On The Road – After. Short Answers

So nine days ago, I finally saw the film of On The Road.  I had posted a list of things I would be looking for in the film.  I’m ready to talk.  First—my short answers on what I saw.  Second—in another post, my long questions about the film.  Here’s my original list, and the short answers about what I saw.

How much of the film is based on the scroll version rather than the finished book?  Some.  The scroll version is closer to the actual events—and so is the film.

An overall theme.  In the book, Sal and friends sense someone walking towards them.  At the end of the book, an old man with long white hair walks past Kerouac in a parking lot and says, “Go moan for man.”  Is anything like this included in the movie?  No.  The theme of the film seems to be Dean’s irresponsibility.

Is Dean Moriarty presented as a new American saint, an irresponsible sociopath, or…?  In keeping with what I just said, Dean is presented as almost completely irresponsible.  At a poetry reading last Thursday, in the wake of the film, I heard one poet sharply denounce Neal Cassady (ie. Dean).

The relationship between Mary Lou and Camille.  Kristen Stewart has suggested that her character (Mary Lou) is the pivot of the film.  But the novel exists in a tension between the two.  I can see why Kristen Stewart (“Luann”) felt she was the pivotal character; she appeared as Dean’s soul mate while Kirsten Dunst (“Camille”) was relegated to a minor role.

What is the role of Carlo Marx?   One film reviewer has said:  “Lose Carlo!”  Is Carlo a true prophet?  A true poet?  A bore?  Pretentious?  Carlo was portrayed as doting and clingy, following Dean around.  His prophetic voice has been removed.

How do they handle that brothel scene in Mexico…?  Superficially, like much else.

Speaking of Mexico—How does the film portray minorities in general?  More specifically, Mexicans and Blacks?  We seem impersonal, societal references:  A sign on a gas station that says “We serve whites only”—and a sign at a roadside grocery that says “We do not sell alcohol to Indians.”  That’s it.  Neither of those signs are in the book.

What about sexism?  Do men utterly run the show?  Pretty much, although Camille does seems pretty independent.  We see the women scrubbing Bull Lee’s floors.

How are the 1940s presented?  How well does the film represent the 1940s, and does it matter?  Though the book is set in 1947-51, most people associate it with the mid-to-late 1950s, when the book first appeared.   We hear bop and see weird jazz musicians.  We hear passing remarks about President Truman.  That’s it.

How homo- or bi-sexual is the book?  How sexual is the relationship between Sal and Dean?  Not very.  Can’t tell how Dean feels about Carlo.  Dean does try to get money out of a gay man by offering sex (That scene is in the scroll version).

 How does Old Bull Lee and family come across?  Funny??  Disturbing?  Simply weird?  Weird—but not nearly weird enough(!).

Does the film include Sal’s vision, in San Francisco, of reincarnation and nonlinear time?  Nope.

How does the film deal with Sal’s relationship to his mother?  Significant, but not significant enough.  But the family is French-Canadian, as in real life.

How is America presented?  America??

Does Dean care about anything besides sex and kicks?  He cares about his children, apparently.  Maybe.

How many people and events are cut out of the movie??  Oh…lots.  But then, the novel includes a lot of characters in very minor roles.

So.  Those are the short answers.  Stay tuned for the long questions!

Anticipation: On The Road, The Film (1)

Finally found out where On The Road, the film, will be premiering in the U.S. on Dec. 21^st:  New York and Los Angeles.  But so far I have not discovered where exactly in Los Angeles it is showing.  It’s tempting to drive down—400 miles—to see the movie, and drive back—400 miles.  But no; I think not.

It actually may have actually been shown at the Marin Film Festival back in May—it was advertised, but I cannot tell that it actually was.  There is probably a story behind that.

I stumbled on a story from early this year, speculating on the distributors chosen for the U.S. release.  The thought was, they aren’t known for large releases.  It was suggested this means that the film won’t make as much money as it might have.  But I’m not familiar, at this point, with this aspect of the business of the film industry.

Meanwhile, I continue to fret about the screenplay, the adaptation, the actors.  How will Kristen Stewart do?  I’ve already seen two quotes from the film that aren’t in the book.  Dean Moriarty, in the film, apparently exhibits a conscience, self-doubt, and even (perhaps) remorse.  This changes the tone 

significantly.  I’d been wondering how they would squeeze the events into a movie time-frame.  What would they leave out?  But the movie apparently runs about 2 hours and 20 minutes—that should give them a fair shot at a reasonably complete treatment.

Still, I see characters listed that I don’t remember from the book.  Perhaps they have simply given names to some of the characters who aren’t given actual names in the novel.

My suspicion is that I will leave the theater disappointed—and then, slowly, the film will grow on me until I buy my own DVD copy and watch it semi-regularly.

I think of other films, the blockbusters, that are advertised for months ahead of their release; and think of how little PR I’ve seen for this film in the months since it was released in Europe and South America.  I hope it does not sink upon release.  A lot of folks are deeply excited and looking forward to it.  The novel, deceptively simple, has become a meaningful part of our lives.  We want to film to succeed.  But then, ever since the book first appeared, in 1957, it’s been loved by many and dismissed by many.  And maybe we shouldn’t worry so much about such things.

Kerouac is Back

I’ve been reading a lot of Jack Kerouac again.  For one thing I stumbled, a year or more back, on an audio book of On The Road.  Now it seems there are actually three audio books of that novel, plus an audio book of the “original scroll,” the version that Kerouac famously typed onto a single long roll of teletype paper, with no divisions into chapters or even paragraphs, using the real names of everyone who had inspired the novel.

I’ve now listened to all four of those audio books, several times each.  They each have their own personalities in part, of course, because of the different personalities of the readers.

One reason I’ve been so interested in these audio books is because On The Road has finally been made into a film, which premiered at the Cannes Film Festival earlier this year and was then released in much of the world—but not yet in the United States.  It is scheduled for release on December 21^st “in selected theaters” (is this why some people believe the world is ending?)  Hopefully “selected theaters” includes at least one theater in San Francisco—and hopefully one in the San Jose area.  I don’t really want to have to fly to Los Angeles or even further to see it.  Of course, I could simply wait…  But what would Dean Moriarty do??

Meanwhile, several women who knew Kerouac have written memoirs—I haven’t read any of them yet.  How wide should I let my Kerouac obsession roam?

New films and books inspired by Kerouac say something about a writer who many people had written off by around 1962.  Kerouac is enjoying a renaissance, including publication of several early works—novels that turn out to be more interesting and well-written than I’d anticipated.

And The Hippos Were Boiled In Their Tanks, co-written with William Burroughs, is now available not only in print but as an audio book itself.  That’s pretty good for a novel written in the early 1940s, unpublished for over sixty years, and dismissed by one of its own co-authors (William Burroughs) as a “not very distinguished work.”

I was expecting it to be “not very distinguished,” found myself surprised at the quality of the writing, and listened to the audio book twice.  Very enjoyable.  I was only a little disappointed at the abruptness of the ending.

Kerouac’s very first completed novel, The Sea Is My Brother has now also been published.  Written only a year or two before Hippos, it is not nearly as well written; but it is enjoyable and interesting enough that I have started reading it for the second time, almost immediately after my initial read.  Certain stylistic points annoy me, and, like Hippos, it ends rather abruptly; but enjoyable all the same.

I originally intended to review them immediately.  I did have initial gut reactions.  “Stylistic patterns in The Sea Is My Brother annoy me.”  “The Sea is My Brother simply stops; it doesn’t really end.”  But I’m reevaluating my initial reactions.  It’s true:  If it hadn’t been Kerouac, or Kerouac and Burroughs, I wouldn’t have read them.  But these guys had something that continues to appeal to me.

Hang on for those reviews (I’ve also just read Naked Lunch)—and watch for that U.S. opening of On The Road, the film.  Only eighteen more days.