A Sad Dean?


First I'd like to say that my post is not designed to criticise the film because I do love it so.

It's just...

It's been a while since I read "On the Road" but I have never forgotten Dean's spirit in the book and remember for the most part he was almost always quite happy regardless of problems he has or the people around him have. The only time I remember in the book that he's upset is when Dean and Sal are having a meal in a restaurant and Sal loses it with Dean after the latter remarks that Sal is damaging his own kidneys; a remote reference but I can't remember another time Dean got upset.

Now, maybe people will post quotes that are long forgotten to me where Dean expresses a sadness (and not one which is brought on by the beauty of what he's seeing or something like that), but in the film it suprised me how he was on the verge of weeping at the end when Remi didn't let him go with Sal to the concert or whatever. In the book I assumed that he didn't really seem to care.

Something has to be done, but nothing too original, because hey, this is Hollywood.

reply

I think Hedlund was aiming to humanize Dean, and it worked in the context of Salles' vision.

Dean is a man of illusion - yes, he's this live wire of excitement, vitality, sexuality, and passion - but he is suffering underneath it, you know?

Also, think of the number of times he mentions his father.. at one point towards the end, he even tries to seek him out. I think the lack of a father figure/male influence in his life might have shaped his reckless behavior in some way.

Now, Sal is the last remaining male in his life whom he does care for and with whom he has shared all these experiences, so when Sal leaves him at the end, it evokes all these emotions within Dean.

Hedlund's face says it all - pain, sadness, regret, and finally, resignation. He's not only lost a friend, but a brother.

That's just my take.

Any thoughts? I'm glad you brought this up, Silent Troubadour, thanks!

reply

[deleted]

It is more realistic but I think that's why I don't like it as much; I like Dean being Godlike. In regards to the sense of power you get from the character, this Dean got my adrenaline flowing and got me more emotional. The Dean in the film is realistic but that makes him more like the everyday person so I don't care about him as much.

Something has to be done, but nothing too original, because hey, this is Hollywood.

reply

[deleted]

So one guy - John - is happy with how they decided to portray Dean in the film; good for him. But how I feel on the subject hasn't changed.

Thanks for informing me about that piece of trivia though.

Nevertheless, both Kerouac and John Cassady knew the man and wanted to portray him differently. I guess in a way the fact that there are two accounts of Neal gives the audience two ways of looking at the man, which is a blessing.

Thanks for your reply debbiebeleza.

Something has to be done, but nothing too original, because hey, this is Hollywood.

reply

I wanted to see the stuff that dean could do that made people go wow! Him coasting the limo through the mountains bare-chested because they can't afford gas or him driving 100 mph over ice lakes with little visibility and never losing control. What about when they have a running race and dean can jump really high? That comes at a time in the book when Sal isn't sure about dean's morality and can't help but admire what he can do.

But I really liked the film. It will grow in popularity over the years

reply

When the film ended, I turned and said the same thing to my husband. Where was the fun, happy, vibrant Dean?!? The film really only showed the sad almost pathetic side of Dean. And he was angry or sad in nearly every scene, not what I expected. I love the book, the movie was just "okay" to me. Had a lot of potential, great actors, great director, great source material, and great prep (I would have LOVED to have taken part in the beat boot camp) but for me, failed to capture the book's fun, happy, exciting, hilarious, "iconic" scenes.

reply

I think the movie's purpose is not to be the book on film as much as supplement to it. The movie gives a voice to the female characters and thus a different viewpoint of the Beatniks. Sal disregards any female agency, because that takes away from his journey.

Similarly, the film shows another side of Dean, one that Sal most definitely ignored. Dean was his immortal muse, so he would not have wanted to recognize the sadness his hero felt towards his own life. As we have learned, Neal Cassady was internally troubled and self-conscious about the way he lived his life. But Kerouac and the other writers don't want just realities to taint their image of what he represented.

There’s no one on IMDB I care enough for to use spell check- suck it grammar Nazis

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Wow. Did you hear a whistling sound when this one flew over your head? Watch it again. That final scene makes the film. Without it the whole point of everything you see before it would be lost.

"IMdB; where 14 year olds can act like jaded 40 year old critics...'

reply

I still think that even though it is not something that Kerouac intended "On The Road" can be enjoyed on a much more basic level of some things that happen to some people. After all a lot of people feel that that's what life is like; there is no point to be lost for me with this film like you say there is. I just feel that Dean crying isn't in character of the Dean in then novel and I prefer that Dean than this more human portrayal.

Something has to be done, but nothing too original, because hey, this is Hollywood.

reply

You must take into consideration that the film medium is very different from the written; films cannot explain emotions in words, so actors need to show it in their facial expressions. Of course Kerouac never literally describes Dean Moriarity as "sad." To use that word when describing a character like this would be unforgivable. But anyone who "reads between the lines" realizes that he in fact WAS an unhappy guy, who was effectively hiding fears and uncertainty about his own life and where it was going. While reading the book I never got the impression that Dean was this happy, well-adjusted and carefree character; but rather someone good at putting forth the image, like alot of people like him are good at doing. So seeing the character sad, and even crying at the end came as no surprise for me at all. Did people expect some kind of voiceover narration telling the audience that "this guy may look like Mr. Cool but he is actually battling some scary inner demons...?" I just don't understand the problems that people have with this film. Every criticism i have heard so far has been wildly inaccurate. The lousy 6.2 star rating it got on this site just astounds me.. i'm really hoping that after some time, "On the Road" will find it's audience, and finally be appreciated..

"IMdB; where 14 year olds can act like jaded 40 year old critics...'

reply

Between the lines lies doubt

Something has to be done, but nothing too original, because hey, this is Hollywood.

reply

Whether Casady's family wanted him "humanized" I cannot say. Of course characters are exaggerated in books (and film), but Neal Cassady can be seen behaving with seemingly limitless frenetic energy in documentary footage, as well as being portrayed as such in other writer's works (Tom Wolfe).

The actor playing Dean/Neal in this film was depressing, and bore no resemblance to the character from the book, nor to the Neal Cassady known to people like Kerouac, Ken Kesey, Tom Wolfe, Jerry Garcia, and many others.

reply

Yass, yass, yass, I understand exactly what you mean Westchester.
I don't suppose you would be able to direct me to this documentary footage you spoke of? I would love to see the real Neal Casady acting the way you say.

This is a snakeskin jacket

reply

Here's a YouTube link of Cassady driving the bus, "Further," with Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters.... And there are other clips of Neal if you search YouTube, including one where he does a reading with Allen Ginsberg.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U6olKwCkw0c

reply

I know. These people make Kerouac sound like a dip shi* and have no right to judge how he wrote Neal. They were not there! buncha half wit scholars we got on here (Not Pinku I like her)

No disrespect to Neal's family but...they were not there either at this time!..on these journeys. Jack was. Period

You mean to tell me Neal's son knew the late teen early twenties Neal!? Hell, my son is 8 and doesn't know my inner most thoughts and motivations.. much less my inner subjective experience before he was born or when he was a little tot.

A persons chemical makeup isn't even the same from year to year.

Neal in his late 20s or early 30s or late 30s or early 40s wouldn't be the same person Kerouac rolled with. Kerouac was inspired by something. Neal obviously had mystical qualities or he wouldn't have incited such animalistic wonder in Jack. They set out to demystify Neal and im not sayin thats necessarily a bad thing. Im positive Kerouac took SOME creative liberty. But im also sure that he wanted the fantastical elements of his creative work in tact and would have appreciated it that way in any film adaptation


Westchester - Seen lots of the footage you speak of. Nice post! I like all of your posts.


I went off with my hands in my torn coat pockets;
My overcoat too was becoming ideal;
I traveled beneath the sky, Muse! and I was your vassal;
Oh dear me! what marvelous loves I dreamed of!

My only pair of breeches had a big hole in them.
– Stargazing Tom Thumb, I sowed rhymes along my way.
My tavern was at the Sign of the Great Bear.
– My stars in the sky rustled softly.

And I listened to them, sitting on the road-sides
On those pleasant September evenings while I felt drops
Of dew on my forehead like vigorous wine;

And while, rhyming among the fantastical shadows,
I plucked like the strings of a lyre the elastics
Of my tattered boots, one foot close to my heart!


- Arthur Rimbaud

reply