat’. However, the theme of both books and movies are similar.
Anyway, between discussion, emails and searches, SOMEbody’s been watching/reading/listening in. D*mn, that’s spooky!
Happens all the time, the cable goes out, so I got to bed early. I don’t go job hunting or spend time with friends or start volunteering with a charity, I just usually hope and pray that the cable is up and on the next day, which it is, and then I go on over-paying the cable company to numb my mind again.
Indeed, as Powers notes, Trinitron was the name for a line of CRT television “picture tubes” from Sony. As I recall, there were two claims of superior tech for that line – one was that the phosphors were hexagonal packed (instead of triangles in linear scan rows) against a black matrix. (Or perhaps it was the opposite of that arrangement.) The other, which I find hard to believe now, may have been that there were THREE electron guns, one for each color, somehow improving accuracy over the normal single cathode.
And just to mention the obvious, since no one else did: The cable went out so he started reading and got smarter. Then he started watching TV again and reverted back to normal.
The parallels mentioned by Rob and Dan explain the strip’s title and the plot, but none of that makes it funny. It’s simply a (tragic) “slice of life”.
P.P.S. In addition to “Charly” (in 1968), the book was made into a TV movie (keeping the original title) in 2000.
Great post title!!
Andréa: I have a running gag with a friend of 45 years (gulp):
I say, “Did you ever read x?”
And he answers, “It’s a book, too?”
I’d buy him that book…but he wouldn’t read it!
@ Phil – Did you mean the name of the CIDU post, or that of Bolling’s strip? :-)
I remember it vaguely along the lines Mitch describes, but a so-far surface perusal of the painfully long wikipedia entry for “Trinitron” shows a rather more complicated technical history. It seems RCA was already using three guns (and so was GE, but putting them in a row instead of triangle), and one of the innovations of Trinitron was using a single gun, but with three cathodes. (I’m a little shaky on what exactly that would mean.) Sony also used something called an aperture grille instead of a shadow mask. Um…
It falls into the category of “Not so much funny as smug.”
Oh. I hadn’t taken in that it was copied from the strip! So yeah, the strip.
He wouldn’t need to read the book — a short story came first, and the novella was like an expanded edition. But I agree with what I think is a critical consensus, that the original story is better than the longer version.
P.P.P.S. Re: archaic TV technology – First there was this Peanuts strip:
How about movies that are based on a book for a while, but then kind of go off into a different direction? For example, “The Witches of Eastwick.” Or “Frankenstein.”
And then there are movies that have the same title as a book and are kind of sort of based on it but not exactly, because the book as it is doesn’t really have a story. “How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying.” “Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex (But Were Afraid To Ask).”
For me, as long as the cable going out didn’t take out the internet (either can go out on its own or together, but really not very often) then the impact is low. There’s quite a bit of TV I can view through the Roku, including the streaming cable and on-demand. There is also plenty of online content too.
Should both go out, then additional reading is my backup.
The movie “Awakenings” is based on Oliver Sack’s book “Awakenings.” Michael Nyman’s opera “The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat” is based on Oliver Sack’s book “The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat.” https://youtu.be/4r1YpNP0Z9I
Speaking of media addiction[s] . . .
YouTube is my downfall; no tv here, but YT is just as bad.
phsiiicidu,
Stop wasting the books. If you send them to me, I will absolutely read them. (Is that too subtle?)
Out of the 52 movies compared to their origin books, I’ve seen five. Was I encouraged by this book to watch more movies? Actually, no . . . but I definitely found some books I wanted to read.
YouTube is my downfall; no tv here, but YT is just as bad.
I consume a lot of YouTube but much of it as background while I do other things. As I type this, Abby (who has a lot of records) is discussing her favorite album from way back† in college, Unknown Pleasures by Joy Division.
Earlier was three segments of District Court from Michigan, a buyer/seller of stuff from Edmonton, a daily vlog from a woman in England, a News of the Day from The Hockey Guy, a segment from the podcast Conan O’Brien Need a Friend {Sona & Gourley Got Busted By Mall Cops), and a cooking show where Emily the Ketchup Queen‡ (the only Level 1 cook on Epicurius ever to be promoted) and an old friend make Bunny Macarons.
† Whatever that means for someone who is not yet 24.
‡ She likes ketchup and in her appearance on 4 Levels of French Toast she served it with said condiment, which she says is the way her father likes it.
Also, I listened to the the MallWalkin’ podcast because that’s where Sona & Gourley Got Busted By Mall Cops.
Here is the cover of the book . . .
. . . and here is the table of contents . . .
I have read the books for:
Frankenstein (1931)
Kiss Me Deadly (1955)
The Haunting (1963)
The Godfather (1972)
Jaws (1975)
Jurassic Park (1993)
Dune (2021)
I have been considering The Thin Man. It’s available from the library’s e-book selection so the investment is low.
I’ve read 21 of the books and seen 16 of the movies. Only two cases where I’ve seen a movie but not read its book (Last Picture Show, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest). Most recent “first read” on the list is True Grit (which I read about two years ago and loved – haven’t seen either of the movie adaptations though), and most recent movie seen of those on the list is Fellowship of the Ring back in 2001 (has it really been that long?) — where I read the book back around 1964.
I have to admit my lack of knowledge – I never realized Jurassic Park was a Michael Crichton book! I immediately reserved it at the library and read it – it is so much better than the movie, if only in the aspect of more philosophical discussion from Ian Malcolm. And, of course, the body count is higher in the book. ‘Nuff said.
2001: A Space Odyssey was completely incomprehensible to me (my ex-FIL actually managed to fall asleep during this movie), but once I read Arthur C. Clarke’s story, I watched it again with much more understanding.
I wonder why Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil wasn’t included; the movie inspired me to read the book, then delve deeper into the story behind it, the author, the characters . . . a real rabbit hole. In fact, I bought the Savannah Bird Girl as a fountain when we moved to FL and could keep her outside year-round. http://www.alldogssite.com/birdgirlfountain_0317191.html
If you liked the book and the movie, In Cold Blood, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND the movie, Capote, featuring Philip Seymour Hoffman in an outstanding job . . . after seeing this movie, I went down the Truman Capote rabbit hole (oh, YT . . . how you answer my every request!) and read many of his books, his memoirs and the books about him and his ‘Swans’.
I watch so few movies that I become a tad obsessed about those I DO see and become an evangelist about them.
Read and saw 21 of these. Saw a few more- some that I didn’t know were based on books- and a few more just read. This is owing not to awesomeness, but through accumulated years. Andrea, thanks for the list.
It was odd that just about the same time as the movie Capote was out in theaters, there was another one about him and the writing of In Cold Blood and maybe also his friendship with Harper Lee. This is probably Infamous starring Toby Jones, despite their listed year of release being one year off.
Interesting that they chose the 2021 Dune instead of the 1984 or so one directed by David Lynch.
Just because someone else considers a book (or movie) a “gem” (or “meaningful”) is no reason that I need to feel compelled to read (or see) it. I’ve already suffered enough through the suggestions that I’ve gotten over the years from my dad, enough that I would consider a vote from him to be more of a warning than a recommendation.
I have watched just eight of the movies in that list (but have also read the book for five of those). The only remaining book that I have read, but not (yet) seen is “The Great Gatsby”. Two other films that I do intend to watch are the new “Dune” (which I have read multiple times) and “Jurassic Park” (which I would never touch in book form, having been massively disappointed by the ending of every Crichton book I have ever attempted). There are a few others in that list that I might endure if I happened to run into them by chance, but I would not actively look for any of the remaining 41 films, and would avoid at least half of them like the plague. That goes double for those 41 books.
Of the movies that I have seen, there are three that I would never watch again: Clockwork Orange, Dr. No, and the first film version of “Dune” (revolting). Even though it was pretty creepy, I might re-watch “Coraline”, and would definitely consider reading it, if I can find a copy over here. That leaves just four book+movie pairs that I would definitely be willing to watch (and/or read) again: Blade Runner, Lord of the Rings, The Princess Bride, and Willy Wonka.
I guess I’ve never been a fan of “Great Literature”.
P.S. @ Andréa – The reason that 2001 was so incomprehensible is that the studio got tired of waiting for (and paying for) Kubrick to finish the movie, so they pulled the plug, which resulted in a surrealistic “acid trip” ending, rather than anything that anyone (not under the influence) could understand or enjoy. I liked most of the movie, but as far as I’m concerned, it should have ended (fade to black) right after Dave pulled the plug on HAL.
P.P.S. @ Mitch – Even though I haven’t seen the new version yet, I definitely think that the author made the correct choice for “Dune”. Sting was the only highlight in the first version, but his presence was nowhere near enough to rescue the rest of that sodden mass.
Then there are books that have never been made into movies and really ought to be made into movies.
Number one on my list is “Paradise Lost” by John Milton. No, it wouldn’t be boring at all if done right. First off there’s the action-adventure that could outdo anything in the Marvel Cinematic Universe as the good angels and the bad angels uproot mountains and throw them at each other!
Later there’s the X-rated part, when Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit, look at each other and try out every sexual perversion they can think of.
If ‘Flowers for Algernon’ were written today . . .
You’d think there could not be a movie of Finnegans Wake, but there is. And I’d call it not too bad..
You’re welcome; if you click on the Table of Contents, it will embiggen.
Any idea of the name? I’d like to see it, if only to compare with Capote.
Oh, I mentioned Infamous because I think that’s the one it must be, even though the year looks off by one. I do remember critics saying “And now we have another Truman Capote movie!”
Around that same time there was another pair, The Prestige and another one also about stage magicians in rivalry. There was talk about how this happens — an idea being “in the air” and studios being stuck with their commitments despite a clash.
I just watched the trailer on IMDB; I think the actor tries too hard, esp. his irritating voice. Hoffman did it better.
Two relevant pics came to me today:
Sure there is a prominent version of Finnegans Wake in a dramatic medium. It’s called The Skin of Our Teeth. :-)
I’ve seen four of the movies (well, more than that, since there are two Willy Wonkas and…four? (of which I’ve seen three) Little Women movies). I’ve read 7 of the books. I have zero interest in reading most of the rest…I might read Emma someday, and A Clockwork Orange. Maybe a few others. The thrillers, including Bond, are noes – huge yawn. I don’t watch a lot of movies and the ones I do watch are overwhelmingly animated – and I don’t read “literary fiction” and very few thrillers.
There are two that aren’t on that list – and I agree with that choice. My Side of the Mountain is a fantastic book, the movie jumped the shark in the first 10 minutes or so (he goes to live on the mountain as a school project, with permission and knowledge of the adults in his life. Can you say missing the point?). Mrs Miniver is worse – the whole point of the book is the observations of a woman in middle age, with a teenage kid at the beginning of the story. Greer Garson is pretty but she’s no Mrs Miniver. The only thing that pair have in common is the title.
Oh, and going back to the cartoon – I love Flowers for Algernon and this cartoon is great! A beautiful version of the idea…and a neat snark on TV.
“The only thing that pair have in common is the title”
“Nightfall” fits that comment rather well. The setup is the same in both, but anyone thinking the movie might be similar to the book is quite incorrect. I remember seeing the ad for it in the newspaper and going to see the movie. Nope, not the same…
@ Darren – You can add “I, Robot” to that list.
I think of such movies as “hood ornament” movies, by analogy with the old joke about how to repair a hopeless old car: Jack up the hood ornament and slide a new car under it. Same thing with “Jack up the title and slide a new plot under it.”
Methinks we could all write Volume 2!
“Simpsons” had an episode in which the makers of Itchy and Scratchy began making non-violent cartoons. They were so dull they drove Springfield’s children outdoors to play and be creative until violence was restored.
Should be noted Bolling has been putting out fat chronological collections of “Tom the Dancing Bug”, and the vast majority hold up remarkably well . Hollingsworth Hound and Lucky Ducky are essential.
Semi-related: Bud Grace is also putting out chronological collections of “Ernie”, aka “The Piranha Club”. I’m reacquainting myself with Ernie, Uncle Sid, Dr. Enos Pork, Quacko the Human Duck, etc.
This “Trinitron” commentary about the effects of TV are closely paralleled by an SMBC comic about social media. It would be too much work to embed, since each panel is a separate image file, so here is a link to the SMBC comic at The Nib.
When Robert first started working in mental health counseling after college, Cliff Robertson had visited that agency to get information on how to play Charly. It was something that was still being talked when Robert started working there some years later.
Comics I Don't Understand 
This title is a takeoff on Flowers for Algernon, a short story/novella about a simple-minded man who undergoes an experiment to increase his intelligence. It’s written as diary entries and you can see the change in his sentence structure as the story progresses like you see the changes in penmanship in the comic. Unfortunately, the intelligence boost doesn’t last. I remember reading it and almost gasping when he started misspelling words again. BTW, Algernon was the name of the mouse who underwent the experiment before the narrator. The movie based on it is called Charlie I think
Also, “Triniton” was a model of television set manufactured by Sony.
How old is this strip, though? Cathode-ray television? Magazines? Typewriter? A commentary on the mindlessness of TV and not cellular phones?
I suppose it likely dates to the time period when [i]Home Improvement[/i] was airing new episodes… namely 1991–1999. (And to be honest I didn’t know [i]Tom the Dancing Bug[/i] was that old.)
This is PROOF that there are microphones/cameras in this house and my searches are being monitored. Not a few days ago, because of a book I read, ‘But Have You Read the Book?’, Hubby and I were thinking of other movies that were adapted from books (52 were covered in the book). ‘Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil’ and ‘Charlie’ was another, as well as ‘Awakenings’, based on Oliver Sacks’ Book, ‘The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat’. However, the theme of both books and movies are similar.
Anyway, between discussion, emails and searches, SOMEbody’s been watching/reading/listening in. D*mn, that’s spooky!
Happens all the time, the cable goes out, so I got to bed early. I don’t go job hunting or spend time with friends or start volunteering with a charity, I just usually hope and pray that the cable is up and on the next day, which it is, and then I go on over-paying the cable company to numb my mind again.
Indeed, as Powers notes, Trinitron was the name for a line of CRT television “picture tubes” from Sony. As I recall, there were two claims of superior tech for that line – one was that the phosphors were hexagonal packed (instead of triangles in linear scan rows) against a black matrix. (Or perhaps it was the opposite of that arrangement.) The other, which I find hard to believe now, may have been that there were THREE electron guns, one for each color, somehow improving accuracy over the normal single cathode.
And just to mention the obvious, since no one else did: The cable went out so he started reading and got smarter. Then he started watching TV again and reverted back to normal.
The parallels mentioned by Rob and Dan explain the strip’s title and the plot, but none of that makes it funny. It’s simply a (tragic) “slice of life”.
P.S. @ Powers – This strip originally appeared on 18-May-2002, and again as a rerun on 13-June-2013. Bolling started Tom the Dancing Bug in June 1990, but the first strip in the GoComics archive is dated 4-Jan-1998.
P.P.S. In addition to “Charly” (in 1968), the book was made into a TV movie (keeping the original title) in 2000.
Great post title!!
Andréa: I have a running gag with a friend of 45 years (gulp):
I say, “Did you ever read x?”
And he answers, “It’s a book, too?”
I’d buy him that book…but he wouldn’t read it!
@ Phil – Did you mean the name of the CIDU post, or that of Bolling’s strip? :-)
I remember it vaguely along the lines Mitch describes, but a so-far surface perusal of the painfully long wikipedia entry for “Trinitron” shows a rather more complicated technical history. It seems RCA was already using three guns (and so was GE, but putting them in a row instead of triangle), and one of the innovations of Trinitron was using a single gun, but with three cathodes. (I’m a little shaky on what exactly that would mean.) Sony also used something called an aperture grille instead of a shadow mask. Um…
It falls into the category of “Not so much funny as smug.”
Oh. I hadn’t taken in that it was copied from the strip! So yeah, the strip.
He wouldn’t need to read the book — a short story came first, and the novella was like an expanded edition. But I agree with what I think is a critical consensus, that the original story is better than the longer version.
P.P.P.S. Re: archaic TV technology – First there was this Peanuts strip:
… and then this Garfield, riffing on a classic Peanuts quote:
How about movies that are based on a book for a while, but then kind of go off into a different direction? For example, “The Witches of Eastwick.” Or “Frankenstein.”
And then there are movies that have the same title as a book and are kind of sort of based on it but not exactly, because the book as it is doesn’t really have a story. “How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying.” “Everything You Wanted To Know About Sex (But Were Afraid To Ask).”
For me, as long as the cable going out didn’t take out the internet (either can go out on its own or together, but really not very often) then the impact is low. There’s quite a bit of TV I can view through the Roku, including the streaming cable and on-demand. There is also plenty of online content too.
Should both go out, then additional reading is my backup.
The movie “Awakenings” is based on Oliver Sack’s book “Awakenings.” Michael Nyman’s opera “The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat” is based on Oliver Sack’s book “The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat.” https://youtu.be/4r1YpNP0Z9I
Speaking of media addiction[s] . . .
YouTube is my downfall; no tv here, but YT is just as bad.
phsiiicidu,
Stop wasting the books. If you send them to me, I will absolutely read them. (Is that too subtle?)
Out of the 52 movies compared to their origin books, I’ve seen five. Was I encouraged by this book to watch more movies? Actually, no . . . but I definitely found some books I wanted to read.
YouTube is my downfall; no tv here, but YT is just as bad.
I consume a lot of YouTube but much of it as background while I do other things. As I type this, Abby (who has a lot of records) is discussing her favorite album from way back† in college, Unknown Pleasures by Joy Division.
Earlier was three segments of District Court from Michigan, a buyer/seller of stuff from Edmonton, a daily vlog from a woman in England, a News of the Day from The Hockey Guy, a segment from the podcast Conan O’Brien Need a Friend {Sona & Gourley Got Busted By Mall Cops), and a cooking show where Emily the Ketchup Queen‡ (the only Level 1 cook on Epicurius ever to be promoted) and an old friend make Bunny Macarons.
† Whatever that means for someone who is not yet 24.
‡ She likes ketchup and in her appearance on 4 Levels of French Toast she served it with said condiment, which she says is the way her father likes it.
Also, I listened to the the MallWalkin’ podcast because that’s where Sona & Gourley Got Busted By Mall Cops.
Here is the cover of the book . . .
. . . and here is the table of contents . . .
I have read the books for:
Frankenstein (1931)
Kiss Me Deadly (1955)
The Haunting (1963)
The Godfather (1972)
Jaws (1975)
Jurassic Park (1993)
Dune (2021)
I have been considering The Thin Man. It’s available from the library’s e-book selection so the investment is low.
I’ve read 21 of the books and seen 16 of the movies. Only two cases where I’ve seen a movie but not read its book (Last Picture Show, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest). Most recent “first read” on the list is True Grit (which I read about two years ago and loved – haven’t seen either of the movie adaptations though), and most recent movie seen of those on the list is Fellowship of the Ring back in 2001 (has it really been that long?) — where I read the book back around 1964.
I have to admit my lack of knowledge – I never realized Jurassic Park was a Michael Crichton book! I immediately reserved it at the library and read it – it is so much better than the movie, if only in the aspect of more philosophical discussion from Ian Malcolm. And, of course, the body count is higher in the book. ‘Nuff said.
2001: A Space Odyssey was completely incomprehensible to me (my ex-FIL actually managed to fall asleep during this movie), but once I read Arthur C. Clarke’s story, I watched it again with much more understanding.
I wonder why Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil wasn’t included; the movie inspired me to read the book, then delve deeper into the story behind it, the author, the characters . . . a real rabbit hole. In fact, I bought the Savannah Bird Girl as a fountain when we moved to FL and could keep her outside year-round.
http://www.alldogssite.com/birdgirlfountain_0317191.html
If you liked the book and the movie, In Cold Blood, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND the movie, Capote, featuring Philip Seymour Hoffman in an outstanding job . . . after seeing this movie, I went down the Truman Capote rabbit hole (oh, YT . . . how you answer my every request!) and read many of his books, his memoirs and the books about him and his ‘Swans’.
I watch so few movies that I become a tad obsessed about those I DO see and become an evangelist about them.
Read and saw 21 of these. Saw a few more- some that I didn’t know were based on books- and a few more just read. This is owing not to awesomeness, but through accumulated years. Andrea, thanks for the list.
It was odd that just about the same time as the movie Capote was out in theaters, there was another one about him and the writing of In Cold Blood and maybe also his friendship with Harper Lee. This is probably Infamous starring Toby Jones, despite their listed year of release being one year off.
Interesting that they chose the 2021 Dune instead of the 1984 or so one directed by David Lynch.
Just because someone else considers a book (or movie) a “gem” (or “meaningful”) is no reason that I need to feel compelled to read (or see) it. I’ve already suffered enough through the suggestions that I’ve gotten over the years from my dad, enough that I would consider a vote from him to be more of a warning than a recommendation.
I have watched just eight of the movies in that list (but have also read the book for five of those). The only remaining book that I have read, but not (yet) seen is “The Great Gatsby”. Two other films that I do intend to watch are the new “Dune” (which I have read multiple times) and “Jurassic Park” (which I would never touch in book form, having been massively disappointed by the ending of every Crichton book I have ever attempted). There are a few others in that list that I might endure if I happened to run into them by chance, but I would not actively look for any of the remaining 41 films, and would avoid at least half of them like the plague. That goes double for those 41 books.
Of the movies that I have seen, there are three that I would never watch again: Clockwork Orange, Dr. No, and the first film version of “Dune” (revolting). Even though it was pretty creepy, I might re-watch “Coraline”, and would definitely consider reading it, if I can find a copy over here. That leaves just four book+movie pairs that I would definitely be willing to watch (and/or read) again: Blade Runner, Lord of the Rings, The Princess Bride, and Willy Wonka.
I guess I’ve never been a fan of “Great Literature”.
P.S. @ Andréa – The reason that 2001 was so incomprehensible is that the studio got tired of waiting for (and paying for) Kubrick to finish the movie, so they pulled the plug, which resulted in a surrealistic “acid trip” ending, rather than anything that anyone (not under the influence) could understand or enjoy. I liked most of the movie, but as far as I’m concerned, it should have ended (fade to black) right after Dave pulled the plug on HAL.
P.P.S. @ Mitch – Even though I haven’t seen the new version yet, I definitely think that the author made the correct choice for “Dune”. Sting was the only highlight in the first version, but his presence was nowhere near enough to rescue the rest of that sodden mass.
Then there are books that have never been made into movies and really ought to be made into movies.
Number one on my list is “Paradise Lost” by John Milton. No, it wouldn’t be boring at all if done right. First off there’s the action-adventure that could outdo anything in the Marvel Cinematic Universe as the good angels and the bad angels uproot mountains and throw them at each other!
Later there’s the X-rated part, when Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit, look at each other and try out every sexual perversion they can think of.
If ‘Flowers for Algernon’ were written today . . .
You’d think there could not be a movie of Finnegans Wake, but there is. And I’d call it not too bad..
You’re welcome; if you click on the Table of Contents, it will embiggen.
Any idea of the name? I’d like to see it, if only to compare with Capote.
Oh, I mentioned Infamous because I think that’s the one it must be, even though the year looks off by one. I do remember critics saying “And now we have another Truman Capote movie!”
Around that same time there was another pair, The Prestige and another one also about stage magicians in rivalry. There was talk about how this happens — an idea being “in the air” and studios being stuck with their commitments despite a clash.
I just watched the trailer on IMDB; I think the actor tries too hard, esp. his irritating voice. Hoffman did it better.
Two relevant pics came to me today:
Sure there is a prominent version of Finnegans Wake in a dramatic medium. It’s called The Skin of Our Teeth. :-)
I’ve seen four of the movies (well, more than that, since there are two Willy Wonkas and…four? (of which I’ve seen three) Little Women movies). I’ve read 7 of the books. I have zero interest in reading most of the rest…I might read Emma someday, and A Clockwork Orange. Maybe a few others. The thrillers, including Bond, are noes – huge yawn. I don’t watch a lot of movies and the ones I do watch are overwhelmingly animated – and I don’t read “literary fiction” and very few thrillers.
There are two that aren’t on that list – and I agree with that choice. My Side of the Mountain is a fantastic book, the movie jumped the shark in the first 10 minutes or so (he goes to live on the mountain as a school project, with permission and knowledge of the adults in his life. Can you say missing the point?). Mrs Miniver is worse – the whole point of the book is the observations of a woman in middle age, with a teenage kid at the beginning of the story. Greer Garson is pretty but she’s no Mrs Miniver. The only thing that pair have in common is the title.
Oh, and going back to the cartoon – I love Flowers for Algernon and this cartoon is great! A beautiful version of the idea…and a neat snark on TV.
“The only thing that pair have in common is the title”
“Nightfall” fits that comment rather well. The setup is the same in both, but anyone thinking the movie might be similar to the book is quite incorrect. I remember seeing the ad for it in the newspaper and going to see the movie. Nope, not the same…
@ Darren – You can add “I, Robot” to that list.
I think of such movies as “hood ornament” movies, by analogy with the old joke about how to repair a hopeless old car: Jack up the hood ornament and slide a new car under it. Same thing with “Jack up the title and slide a new plot under it.”
Methinks we could all write Volume 2!
“Simpsons” had an episode in which the makers of Itchy and Scratchy began making non-violent cartoons. They were so dull they drove Springfield’s children outdoors to play and be creative until violence was restored.
Should be noted Bolling has been putting out fat chronological collections of “Tom the Dancing Bug”, and the vast majority hold up remarkably well . Hollingsworth Hound and Lucky Ducky are essential.
Semi-related: Bud Grace is also putting out chronological collections of “Ernie”, aka “The Piranha Club”. I’m reacquainting myself with Ernie, Uncle Sid, Dr. Enos Pork, Quacko the Human Duck, etc.
This “Trinitron” commentary about the effects of TV are closely paralleled by an SMBC comic about social media. It would be too much work to embed, since each panel is a separate image file, so here is a link to the SMBC comic at The Nib.
R.I.P. Shrug (his last CIDU comment).
When Robert first started working in mental health counseling after college, Cliff Robertson had visited that agency to get information on how to play Charly. It was something that was still being talked when Robert started working there some years later.