4/10
i think there may have been a misunderstanding...
18 June 1999
wow. so i read the book before i watched the movie (i am biased). in general, many adaptations of novels into film become watered down, distorted, and in many other ways 'hollywoodized'. name of the rose< is one of these films.

it must be a daunting task to capture the brilliance of an eco novel on film. so, maybe one decides to interpret artistically the novel on film; eco wrote a book to be read, not to be seen and so a film is granted certain allowances in its translation. perhaps one uses the inherent qualities of film in the way eco uses intellectual discussions (or whatever), leaving the plot as common ground between the two. but this film is mind boggling in its lack of attention to detail -- its glossing over of plot elements in the novel. seemingly important points are never discussed, the characters are not developed. for instance, i felt the initial sequence in the novel regarding brunellus [the horse] was rather important in establishing william as an intellect, but we see nothing of this in the movie. we just get some guy and his novice. bizarre.

so, i dont know. all i can suggest is read the book; its much better. watch the film if you are curious (like i was), but ... well, you will see for yourself.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed