Short Cuts

"Short Cuts" was, in my opinion, a great movie.  Some of the complaints in the class were about the fact that the movie did not follow the stories exactly.  For the movie, though, I think it was necessary to take the stories and put a new and modern twist on them.  It was interesting because, although there were so many stories, they all related to each other somehow.  Also, the cast was stellar in portraying the characters.  I thought the film was successful in evoking a multitude of emotions.  My biggest problem with the movie was the time restrictions.  Since we could only watch one hour of the film per day, we missed minor parts that ended up being very important to the film.  Furthermore, as the movie was so long, splitting it up between days made following the different story lines very confusing.  The use of multiple story lines was another problem we discussed in class.  I think if we had been able to watch the whole film in one sitting, this would not have been a problem.  I thought incorporating all the stories together was a successful move on the director's part.  By including all the different stories, the director was able to bring so many of Raymond Carver's characters to life.  Since all of Carver's stories focused on different types of people, many different personalities were represented.  With a variety of people, the interaction between characters was very interesting.  The biggest surprise to me was the end of the film when the teenage girl is murdered.  I definitely did not expect it and while, at the time, I thought it came out of left field it seems to fit in with the rest of the devastating circumstances.  I really enjoyed the film, I only wish we would have been able to view it more efficiently.

Raymond Carver

Usually I would be turned off by the anticlimactic outcomes of Raymond Carver's stories, for some reason, though, I really enjoy reading them.  While they are easy to follow, they address the complexities of everyday life.  "Jerry and Molly and Sam" was sort of disturbing to me.  Although there are no really life changing or devastating events, the fact that the main character is almost trapped in his life is unsettling.  For part of the story I was waiting for some kind of big action to take place, but as I read further, the story just didn't seem to need a plot twist.  I am really interested in Raymond Carver for this reason.  I think it's amazing that he can take such mundane aspects of life and turn them into captivating stories, there's some detail that just draws you in. The story revolves around a lost dog but extends further into the life of an unfaithful family man, the commonalities within the story allow readers to relate to the characters in a strange way. Also, the fact that the title of the story, "Jerry and Molly and Sam" comes from very briefly mentioned characters adds to the oddness.  "A Small Good Thing" has the same ability to draw you in without any extreme drama.  Although this story has a more grim outcome, the lack of action throughout the entire story is very similar to that of "Jerry and Molly and Sam".  From reading the two stories I can assume that Carver felt a need to address the depressing events of everyday life. It seems that Raymond Carver was very interested in characters that have become nothing more than victims of circumstance. Carver's ability to translate monotony into a successful story is really amazing to me.  I am looking forward to "Shortcuts" and seeing how Carver's stories are adapted to film.

The Sky is Gray

"The Sky is Gray" is one of the best stories we have read so far.  Language, youth, and maturity were all important contributing factors to the point of view.  Since the story was told from an eight year old boy's perspective, I think it had a unique angle.  Pride seemed to be one of the main themes of the story.  There were many instances throughout the reading where pride played a major role.  For example, the mother had to buy something when they stopped at the cafe to warm up, she would not except the extra meat from the old lady, and she would not allow her son to flip up his collar in the cold.  This aspect was very interesting to me.  For African Americans in this period, everyday life was a struggle.  Establishments were split between black and white and blacks were forced to ride at the back of the bus.  With all this to endure, the mother still had all the pride in the world.  It was as if she would not let her unfortunate situation get her down.  I really respected the mother's character for this reason. 

 On the other hand, I was a bit uncomfortable with the way she treated her son.  While he was the oldest child in the family, eight years old is hardly old enough to have the responsibilities of a full grown man.  Of course, with the father being away and money being so tight, the boy had to take on a lot of grown up tasks, however, I thought the mother should have taken his youth and vulnerability into account.  One part in particular demonstrates my view.  The mother tells the boy he must kill the birds they have caught.  When he refuses she begins to beat him.  At the sight of this the aunt comes out and tells the mother she must explain the situation to the boy rather than just hit him.  I understand that times were very difficult for the family, but I also believe that every child deserves to be a child.  I don't think it is fair to expect an eight year old to take on such responsibilities with no questions asked.

Religious undertones were another important aspect of the story.  There was a lot of talk about God and beliefs and I think the old woman sort of represented an everyday personification of kindness.  I thought it was interesting that Gaines included the character of the young man reading the book.  At the time the story was written, I feel it must have been pretty brave to bring up such questions.  Because of this, I was definitely intrigued by the character.

At the close of the story, I have to say, I was very impressed.  It would be wonderful if the film turned out to be half as good. 

Tomorrow

Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate William Faulkner, but "Tomorrow" was not my favorite story.  Even if I had been wildly interested in the plot, the writing was nearly impossible to follow.  While getting lost in Faulkner's very detailed descriptions, I had a hard time keeping track of all the characters.  Faulkner noted, almost to a fault, every aspect of the most insignificant parts of the story.  Teaming that with the fact that Fentry was the only character discussed in length made for quite a confusing story.  On the positive side, I enjoyed the end of the story.  Although I spent much of the time trying to figure out what the story was actually about, it all came together for me at the end.  Realizing the true identity of the murdered man as the boy Fentry had cared for in childhood was my favorite part of the story.  Although I was not moved by the story, I can appreciate it as a work by a great author. Though I wasn't exactly thrilled with "Tomorrow" in short story form, I tried to keep an open mind for the movie. This endeavor was futile. Apart from Robert Duvall's comical accent in the portrayal of Fentry, the plot did not transfer well to film. Though many of the same elements were present in the movie, I think the amount of time spent displaying Fentry's dismal and uneventful life was unsuccessful. While the theme of endurance became apparent in these scenes, they did not add to the level of entertainment. The characters of Fentry and Sarah were a bit over the top. Although the film was in need of more entertaining aspects, overacting was not the way to go. It's rather hard to indulge in a movie when the actors aren't convincing. After reading the short story and seeing the movie, I have to say I was more captivated by the story. I usually follow the mantra that the book is always better than the movie, and in this case I was correct. With that being said, the story was less than I expected. Honestly, I feel bad that Robert Duvall considers his role as Fentry such a great accomplishment.

Memento

It has probably been five or so years since I have seen "Memento".  The first time I saw it, I was entertained but I was not crazy about it.  In fact, after reading the short story I was surprised with how much I had enjoyed it.  Remembering the movie, I thought I would have the same feelings about the short story. The opposite was true, though. I was extremely intrigued by the story. The lack of information gave the story a sense of chaos and suspense.  It was a gripping account that kept me on the edge of my seat. Seeing the film for the second time left me a bit puzzled.  Although the movie has a solid plot and many significant twists, I had almost completely forgotten what happened.  For example, in the scene where the audience finds out that Natalie has ulterior motives, I was shocked at the fact that I had not remembered this particular twist.  After seeing it again I remembered the sinking feeling it gave me the first time I saw it. That part of the story seemed like it should have been hard to forget.  I could not believe that it had completely slipped my mind.  Natalie's character seemed different to me this time, though.  I had not felt sorry for her the first time I had seen the movie.  Realizing, though, that she had lost someone because of Leonard's "game" left me sympathetic to her character.  Having seen the movie so long ago, I had forgotten how the story pans out. The fact that Leonard turned out to be the real antagonist was a bit disappointing but I really believe it added a lot to the movie. Honestly, I think the whole story made more sense to me this time.  I was exponentially more impressed with the film.     

Memento Mori

Excellent.  This short story is superb.  It has all the makings for a great plot -suspense, thrill, desperation, revenge, etc.- and is compacted into a tiny bit of writing.  I saw the movie a few years ago and I was not completely enthralled. I remember feeling a bit confused and uneasy through most of it.  After reading the short story, I had totally different feelings, though. I kept up with the action and narration.  My only complaint is that the story is not long enough.  I am looking forward to seeing the movie for a second time. It has been a while and I am interested in being able to compare the two forms of the story.

The sense of urgency throughout the whole piece is a key element of captivating the reader.  Because the chapters are so short, it is nearly impossible to stop until you reach the end.  Most of the chapters end with some kind of jarring cliffhanger that forces the reader to keep on going.  Since "Memento Mori" is so short, however, this is not a difficult feat.  Even if the story were longer, I think the author's total originality and creativity would keep the reader interested through the whole thing. If I am not allured by a story it can take decades to finish. The choppiness of "Momento Mori" paired with the uniqueness left me completely satisfied.

Passage of time seems to be a recurring theme in the short story.  I thought the lack of information in the time between Earl's tattoo and his waking up in the hotel was magnificent.  With room for such open interpretation the reader has to rely on clues to develop the story.  Obviously, a significant amount of time has passed.  Since it means nothing to Earl, though, why should it be significant to the reader?  Reading the story from Earl's point of view really brought out feelings of desperation.  Most momentous for me was the end of the story when Earl could not find a pen. Nolan's ability to express Earl's despair was fantastic.  I literally felt his anxiety.

"The Killers" and Heroic Fatalism

Phillip Booth's essay on the film adaptations of "The Killers" was rather enjoyable.  I found it to be an easy and quick read.  My only regret is not having seen all three versions of the story discussed in the essay.  While I agreed with many of Booth's points, it was difficult to think critically when I haven't seen the films.

The Killers (1946)

In Booth's description of the 1946 version of "The Killers" much time was spent comparing the film to other works of the era.  Understanding Booth's point proved difficult as I have never seen the movies mentioned.  Furthermore, the extended amount of time spent discussing the director took away from the commentary on the actual film.  It was interesting to read about the film's history and background, but I found myself wondering less about the story's purpose when I was introduced to all the extra information.  On the other hand, knowing the history of the directors allows the reader to understand the director's style.  Understanding the director's style makes comparing different versions of the story easier.

The Killers (film short)

While I have never seen this version of the film, Booth's description was easy to visualize.  After reading the intriguing account, I am quite interested in seeing the film.  Booth notes that the film short is closely related to Hemingway's actual story.  I was curious about this because both longer versions of the filmed differed from the original story.  Booth's discussion of the "unexpected images" in the short really caught my attention.  Because the essay did an excellent job of bringing the short to life, I am very interested in seeing it.

The Killers (1964)

The comparison between Sheila and Kitty as the "femme fatale" role was a compelling addition to the essay.  Although I was more captivated by what I saw of the 1946 film, reading about the later version interested me.  As we discussed in class, it was surprising that the film was even called "Ernest Heminway's The Killers" because it had so few similarities to Hemingway's actual story.  

I have always been rather skeptical of film adaptation of novels and short stories.  More often than not I am justified in my skepticism.  After reading this essay, though, I'm thinking that the movies may engage me as much as Hemingway's short story.