HomeMember CenterWriter's Corner: Biography Non-Fiction
Member Advice Summary
Films of John Steinbeck work (on the occasion of the the end of his centenary)
by Stephen_Murray | Feb 25 '03
Steinbeck characters and plots generally work better on screen than those of Faulkner, Fitzgerald, and Hemingway.

Return to opinion



Have something to say?
Write your own comment on this review!
Comments on Films of John Steinbeck work (on the occasion of the the end of his centenary)" (6 total)  
  Comment Sorted by
Date Written
#2 (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray
I placed the film "East of Eden" ahead of "Of Mice and Men," behind only "Grapes of Wrath." I think Massey, Dean, Harris, van Fleet are all great, leaving only Richard Davalos as Aaron Trask (and making Cain not really guilty of murdering Abel must be heresy...)
Feb 26 '03
8:56 pm PST

Excellent! (Reply to this comment)
by st_patrick
I was very impressed by the Hollywood versions of "Of Mice and Men" and especially "The Grapes of Wrath". The latter makes me glad I missed the depression. I thought "East of Eden" was better than you give it credit for, although only loosely based on the novel.

Happy to see your dedication to the film works of a great novelist. As always, your reviews are informative.

Patrick
Feb 26 '03
6:15 pm PST

Re: I certainly don't (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray
Well, you've seen one I haven't.

I don't agree with your explanation, though. Hemingway did not write arcanely (and, for that matter, Fitzgerald wrote a lot for mass-circulation magazines). Faulkner did, but I think the films of Fauilkner's work are better than those of Hemingway's and Fitzgerald's. Plus Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden are much longer than any of Fitzgerald's books and most of Hemingway's (and having just seen John Ford's 1932 film of Arrowsmith I know he jettisoned the whole second half of that).
Feb 26 '03
12:15 pm PST

I certainly don't (Reply to this comment)
by panguitch
have the breadth of experience you have, but Sinise's Of Mice and Men is one of my all-time favorite films.

Gushing aside, you highlight an interesting fact with Lewis and Steinbeck vs. Faulkner, Fitzgerald and Hemingway. I see accessibility being a factor in this differentiation. Accessibility is a good thing in my mind. It's a trait common to all real classics. But it's not something valued by elitists.

It'd be pushing it to say Stephen King will be remembered as the Shakespeare of our day. But I suspect it's closer to the truth than saying it of someone like Gloria Naylor (no offense, Gloria, you're just the first name of an academic lit author that popped into my head).
Feb 26 '03
10:10 am PST

Re: Stephen Babe (Reply to this comment)
by Stephen_Murray
Thanks.

Yeah, or just for comparative essays.
Feb 26 '03
8:59 am PST

Stephen Babe (Reply to this comment)
by kristinafh
Most excellent review. Wouldn't it be neat if we had an area in the movies and/or books section to review the complete works of an author/director?!

Kristina :)
Feb 26 '03
4:26 am PST