DeLillo adaptations

[Erik T. Burns]

I think I would have to say that Don DeLillo is my 3rd-favorite writer,
after Gaddis & Pynchon.

my three favorite books are

Libra
The Names
Americana

but I also really really like Amazons, Underworld (really especially the
bit published in Harper's as "Pafko At the Wall"), Running Dog, End Zone,
Ratner's Star and Great Jones Street. A-and White Noise! I am less enamored
of the later DeLillo where he finds the desert and his middle-aged white
men wander about in it wondering & pondering their collective orbs. It was
OK in the (relatively) small doses in Underworld, but come on. And I
thought "The Silence" was, well, subpar. Still a better read than most
books, though!

As for Kubrick, he also did a pretty great "Lolita," with VN's "help;" it
was somewhat faithful and somewhat unfaithful to the book, like Lo herself!


On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 2:44 PM Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>
wrote:

> My own favorite King novel is “It,” followed by “Misery.” And I’d even
> throw in the first half of “The Stand”—the Captain Trips part; after that
> it goes rapidly downhill. But “The Dead Zone” is certainly up there.
>
> I agree with most of what you say—film and books are very different, yes;
> for instance, I *love* “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep” *and*
> “Bladerunner,” despite the latter only being loosely based on the former.
> (And Cronenberg’s “Crash” is a great adaptation of the novel, despite the
> differences. Also his “Naked Lunch.”) But in the case of “The Shining,” I
> think the book is only mediocre, while the film is a masterpiece. I think
> that Kubrick improved on King in every way, especially by purging the
> narrative of the silly “Oh no! The inanimate objects are coming to life!”
> bits. In fact, I think Kubrick always does great justice to his source
> material—“2001” and “A Clockwork Orange,” for instance. (And despite what
> Burgess himself prefers, I like Kubrick’s ending better!)
>
> In my own striving-to-be-humble-but-really-I’m-a-snob opinion, there are a
> few films that have even bettered the book source material. “The Shining”
> is my number one example, but I would also put “Jaws” and “The Godfather”
> up there, and to a lesser extent “Rosemary’s Baby” and “Jackie Brown.” Not
> that any of those books were bad, but the movies were definitely better.
>
> —Quail, always up for phenomenological shibari!
>
> From: Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com>
> Date: Friday, September 9, 2022 at 4:33 PM
> To: Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>, pynchon -l <
> pynchon-l at waste.org>
> Subject: Re: DeLillo adaptations
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 9:50 AM Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com
> <mailto:quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>> wrote:
>  (snip)
> And Jerky, I hear you: “The Dead Zone” is great. I would only rank “The
> Shining” above it (and maaaaybe “Misery”), but Cronenberg did a bang-up
> job. After Lynch, Cronenberg is my favorite living director. I also think
> it’s interesting—Cronenberg hated King’s script for “Dead Zone,” so he had
> it rewritten, then rewrote parts of it himself. And it’s pretty well-known
> that King hated Kubrick’s “The Shining.” I think it’s funny that the two
> best adaptations, each by a cinematic genius, both were forced to partially
> ignore the author. And if you’ve ever seen King’s own cinematic adaptation
> of “The Shining,” hoo boy.
>
> The main difference being that Cronenberg's Dead Zone is exquisitely
> faithful to the novel (King's best, IMO, and the closest he has ever come,
> or will ever come, to writing the Great American Novel), while Kubrick
> takes great license with King's work (despite being fastidiously precise
> when translating certain scenes, such as the Gold Room chat between Jack
> and the bartender, which is taken word for word from the novel). I guess
> issues arise when you try to determine what's fair and what's not when
> comparing a film and its source material, be it novel or play or real life
> event. I know I'm not teaching any of you learned dogs new tricks, but
> movies are as different from, say, history books, as history books are from
> the reality of the lived events themselves. No sense getting tied up in all
> kinds of unresolvable phenomenological knots about it. Film and literature
> have to work on their own terms, and it has been my experience that the
> points of intersection between those two seperate arts are surprisingly few
> and far between.
>
> Jerky
>
> BTW, I hear *Brandon* Cronenberg’s next movie is J.G. Ballard’s
> “Super-Cannes.”
>
> —Quail
>
> From: Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com<mailto:jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com
> >>
> Date: Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 3:23 PM
> To: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com<mailto:richard.romeo at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com<mailto:
> quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>>, P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org<mailto:
> pynchon-l at waste.org>>
> Subject: Re: DeLillo adaptations
> You guys, man!
>
> First of all, we're only one novella away from one of Delillo's very best,
> IMO, that being ZERO K. A novel which, by the way, would make a tremendous
> film for the right director and cast.
>
> Secondly, how can anyone mention successful Stephen King adaptations and
> the films of David Cronenberg in the same email, and forget to mention
> perhaps the best cinematic translation of King's writing into cinema, The
> Dead Zone? For SHAME!
>
> Jerky
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 1:40 PM rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com<mailto:
> richard.romeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Interest take, Q (the good Q)
>
> I somewhat agree with your argument, especially with the post-Underworld
> novels. I don't hate it, but I can see how his dialogue may annoy others. I
> can't say Libra or many bits of Underworld have that quality, in fact, the
> historical reproductions of the Bronx in U and Oswald and his ilk in Libra
> are tour-de-forces imho. In fact, Libra is probably my favorite DeLillo.
> It's also interesting that you like Tarantino since I kinda feel about QT
> as how you feel about DeLillo. the man's work terribly annoys me and all
> his imitators, the Raymond Carver of the pictures. ugh
>
> Mike White. hmm. it's been hard for me to like since Chuck and Buck. I
> think he's gotten better however--and his female characters are top notch.
> the White Lotus is quite good. I didnt like the series with Laura Dern but
> the Jennifer Aniston as waitress in a dead town is good, too. White is in
> it, not sure he directed. I think he did. All that to say, he's not my cup
> of tea but he is talented.
>
> I had a strong DeLillo phase and I will read anything he writes (a sadly
> dwindling number for writers for me), but the best times are past. Maybe
> that's just what happens. folks get old, etc. I still will claim the best
> thing about Bleeding Edge was that you wouldnt have known it was written by
> some guy in his 70s. and if it is the last one we see from Mr P I guess
> that's not a bad way to end things (fingers still crossed of course)
>
> yr ob'd sv't
> rich
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 11:57 AM Allen Ruch <quail at shipwrecklibrary.com
> <mailto:quail at shipwrecklibrary.com>>
> wrote:
>
> > To begin with a confession, I kind of hate DeLillo. I know he’s a great
> > writer, and his sentences are perfect, yes, yes, I get it. I’ve read
> > several of his books, but abandoned many more. The thing is: I HATE HIS
> > DIALOGUE. It’s so ridiculously stylized and overly-pretentious for me, I
> > just can’t get into it. Which is weird, I mean I love Shakespeare and
> > Quentin Tarantino; but there’s something about DeLillo’s characters that
> > make me *hate* them, and that makes me hate the books, which makes me
> hate
> > DeLillo’s writing. It’s like Wes Anderson movies: I just want to punch
> each
> > and every character, then punch the director.
> >
> > Having said that, there has been one solid DeLillo adaptation: David
> > Cronenberg’s “Cosmopolis.” He adapts the dialogue pretty straight from
> the
> > book—which makes me hate it (see above)—but the entire thing is pretty
> > saturated with satire, and I think does a lot of justice to the source
> > material. And Robert Pattinson is amazing, as usual.
> >
> > I have very little hope that Noah Baumbach is going to make a good movie
> > out of “White Noise,” but at least someone is trying.
> >
> > Now, how about a prestige-TV series based on “The Recognitions,” written
> > and directed by Mike White? That I’d fucking watch! Yeah man, I’d watch
> the
> > fucking shit out of that.
> >
> > —Quail
> >
> > From: Pynchon-l <pynchon-l-bounces at waste.org<mailto:
> pynchon-l-bounces at waste.org>> on behalf of Erik T. Burns <
> > eburns at gmail.com<mailto:eburns at gmail.com>>
> > Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 4:52 PM
> > To: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com<mailto:richard.romeo at gmail.com>>
> > Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org<mailto:pynchon-l at waste.org>>
> > Subject: Re: Pynchon at the Beach
> > I suppose it would be possible to take White Noise so seriously that one
> > entirely misses the point.
> >
> > I hope that doesn't happen, though I had also hoped no one would ever
> make
> > movies out of his books. They feel like they might make good movies but I
> > don't think they will, really. Kind of like Stephen King, for that matter
> > (where, aside from a handful of exceptions including The Shining, Stand
> By
> > Me and Shawshank Redemption, the cinematic versions inerrantly blow.)
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 9:06 PM rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com<mailto:
> richard.romeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > on an another note: the trailer for Baumbach's take on White Noise left
> > me
> > > scratching my head--I get it's just a first look but it feels or
> > suggests a
> > > Hollywood 80s Godzilla disaster movie. I'm not sure how DeLillo's
> satire
> > > translates to film and I consider WN satire. the trailer exudes such
> > > seriousness which I hope doesn't get all the attention. DD is at his
> best
> > > mixing the humorous with the profound--I'd be shocked and disappointed
> if
> > > the former wasn;t given its due. Don Cheedle as Murray Suskind gives me
> > > some hope
> > >
> > > rich
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>