Is this worth watching? - The World According to Garp (1982) Discussion

[–] mjpsanto 22 years ago

I was in no way disappointed with the film. In fact, I strongly encourage every reader to watch the film....b/c even if some things are different from the book, the movie will still be great. This is definitely an underrated film.

reply

[–] privatesf 21 years ago

I agree. The book is one of my all-time favorites and I also thought the movie was equally as good. Williams has rarely been better.

reply

[–] adina_darko 21 years ago

I loved the book, and I haven't seen the movie. My mom didn't like it ((though the book is one of her favorites)), but I hope to see it soon!

Gentlemen, you can't fight here! This is the war room!!

reply

[–] jseger9000 21 years ago

I've seen the film several times and have just finished the book.
I was surprised how closely the film followed the book. Some characters were condensed and some dropped, but I think a fan of the book would not be disappointed.

reply

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] twiggy19782001 21 years ago

I actually enjoyed the movie better than the book. The book was kind of confusing to me in parts. Of course the book was also good b/c in went into more details about Jenny Fields and Garp and so on. The movie was excellant, it was very moving and touching. The one bad thing is that I can't remember if Garp died at the end or not. Its been so long since I read the book.

reply

[–] Seahawk2k 20 years ago

I was very dissapointed with the movie. They completely butchered it. But seeing the movie will not ruin the book. Bah the movie made me so mad.

And to all others in this story profound shooms of lipmistic brrrrrr.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] NINnerd 20 years ago

i've noticed that a lot of people don't know whether or not walter dies. i think it's completely obvious. i mean, the close-up, the fact that walter isn't in the rest of the movie, when robin williams says "i miss walt." come on!

i really loved the movie. i do believe that in the movie it is a little less obvious as to whether or not garp dies. but i guess he does, since he does in the book. and he tells helen to remember,...etc.

-------------------------
I sleep, therefore, I am.

reply

[–] Tomvis 18 years ago

Wake up, Seahawk2k, Its 2007 now. You WILL enjoy it. I repeat; you will enjoy it. (Im making an hypnotical gesture.. wooooh -kazam.) There. Hope you like it.. :)

reply

[–] krank23 20 years ago

I would say no, this is not worth watching. I saw it with a friend, who hadn't read the book. I love the book, and Irving's work in general.

This movie more or less requires, it seems, the viewer to have read the book. I had to explain the actual story to my friend afterwards, and who Pooh was, and why she did what she did. He then agreed with me in my judgement: That this is the worst piece of crap any of us have ever seen.

It is full of "errors", where sections from the book have been stomped on and mutilated into something one might be thinking of as suitable for fans of big "hollywood" movies. Personally, I was near viominting more than once. The only character for whom they seems to have found the "right" actor was Roberta. Garp was a clown, Jenny was a nice, warm and friendly feminist... I could go on. It seems they actually ENJOYED destroying every piece of interresting plot point from the book. Not to mention the business of moving one of the greatest parts, according to me, from the charming city of Vienna to New York!

This is nothing but pissing on Irving's grave.

reply

[–] rikkylee 20 years ago

WOW!!! I have never heard such a bad review of the movie. My wife and I watch it on a regular basis and have loved it. When I saw it as a child and to this day when he dies but is "flying" I have cried from the joy and sadness of him finally getting his wish of flying like his father.
I have to get the book and see how much more fantastic it is than the film. I must see what I am missing. gtg to the library now, bye.

reply

[–] anubis1138 20 years ago

I am a pretty strong critic when it comes to movies, but I thought The World According to Garp only had one serious flaw. Robin Williams. I could feel him straining to be the wild man, I could feel the distance between him and his character as a kind of odd frustrated energy, which works for some scenes but ultimately makes his performance uneven and difficult to watch (from a pure performance aspect). By the time he did Goodwill Hunting, his maturity helped to put him closer to that character and he gave his best understated performance ever. In Garp, it was like watching Jeremy Piven in PCU, straining to be himself and cut loose with manic improv but having a script and dictatorial director that allowed no creative licensce or breathing room for the actor.

Overall, it's a great movie for many, many reasons, but Williams was just not ready for a dramatic role of that intensity while being understated.

reply

[–] rikkylee 20 years ago

I read the book and am very satisfied. I couldn't create any faces that weren't the actors unfortunately. The short stories that go into the book are as good as or better than the man with the gloves story. The book is so much more vast than the already fantastically viewed movie. The movie however focuses on Garps fascination on flying...not so in the book. If you like the movie take the time and love the novel. You won't regret it.

reply

[–] CynicalClerk 20 years ago

For all the people who have read the book and claimed the film has not lived up to it, consider this; The book is over six hundred pages and chronicles (SPOILER) not just a day in the life, or a month in the life, or a STORY in the life... but THE ENTIRE LIFE and death of a person. You would have to expect that things from the book would get left out or changed, simply to file the story down to screenplay format. Personally, this is one of my all time fav's and easily the best work Robin Williams has ever done. I would reccommend it to anyone who appreciates good flicks. It is DEFINATELY worth watching.

reply

[–] manwithnoname76 20 years ago

Irving is NOT dead, a little research before your comments would go far to dispell the myth that you are a retard.

reply

[–] penguined 20 years ago

Do not watch this movie. It has no flow and is very choppy, jumping around Garp's life. It's a very poor adaptation of a great book.

"For all the people who have read the book and claimed the film has not lived up to it, consider this; The book is over six hundred pages and chronicles (SPOILER) not just a day in the life, or a month in the life, or a STORY in the life... but THE ENTIRE LIFE and death of a person. You would have to expect that things from the book would get left out or changed, simply to file the story down to screenplay format."

The Ciderhouse Rules was an even longer book than this and it managed to tell Homer's entire life. The fact that it has to cover someone's whole life is no excuse.

Anubis1138 was also correct in pointing out that Robin Williams was miscast as Garp. I like Robin Williams but he just wasn't right for this movie.

In short read the book, but stay away from the movie.

"There are a million fine girls in the world, but they don't all bring you lasagna at work."

reply

[–] wooksie 20 years ago

What are you talking about, penguined?

The movie version of The Cider House Rules drops over 1/3 of the book.

Irving liked the adaptation of Garp for what it was; a series of vignettes that captured the essence of the book. He was pleased enough with George Roy Hill’s film that he stayed friends with him until Hill died.

Obviously many of Irving’s stylistic choices don’t translate well to film, notably the stories-within-a-story (Pension Grillparzer etc), but the meat and potatoes are there.

At least Garp isn’t a slap in the face to readers of the book like Simon Birch (Irving made them change the name) or Stephen King’s Hearts in Atlantis.

reply

[–] dtr19 20 years ago

Alright, first of all, I think Williams was a great Garp. Second of all, Garp may have had a lot cut out, but some of the best things are still there, and its still a great movie. As for The Cider House Rules, they cut just about 2/3 of the book actually. They didn't put in most of the stuff about the Dr. and they put nothing about after Buckie, or whatever his name was(been a while since I saw the movie or read the book), came back. It just put in a small part of the Homer aspect of the book, and even changed things around in that too. With Garp, at least they didn't change things that they left in really. Garp is a good movie, and so is Cider House, and honestly, if you're gonna watch a movie based on a book, just try not to think of them as the books. Take them as a seperate thing. If you sit there and disect them, you're gonna be disappointed no matter what. Fact is, no movie can be exactly the book. At least not when the book is over 300 pages. But all in all, Garp was a great adaptation if you ask me, and Cider House was in no way a good adaptation. It cut out a HUGE amount of things.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rikkylee 19 years ago

hotel grillparzer rocks!!!

reply

[–] Agrenish 19 years ago

Maybe someone could explain something to me as I've just finished watching the movie. I've had a compleate media blackout concerning everything regarding the movie and I was very much left puzzled as to the point of the movie. Honestly, it even initiated the beginning stages of a headache. The first hour I was very amused and was enjoying the film quite a bit, however the movie just kept going on and on and on.

**SPOILER ALERT**

By the end, I had no idea what the moral of the story was supposed to be. Don't blow the students? Don't bang the babysitter? Don't write politically charged books during a transitional time period or else you'll be assassinated? I was left with only the insights of Garp and memories of some very random scenes that if they had been cut out I wouldn't of noticed a difference nor missed the shorter length of playing time. Lots of scenes that left me asking "why is this in here, did they have to adapt the whole book?" or something to a similar effect.

Will someone please tell me why this movie is rated as high as it is and why I'm reading such praise in here and kindly tell me what I've missed?

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dtr19 18 years ago

I know this is an OLD post, so you might not even ever see this and it may not even be relevant anymore. However, I am going to attempt to anwser this question for you anyway. First of all, this movie had no moral. At least none that was necessary to get the movie and think it was good. Mainly what you missed I think is that the movie was really meant to be a biography of him and his mother. It wasn't meant to be taken totally as you would normally take a fictional movie. All of Irvings books are that way. They aren't normal fiction. They are all almost biographies, but fictional. Also, you're disecting a movie that can't be disected to understand it and enjoy it. You have to take it as a whole to like it. Anyway, those are my humble thoughts on that.

reply

[–] johnnywoo 18 years ago

I'd take it further. Irving wrote a book, which may or may not be autobiographical - who cares? He wrote a GREAT book. With great characters. The plot is incidental in a lot of ways - several short stories, and (someone said it earlier) it covers a lifetime - largely from Garp's birth to his death. Anyone surprised or disappointed or upset about his death should think about what the book is about. Anyway, I digress...

For me, any blessing in having the movie at all would be that it would bring the book to a wider audience. And that would be no bad thing. I just hope it didn't put anyone off.

If you want to see the movie, see the movie. You might like it, you might not. If you want to read the book, read it. You might like it, you might not. Please please PLEASE don't compare the two.

reply

[–] tonymurphylee 19 years ago

I am an inspired fan of John Irving. his new book sounds good. I have not actully seen the film adaptation of THE CIDER HOUSE RULES. I am actully not allowed to because my mom said it is one of the most boring and stupid movies she has ever seen. But anyway, I thought that even though the film adaptation of GARP was kind of loose, it is still defintely worth watching.Robin Williams was very intresting in this one. Since this is one of his earlier movies, i would say that it should be watched by many. It is sort of for certain tastes though.

reply

[–] metalmagnolia 18 years ago

"honestly, if you're gonna watch a movie based on a book, just try not to think of them as the books. Take them as a seperate thing"
exactly - do we quibble with Gone With the Wind because it left out 2 of Scarlett's children?

reply

[–] alamay 18 years ago

Looks like you're the retard. Previous post said nothing about J.I. being dead.

reply

[–] fcabanski 19 years ago

Your question is almost funny because the movie is so good and so far beyond just being worth it to watch.

Watch the movie!

reply

[–] none_here 18 years ago

the book is about a thousand times better than the movie

reply

[–] mushrmcourtgrl 18 years ago

agreed. the movie's tone is totally different and it doesn't stand on it's own very well at all. If I had watched the movie before reading the book I would have been supremely confused. Not by the plot, neccesarily, but at the *point*. The movie appears to draw no real conclusions about anything at all. It's very odd, and it wouldn't have made a lick of sense to me if I'd not read the book first.

Watch it if you must, but you don't have to.

reply