Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Freaks and Spurs

In both the short story "Spurs" and the movie adaptation "Freaks" there are fantastical characters (Circus People) that are shown, represented and treated by the author/ director differently. These are both the "same"stories to an extent. What I mean by that is that they have the semi-same characters the same protagonist and same basic conflict for the protagonist. They are both handled in way different ways. Which makes sense because they're to different mediums at two way different lengths and proportions. But in this post I'm going to be talking about how the two different artists working in two different mediums handled the characters.

First I'll start out with the first thing we viewed which was the original short story, "Spurs". In this short story there aren't as many characters that we really pay attention to compared to the movie. We mostly follow and hear Jacque's thoughts and actions, but we switch around to the minds of other characters as well throughout. In the short story we are more focused on the different character's personalities, as opposed to the movie, but I will get into that soon. A little bit of the characters imagery is used in the short story, but obviously there is more in the film because film is intended to be about the image and although in writing there is descriptions which make you imagine images, but in film it was it's original intended use. In the film we also switch off between characters even more so which brings me back to how the film physically shows the characters in a different way than in the story. In the story if you took out the text saying everyone was from the circus and the few descriptions of them you might, maybe believe that they were regular people (Didn't mean that to come out offensive if it did.). By that I mean a big part of the movie was treating the characters, well like, freaks (And not in a good way.). The film makes the audience feel like they are touring around the circus seeing everyone do there trick which excites them. That holds the movie and the plot together (kind of) the first time you see it or at least I know I felt wonder and awesomeness when the guy with no arms and no legs pulls out a box of matches and a cigarette (or what ever it was...) and lit it with only using his mouth. The short story treats the characters in a more dignified way than the movie showing everything off to excite the audience and completely the distract us from gaps or dragging in the plot which is almost understandable considering the big change from short story to feature film and the time period.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Smoke and Auggie Wren's Christmas Story

   In both of these stories (The original and the adaptation.) there is a questioning of truth, of reality and fiction. The part of both of these stories when that is an inherent question is when Auggie tells the christmas story of him following the adress of a kid that stole from his store, to go return the wallet because he felt bad for him. Instead of the kid that he was expecting to answer it was his blind grandma that mistakes Auggie for her grandson. He comes in and plays a long with it because he feels bad for her that she's alone and her own grandson didn't even come on what probably would be her last christmas. He buys a christmas dinner with some wine and eventually they're both drunk and Auggie has to use the bathroom and sees a stack of cameras. He decides he wants to take a picture and takes the camera and the grandma is sleeping. Then he leaves with the camera and after that he starts to take a picture every day with it in the same spot on the corner of his store.

  In the film and short story they both have the moment with Auggie's story. In the story whether Auggie is telling the truth is only shown through the narrator's opinion. In the movie it's left to more of an un biased opinion although the writer (The narrator in the short story.) still does not believe Auggie it is some what left to us to decide based on what we've seen. In both of the mediums there is the idea of whether Auggie is telling the truth or not. I personally believe in the movie that the story isn't real because earlier in the movie a kid steals some books, exactly like in the story, but Auggie already has the camera before then. I think that Auggie just made the story after that to get a free lunch. In the short story I'm not quite sure. But I don't think that is the part that matters. At least in the movie it seemed like the moment of the story could just be about Auggie this hardened guy, opening up telling this story. Also something to support that in the movie also around that time Auggie gives the girl the money for his alleged daughter and is nice about it. He seems to be more generous and open to things. In the short story it seems to be about a christmas story that isn't cheesy or ends happy, but Auggie seems to get the narrator with the story and opens him up and he ends up writing the story. The question of whether it is truth or lie in my opinion is just kind of a mask. These are both good stories for their mediums and are similar in some ways and way different in others.