I just started reading this book. I really enjoyed Roth's THE HUMAN STAIN and am looking forward to seeing that movie. I'm about 1/3 into this one. Anyone have comments about the book or casting that has been done for the film?
Thanks
Harsh stone white, eyes behold, bruise baths soak crying bones. Every day's appeal to stop
It has been reported on some movie sites, Inside Film (IF), and some boards that Jennifer Connelly and Paul Bettany have signed on. Also Evan Rachel Wood. There was also talk of Daniel Day Lewis. Not sure if Day Lewis is still - or really ever was - still attached. Bettany as Swede or Jerry? Day Lewis as Swede or Jerry? Connelly as Dawn and I assume Wood as Merry.
Looks like script by John Romano (Intolerable Cruelty, Hill Street Blues, LA Law) and directed by Philip Noyce. To shoot in Montreal and NY I believe and starts from sometime in April till end of June, 2004. Obviously all subject to change.
It's an amazing and complex book...I was born in Newark NJ...grew up in NJ...Roth is a favorite of mine and writes about the NJ I know...and my parents and grand parents knew intimatly..this is a facinatinmg dark drama that delves deeply into the issues at the heart of the counter cultuer of the sixities and it's impact on the "American Dream" with which Roth is particularly facinated.
I loved it. I wish I was directing the movie is all I can say.
peace
I've read the book, it's one of my favorites of Roth's.
I have yet to hear anything firm in the casting area, I too have heard the Connelly/Bettany rumors but haven't heard of any firm signings. Interestingly, the book spans the entire life of the main character, so they will need an actor that can convincingly play late student years - mid-50s.
One of the most beautiful parts of the book's narrative is Roth's description of the art of glove-making. I wonder how this will translate in the film? It would be a shame to lose the imagery...
I've read the book too and I loved it. Philip Roth is one of my favorite authors. I hope the film will not be an insult to such a great work. So many nice details crammed into the book, hopefully Philip Noyce will keep many of them intact. And I hope they won't change the ending: was that a great one, or what!
Frank.
[deleted]
I agree, Philip Roth is one of the most talented artists in America a kind of Woody Allen of the literary world. And yes the ending of the book is incredible and hopefully translates well to the screen.
shareI read the book and i just don't buy that the post-sixties culture is lost as a result of the civil upheaval. I agree it was traumatic, but though he is haunted by the ghost of the sixties and especially by Merry, he manages to re-marry and produce three more children and fade into the background. I do think that the novel itself is an attack of the 60's counterculture but i don't think it is a purely negative critique.
shareLoved the book, Roth is an excellent writer, just brilliant. I think this movie-project is interesting, however, I have a hard time seeing Paul Bettany as the Swede (if that's who he's gonna be portraying).
shareI read the book this summer. Wasn't too keen; Roth's overall vision isn't one that chimes with my views, but I can appreciate it was good writing, and overlooking the themes it was incredibly involving and very well-drawn. Can't help but think Ewan McGregor is a horrible choice; not that I don't love him, but he's about as Jewish as Abu Hamza, and the film is SO rooted in Yiddishkeit (as are all of Roth's books) that it seems odd not to go for a Jewish actor (or someone who's actually capable of slipping their native, non-American accent, which McGregor has yet to do).
I'll watch it, because the source material has a guarantee of being aimed at adults, and that's incredibly rare these days, but it'll have to pull something pretty big out of the bag to work, in my view.
I loved how Roth doesn't mince his words about the rottenness of communism and socialism and how it seduced an entire generation into following its sick and dangerous ideology.
shareI disagree! You can have socialism without Communism, Canada does it, and Scandinavian countries do it, as Bernie Sanders has said many times.
I'm about half way through the book, and Swede comes across as kind of clueless and out of touch to me. There were serious problems going on in this country, and all he can focus on is making the perfect glove. There was an Amazon customer review that said basically the same thing.
I think, however, that Roth's one-maybe-two-dimensional portrayal of Merry and the other revolutionary forces of the '60s was precisely the point. This novel was not so much about the turbulent '60s as it was about the disintegration of the '50s. The story is narrated by Nathan Zuckerman and told through the (imagined) eyes of Swede Levov, both of whom graduated high school before 1950. Roth is not only concerned with the collapse of the Swede's American dream, but also with his assimilation into American society, his pursuit and eventual attainment of the American dream -- all typical characterstics of the '50s. The Swede had no concept of the attributes which we typically ascribe to the '60s. He was too busy worrying about how to make the perfect lady's dress glove. The reason Roth did so much research and wrote in such painstaking detail about the glove industry was to tell the reader precisely what Lou and Swede Levov's lives revolved around. Since the Swede is the only character whom we see others through, of course he isn't going to question himself for being concerned with such things as D rings and piece rates. It's up to the readers to draw the inference that maybe, just maybe, the Swede is out of touch and too concerned with materialism and achieving the perfect life. This is not necessarily a terrible thing by itself