Don't matter to me who cut what...i'm not some Richard Price stan...and I'm not a Spike hater...thats irrelevant...its the fact that it was cut...period. Now can you make a great movie if you cut a bunch of shyt out of the book its based on...sure...just look at Goodfellas. And I don't need to tell you...that Clockers is no Goodfellas.Its relelvant that Price co-wrote the screenplay because you are saying that you dont like that Lee cut out all the important parts of the book, but the actual author of the book helped write the movie version so essentially Richard Price also cut out those bits you feel were so important. Its extrememly relevant to what we are talking about because it shows that this wasn't simply a distortion of the book, this was a new peice of work that was based upon the story from the book. Now its fine if you dont like the film, but if you main gripe is that it wasn't true to the book, then you are really just being unreasonable.
And yes the film was set in Brooklyn, but the film isn't about Brookyln, it was about a character yearning to get away from a hopeless environment but also being a major contributor to that hoplessness, just like in the novel. The duality of the character being both the victim and the perpetrator, I think the film captured very well.
Also, in regard to The Godfather, Vito's rise to power was not present in the original Godfather film but it was essential in the book because not only did it portray the closeness of Vito and Tessio which was very important later on, but it also showed that just like Michael, Vito didn't initially aspire for that life. And if your leaning on the fact that the sequal contained Vito's rise, the sequals also included a b*stard child of Sonny's inhereting the family, even though that was impossible based on the fact that the mother of that child did not get pregnant in the novel.
Film's are different from novels, all the time. So disliking a film for not being the same as the novel is a really lame arguement to judge a film by, especially if the author co-wrote the screenplay for the movie. However, if you didn't like the film because of the something specific to the film, thats fine and you are entitled to that opinion.
If you'd like I got post more less than favorable reviews...there's plenty of em.(Clockers)preserves the brutality of the book but little of its dark humor. An exception: cops examining a bullet-ridden body with the grisly detachment of coroners who tuck in their ties before bending over a corpse. And why scrap the subplot about Rocco being followed by an actor who wants to play him onscreen? It's Rocco's glam pipe dream. Coherence is also a victim in the film version. Lee's needlessly elliptical style will leave nonreaders of the novel wondering who's who and what's where. The blunt editing seems to have reduced John Turturro's role to an occasional walk-on as Rocco's partner, Larry Mazilli, a pivotal character in the book. As for the ending, the filmmakers may not have seen Keitel in Bad Lieutenant, but that's no excuse for showing the actor drive yet another street kid off to a travel terminus and a chance at redemption
Don't matter to me who cut what...i'm not some Richard Price stan...and I'm not a Spike hater...thats irrelevant...its the fact that it was cut...period. Now can you make a great movie if you cut a bunch of shyt out of the book its based on...sure...just look at Goodfellas. And I don't need to tell you...that Clockers is no Goodfellas.
I don't think the film captured Strikes hopelessness at all...disagreed
The Godfather movies did shows Vitos rise to power...until they make a Clockers II...stop that angle slime.
I don't know why you keep assuming that I dislike the movie cuz it was different...I listed plenty of reasons why I didnt like the film and not one of em were "it was different from the book"
I already explained why some of the differences ruin some of the story...but thats not saying i hate it cuz of differences. I've liked plenty of movies that have had differences from the books. Some have been executed great...others...not so much. Like I said just agree to disagree...you wont convince me.
If you'd like I got post more less than favorable reviews...there's plenty of em.
Scorcese and Clockers? I dunno. What does Scorcese know about nikkas and New Jersey? He certainly coulda done better than Spike Lee did.
Spike pretty much cut a quarter of the story out...then changed it to Brooklyn. He had questionable casting too. Delroy Lindo was fukking perfect. Harvey Kietel was cool...but everybody else was pretty much terrible or didnt fit their role at all.
I really like how Nick Gomez made New Jersey Drive...Really captured the setting. I would have loved if Clockers had that feel.
They took too much important shyt out. Moving the story to Brooklyn ruined all those excursions he made to New York in the book. I don't think the film captured the book at all. You contradict yourself by saying that...and in the next sentence saying that the book was less about the city but the story...Spike cut the soul out the story...and made it about the city...the city of Brooklyn to be exact...
I'm just speaking for myself. But it felt rushed. They took a 600+ epic book and made it into a watered down movie the length of 2 episodes of Dexter. They took out the whole shyt with his girl in New York...they took out the whole shyt with Champ...they took out the whole shyt with Budda Hat. They took out the whole shyt wit Papi. They make the Fury look like bytches and barely had them in the movie...They made Rocco into a minor character...took his whole story out the film...Took out that actor that was following him around...Took out alot of Rodneys story...Took out alot of Andres story. Made Errol Barnes seem more like Bubbles than Omar. Took out Victor and Strikes whole brotherly relationship...took out a lot of Victors stuff now that I think about it...Without all that that I mentioned...you don't get very much of Strikes background at all. Other than that...played out boring cinematography...awful casting² ...wack soundtrack³. The thing I hate about it most is what coulda been. I coulda been so much better.
².) Aside from Harvey Kietel and Delroy Lindo, as I mentioned before.
³.) I don't have to mention that Return Of the Crooklyn Dodgers is classic.
I'm just speaking for myself. But it felt rushed. They took a 600+ epic book and made it into a watered down movie the length of 2 episodes of Dexter. They took out the whole shyt with his girl in New York...they took out the whole shyt with Champ...they took out the whole shyt with Budda Hat. They took out the whole shyt wit Papi. They make the Fury look like bytches and barely had them in the movie...They made Rocco into a minor character...took his whole story out the film...Took out that actor that was following him around...Took out alot of Rodneys story...Took out alot of Andres story. Made Errol Barnes seem more like Bubbles than Omar. Took out Victor and Strikes whole brotherly relationship...took out a lot of Victors stuff now that I think about it...Without all that that I mentioned...you don't get very much of Strikes background at all. Other than that...played out boring cinematography...awful casting² ...wack soundtrack³. The thing I hate about it most is what coulda been. I coulda been so much better.
².) Aside from Harvey Kietel and Delroy Lindo, as I mentioned before.
³.) I don't have to mention that Return Of the Crooklyn Dodgers is classic.
She's got to have it.
I'm just speaking for myself. But it felt rushed. They took a 600+ epic book and made it into a watered down movie the length of 2 episodes of Dexter. They took out the whole shyt with his girl in New York...they took out the whole shyt with Champ...they took out the whole shyt with Budda Hat. They took out the whole shyt wit Papi. They make the Fury look like bytches and barely had them in the movie...They made Rocco into a minor character...took his whole story out the film...Took out that actor that was following him around...Took out alot of Rodneys story...Took out alot of Andres story. Made Errol Barnes seem more like Bubbles than Omar. Took out Victor and Strikes whole brotherly relationship...took out a lot of Victors stuff now that I think about it...Without all that that I mentioned...you don't get very much of Strikes background at all. Other than that...played out boring cinematography...awful casting² ...wack soundtrack³. The thing I hate about it most is what coulda been. I coulda been so much better.
².) Aside from Harvey Kietel and Delroy Lindo, as I mentioned before.
³.) I don't have to mention that Return Of the Crooklyn Dodgers is classic.
For me, in no particular order
Jungle Fever
School Daze
Do The Right thing
Get On The Bus
Malcolm
Mo Better
honestly, I think these two are among his worst. Girl 6 slightly more tolerable, but She Hate Me is just awful and confusing. It sucks to because I dont think the acting was bad in that movie at all, but the script and direction were just terrible.Also, I think Girl 6 and She Hate Me are criminally underrated.
I think Girl 6 and She Hate Me are criminally underrated.
honestly, I think these two are among his worst.