Never a good idea to read the book after you’ve seen the movie, they’re too different media and script writers alter books to bring the story to the big screen. This is a work of fiction, no photographer named Robert Kincaid ever worked for National Geographic. Why did the author feel the story’s fundamental conceit need be predicated on a falsehood? The bridges and the countryside are very real, I’ve seen them personally. The home used in the movie was deliberately burned as was the bridge where the two met. Movies show, books tell so here we follow Kincaid on his drive from Bellingham, Washington and learn about the man who shows up at an Iowa farmhouse.
The problem with having seen the movie version means it’s almost impossible to think of these characters without picturing Eastwood/Streep. Due to product placement we don’t get to see a Levis label tightly clinging to a male butt on screen. The book contains extras that didn’t make it to screen including the text of Kincaid’s letter to Francesca. As I’ve said it’s hard to think of the characters without picturing the movie version. Interesting that the author gave him his name Robert. This was an eternal love affair that couldn’t be.
The problem with having seen the movie version means it’s almost impossible to think of these characters without picturing Eastwood/Streep. Due to product placement we don’t get to see a Levis label tightly clinging to a male butt on screen. The book contains extras that didn’t make it to screen including the text of Kincaid’s letter to Francesca. As I’ve said it’s hard to think of the characters without picturing the movie version. Interesting that the author gave him his name Robert. This was an eternal love affair that couldn’t be.
Not a great read but one for the romantic in most of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment