Filming ordinary books is easy; it's the stuff of the film business. Filming one of the greatest English language novels of the 20th century is really hard. Really hard.
The script is a worthy and very creditable effort which makes concessions to film and audience comprehensions; something Faulkner flouted when he forced readers to deal with the opening sixty pages of this remarkable book.
The telling is true enough, it keeps to the thread of the stories; the compromises between book and film are understandable; the portrayals are strong and the director has Faulkner's echo to work with. It is a solid entry to the book and no doubt it will be the thing students use instead of reading it.
The question is whether it works in its own right and that is more problematic because if one comes to the film via the book the comparisons are interminable. If a viewer sees it as is they could quibble with its purpose and narrative, still atypical, especially in these conventional times.
The essential quality of Faulkner's prose is effaced; it has to be as the camera replaces the text, and that is a huge loss for multifarious reasons, in particular the extreme subjectivity which must be diluted through the objective lens.
Even so, the film is admirable for its talent and effort; nor does it waste the viewer's attention.
The script is a worthy and very creditable effort which makes concessions to film and audience comprehensions; something Faulkner flouted when he forced readers to deal with the opening sixty pages of this remarkable book.
The telling is true enough, it keeps to the thread of the stories; the compromises between book and film are understandable; the portrayals are strong and the director has Faulkner's echo to work with. It is a solid entry to the book and no doubt it will be the thing students use instead of reading it.
The question is whether it works in its own right and that is more problematic because if one comes to the film via the book the comparisons are interminable. If a viewer sees it as is they could quibble with its purpose and narrative, still atypical, especially in these conventional times.
The essential quality of Faulkner's prose is effaced; it has to be as the camera replaces the text, and that is a huge loss for multifarious reasons, in particular the extreme subjectivity which must be diluted through the objective lens.
Even so, the film is admirable for its talent and effort; nor does it waste the viewer's attention.