I loved The Great Gatsby. It gave me a lot of respect for F. Scott Fitzgerald. But then I saw the recent movie version of this book of his, and I fucking abhorred it. I had to know what was responsible for the enormous discrepancy in my appreciation for Fitzgerald tales - was the story of Benjamin Button really terrible to begin with, or did Brad Pitt and company just destroy it on the big screen? I'm happy to say that the case was the latter one. This short story, or novella, or whatever you want to call a 52-page book, was phenomenal. As you probably know, it's a tale about a man who ages backwards. He exits the womb an old man and dies seventy years later looking just like a newborn. Fortunately, Fitzgerald's story has nothing else - literally, not even a plot point - in common with the three-hour movie it inspired. Book Benjamin lives from 1860-1930 in Baltimore with his parents. Movie Benjamin lives from 1918-2000 or so in Louisiana with a foster family. The book is a clever satire on aging and the way it affects social norms. The movie was an awkward attempt at a biopic-romance fusion in which every character is selfish and unlikeable. Seriously, the contrast couldn't be greater. I don't have much else to say here, but do yourself a favor and read this short story. Not only is the book better than the movie in this case, but it actually takes less time to finish as well. If you really want the best of both worlds, just read Benjamin Button and then watch Forrest Gump.
No comments:
Post a Comment