Keith Gordon

[patrick]

For a short while I was a teacher, and while I was never able to teach this novel it remains one of my favorite young adult books. I had always heard about the film version, but never had a chance to see it before the brand-new DVD release (out Tuesday). Pretty much all I had heard about it was anger over the changing of the book's ending, and it seemed that no one had anything kind to say about it.

Of course, I watched the DVD and thought it was terrific, especially for a low-budget adaptation from a first-time director. Gordon is a bit liberal with his camera tricks (he LOVES 360 spins and shaky hand held shots to create confusion and mood), but pretty much everything else is dead-on. I love how the character of Archie was changed to be more sexually ambiguous, and the ending is still powerful while being changed to work better on screen.

(also, I didn't realize until looking the movie up on IMDB that "Wally Ward" was Wallace Langham's stage name, it's kind of odd seeing him in a serious role considering 99% of his work seems to be cameos on TV shows or voiceover work).

Sorry for just kind of rambling, this is my first time making one of these posts.

[John Cope]

Wow, thanks for alerting me to this, patrick! I adore this movie. It was hugely important to me growing up and was one of those pictures I must have watched dozens of times and knew by heart. I read the Cormier book later and always preferred the movie. It was more authentic to me, despite its glossy style. Gordon really used his music well, too. Peter Gabriel's We Do What We're Told has never been employed to such powerful, haunting effect. And that image from the cover of the DVD is a great one to use as it is a very striking moment in the film itself, almost iconic; the fact that much of the imagery comes across that way is probably attributable to Gordon's youth and my own youth made it appealing but it remains in my mind these many years later.

And, yes, Langham was a god to us for this movie. I remember one girl I showed this to years back becoming obsessed with him based on this performance. It's a real tragedy that he never went on to refine his obvious dramatic ability.

[dustybooks]

I'm a huge fan of this movie as well, have been awaiting the DVD release for ages. Can't wait to hear Gordon's commentary track, as he's usually quite interesting.

I saw the movie on the Sundance Channel in high school and didn't read the book until last year. I too prefer the film; I think the visuals make a lot of difference in getting the menace across. For me this is probably the definitive movie about adolescent alienation; at the very least I put it up there with Rebel Without a Cause. As for the ending, I can see criticism of altering the message, but it feels like a much more effective emotional arc as presented in the movie. The book's ending felt a bit too much like an exercise to me.

[Cronenfly]

Happy (and a bit surprised, even) to see so much love for this: picked the DVD up on the cheap thinking it would be decent, maybe, but I've watched and thought about it more than I do many DVDs I've payed 5 times as much for (funny how that works). The use of music is still striking in a way that most '80s movies can't even dream of today, and Ward/Langham does indeed give a fan-for-life making performance. So too does John Glover, who I find to be very underrated as an actor (the fact that his performance could get me through the otherwise near-excretable 52 Pick-Up is amazing unto itself). The film has a dark edge lacking in most mainstream-ish movies starring teens (especially of that period- I know, River's Edge, etc did too, but still, compared to most, it's stern stuff), and even recalls (or apes, depending on your POV) Kubrick in a number of sections. I gush, as it probably isn't really a masterpiece, but it's certainly one of my favourite movies. I look forward to reading the book at some point.
EDIT- And what's all this BS about people thinking the movie has a happy ending? I can't fathom anyone except a child seeing the movie and thinking it ends well: only on the most basic level is it even superficially "happy", and even then it really isn't. Thoughts as to why people seem to misinterpret the end a lot?

[Cronenfly]

Just wondering whether anyone had any thoughts on this: since seeing (and loving) The Chocolate War, I've picked up this, Mother Night, and Waking the Dead on DVD on the cheap, but have yet to watch any of them. The (now seemingly OOP) R1 DVD of this one is pan and scan only, and you can read the IMDB message boards for the chronicling of Gordon's (thus far unsuccessful) attempts at a re-release in widescreen since at least early 2006 (he's one of the few directors who seems to post there: know of any others, anyone?). Anyways, just though I'd ask about it: I liked Birdy on the whole (another Wharton adaptation), and I'm a Gordon admirer thus far, so it seemed a safe bet.