Cosmopolis Movie

[rich]

possibly but delillo really lives inside doesnt he? imagine filing pafko at
the wall--how do you depict visually such rich language. a narrator?
remember the thin red line? insufferable except a few beautifully shot love
scenes. i also think delillo talks alot about film but his real kick is
language itself

rich


On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Mark Sacha <msacha1121 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think most of the blame for this lies with Cronenberg. It's as if he
> went out of his way to make it wooden and impersonal, to turn every
> interesting scene or concept into self-aware pretension. I find it hard to
> buy that DeLillo can't be adapted to the screen - difficult, maybe, but
> nowhere near impossible. He has a huge filmic influence that both shows and
> is blatantly admitted in his work, i.e., the film on the plane in Players,
> 24-hour Psycho, etc.
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 12:19 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> the ideas are wonderful; the movie just dreadful. delillo doesnt
>> translate to the screen, at least i think so. even cosmopolis which i didnt
>> really like, still had me underlying shit most every page. its a book of
>> asides, but that goes for most delillo.
>>
>> rich
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 10:48 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Even horrible dialogue during sex.  Ugh!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, November 1, 2013, David Morris wrote:
>>>
>>>> OMG!  This really sucks!  Endless talk from people without souls for
>>>> whom we care nothing, not even about their wealth. Too smart by half.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20131102/224f4d09/attachment.html>