Posted by Di§turbed at spider-tq052.proxy.aol.com on December 04, 2000 at 11:46:23:
In Reply to: yup. posted by Pitstain on December 04, 2000 at 11:34:38:
I know what Lynch was trying to do in the original film with the inner monologue thing, as the book lets you inside the characters' heads so much, but I think the whispered voiceover was pretty ludicrous...way too soap-opera.
I think Lynch's film captures the feeling and the spirit of the book, whereas this adaptation is catching more the details of the story. Lynch's film is the poetry to the miniseries' novel. Still, I'm impressed with this one so far. I'll be watching the rest of it.
If you liked either or both films, you ought to read the book. It's damn good.
: : It wasn't that bad, but I'm a Lynch fan so I'll withhold judgement for
: now.
:
: yeah, so far i'm much more fond of the Lynch one... the effects and
: scenes are nicer in this one, but i prefer the costumes and dialog in
: the original. (especially lynch's use of the "inner monologue"...much
: more effective than having Paul constantly chanting "fear is the
: mindkiller")
: but then i'm a fan of the movie, not the book... I never read it so i don't
: know if Lynch took liberties he shouldn't have... I know the
: differences in pronunciation are starting to drive me crazy though...