I will say Craig made Lee more likable and his bow in the movie was awkward but not as disturbing as described in the book. And maybe I was too harsh when I saw he didn't love Allerton. He had a flawed kind of love where he tries to buy and control it, but he obviously had strong feelings for Allerton. Even though I already released this video, this is a movie I am still formulating my thoughts on! I definitely want to see it a second time.
I just saw this film a few hours ago, no prior knowledge of William Burroughs and I will say it had me captivated the entire time. The loneliness and longing portrayed was incredible acting work. I deeply understand Lee’s character as an addict loner gay man always seeking for something, for your fix. The scene where they take ayahuasca and meld together, I was mouth agape at its beauty, I had never seen something replicate something I had had dreams of so clearly and so beautifully as someone who has a hard time verbally communicating. This movie made me feel so many complicated things about it and myself. I dream of seeing the 3hr directors cut
@ honestly I loved it, Lee was stuck in a never ending cycle of self abuse be it drugs, alcohol, or unrequited love. He can’t stop looking in that door that holds Eugene, someone he longs for and longs to be more like “I’m not queer, I’m disembodied”. Even in his final moments he dreams of Eugene there in bed with him showing him a very simple affection, but one of the only kinds he had their entire situationship. Very tragic but genuine.
Ooh, I like the way the microphone cover, sweater, and poster font color all match. Nice touch! I agree that the movie was better, for most of the reasons you mention. It's the most faithful adaptation of a Burroughs that we are ever likely to see, but the book always felt incomplete. Guadagnino manages to make it seem complete. I was surprised, though, that you didn't mention Lesley Manville. If anyone from this movie is likely to get an Oscar nomination, it has to be her.
Yeah so true about the book feeling incomplete! And she was amazing! I have never seen anything with her before and when I saw what she normally looks like I was shocked lol. Guadagnino movies always have such perfect casting!
When it comes to the adaptation of his work they tend to work in the weird happenings in his real life. David cronenberg was starting a straight-up adaptation of naked lunch and then it just became about the writer. Weird but fun to watch.
I love the symbolism of the centipede bc if that rational is transferred to; “IJ2 Temple of doom” it highlights the lust Willie and Indy have in the second act. It’s an interesting literary comparison.
I find the people in the Beat Movement so interesting. I mean, I think Ginsberg is the only one I would of liked in person. I haven't read Queer though. Might have to look at it.
This is the first I have ever read anything by any of them! It reminded me of Hunter S. Thompson's writing to some degree. But yeah, from what I have read online, a lot of people have a lot of negative to say about them as people 😬
The 'routines' are the only part of the book to resemble Burroughs' later writings. Through writing these for Allerton, he discovered his own capacity for grotesque (and often funny) fantasy. From 'The Naked Lunch' onwards, his books are ENTIRELY made up of material like this, with no autobiographical content. These events turned him into the writer he became, creator of non-narrative hallucinatory prose of enormous originality (and which often mention centipedes!).
I saw this movie in the theater, but I would have to watch it again, but just chapter three in the film. But these dream sequences were VERY Trippy, and somewhat confusing. I had some moments where I was falling asleep during the film(never order a cheeseburger 🍔 and popcorn🍿a drink at the movie theater) should have ordered a cup of coffee ☕️ before watching this.
I'm little mix on the film, thought the performance by Danial Craig was the best of his movies, the movie art direction didn't work for me, left feeling it had the potential for the best movie of the year for me, but was a missing an ingredient, but I'm glad you like the movie more , I'm not a huge Willam Burroughs fan, but do think Burroughs is a good writer
A very possible part of the continuity and structural problems of this film no doubt has to do with its originally being a 3 hour 18 minute film. That longer variant was the original film seen at the Venice Film Festival. It was trimmed by around 20 minutes for subsequent festival showings. The American distributors demanded that the film be cut to a 2 hour or so length. So that is what we got. Being that this adaptation seems a pastiche of fiction and more biographical elements, I'm guessing there are more occultic elements which were left on the cutting room floor. Guadagnino is working to get the full length original released later to streaming and / or disc. I had absolutely no problem with the truncated version we have seen. I've viewed it twice and really loved it BUT I always like to see a director's original conception.
@@WhytheBookWins Boy, u are fast on the gun! Sorry I added a bit more there as u were commenting. Make sure you watch NAKED LUNCH as it is in many ways a companion piece. It also mixes fiction and biographical elements. And thanks for your coverage here!
@gregoryblaska1586 😆 And I read that burroughs was very into the occult so that makes sense! And I definitely want to read/ watch naked lunch at some point!
@@WhytheBookWins Yes, his early life experiences with spontaneous clairvoyance and telepathy formed an obsessive search into the world of the esoteric & arcane. The Golden Dawn Teachings, Aleister Crowley, Castenada and psychic research were his particular venues. That mixed with what appears to be unaddressed substance addictions formed his singular path.
@ Can you do the book “Thunderball” vs the 1965 film of the same name along with the movie “Never Say Never Again (1983)” which is based on the same book.
I will say Craig made Lee more likable and his bow in the movie was awkward but not as disturbing as described in the book. And maybe I was too harsh when I saw he didn't love Allerton. He had a flawed kind of love where he tries to buy and control it, but he obviously had strong feelings for Allerton. Even though I already released this video, this is a movie I am still formulating my thoughts on! I definitely want to see it a second time.
lol I like how; your shirt is the exact same color as your microphone 😊. Definitely downplays the green hints of color in your eyes
Thank you so much for this video because I was so lost on the centipede and the gun and glass sequence.
I'm glad it was helpful 😊
0:41 holy fuu Kerouac was flaming hot
Agreed 😆
I just saw this film a few hours ago, no prior knowledge of William Burroughs and I will say it had me captivated the entire time. The loneliness and longing portrayed was incredible acting work. I deeply understand Lee’s character as an addict loner gay man always seeking for something, for your fix. The scene where they take ayahuasca and meld together, I was mouth agape at its beauty, I had never seen something replicate something I had had dreams of so clearly and so beautifully as someone who has a hard time verbally communicating. This movie made me feel so many complicated things about it and myself. I dream of seeing the 3hr directors cut
Thank you for sharing! I'm glad you loved the movie!
What did you think about the very end?
@ honestly I loved it, Lee was stuck in a never ending cycle of self abuse be it drugs, alcohol, or unrequited love. He can’t stop looking in that door that holds Eugene, someone he longs for and longs to be more like “I’m not queer, I’m disembodied”. Even in his final moments he dreams of Eugene there in bed with him showing him a very simple affection, but one of the only kinds he had their entire situationship. Very tragic but genuine.
Great channel. Great premise.
Thank you!
Ooh, I like the way the microphone cover, sweater, and poster font color all match. Nice touch! I agree that the movie was better, for most of the reasons you mention. It's the most faithful adaptation of a Burroughs that we are ever likely to see, but the book always felt incomplete. Guadagnino manages to make it seem complete. I was surprised, though, that you didn't mention Lesley Manville. If anyone from this movie is likely to get an Oscar nomination, it has to be her.
Yeah so true about the book feeling incomplete!
And she was amazing! I have never seen anything with her before and when I saw what she normally looks like I was shocked lol. Guadagnino movies always have such perfect casting!
When it comes to the adaptation of his work they tend to work in the weird happenings in his real life. David cronenberg was starting a straight-up adaptation of naked lunch and then it just became about the writer. Weird but fun to watch.
Yeah i guess the death of Vollmer is so infamous it's hard not to show it
I love the symbolism of the centipede bc if that rational is transferred to; “IJ2 Temple of doom” it highlights the lust Willie and Indy have in the second act. It’s an interesting literary comparison.
I did not read the novel or had never read anything about from the author. This movie really left me affected. I loved it.
Thank you for sharing! I'm glad you liked the movie and glad I was wrong about those who went in blank possibly not liking it.
I find the people in the Beat Movement so interesting. I mean, I think Ginsberg is the only one I would of liked in person. I haven't read Queer though. Might have to look at it.
This is the first I have ever read anything by any of them! It reminded me of Hunter S. Thompson's writing to some degree. But yeah, from what I have read online, a lot of people have a lot of negative to say about them as people 😬
Ginsberg was an admitted pedo tho...
The 'routines' are the only part of the book to resemble Burroughs' later writings. Through writing these for Allerton, he discovered his own capacity for grotesque (and often funny) fantasy. From 'The Naked Lunch' onwards, his books are ENTIRELY made up of material like this, with no autobiographical content. These events turned him into the writer he became, creator of non-narrative hallucinatory prose of enormous originality (and which often mention centipedes!).
Thanks for sharing! I definitely want to read more by him.
You never disappoint. I love the movie, the book is harsh to read for how unlikeable is Lee
I saw this movie in the theater, but I would have to watch it again, but just chapter three in the film. But these dream sequences were VERY Trippy, and somewhat confusing. I had some moments where I was falling asleep during the film(never order a cheeseburger 🍔 and popcorn🍿a drink at the movie theater) should have ordered a cup of coffee ☕️ before watching this.
Yeah some parts of the dreams also come from the intro Burroughs had added in '85. But agreed, definitely one I need to watch again!
I'm little mix on the film, thought the performance by Danial Craig was the best of his movies, the movie art direction didn't work for me, left feeling it had the potential for the best movie of the year for me, but was a missing an ingredient, but I'm glad you like the movie more , I'm not a huge Willam Burroughs fan, but do think Burroughs is a good writer
Yeah i went in with such high hopes and did end up feeling like something was missing and it took me a while to decide how I felt about the end.
Having seen Daniel Craig play a similar character in Love is the Devil I would like to see this film.
He is fantastic in it!
A very possible part of the continuity and structural problems of this film no doubt has to do with its originally being a 3 hour 18 minute film.
That longer variant was the original film seen at the Venice Film Festival. It was trimmed by around 20 minutes for subsequent festival showings.
The American distributors demanded that the film be cut to a 2 hour or so length. So that is what we got.
Being that this adaptation seems a pastiche of fiction and more biographical elements, I'm guessing there are more occultic elements which were left on the cutting room floor.
Guadagnino is working to get the full length original released later to streaming and / or disc.
I had absolutely no problem with the truncated version we have seen. I've viewed it twice and really loved it BUT I always like to see a director's original conception.
Yeah i will definitely watch the 3 hour version if it gets released!
@@WhytheBookWins Boy, u are fast on the gun! Sorry I added a bit more there as u were commenting.
Make sure you watch NAKED LUNCH as it is in many ways a companion piece. It also mixes fiction and biographical elements.
And thanks for your coverage here!
@gregoryblaska1586 😆
And I read that burroughs was very into the occult so that makes sense! And I definitely want to read/ watch naked lunch at some point!
@@WhytheBookWins Yes, his early life experiences with spontaneous clairvoyance and telepathy formed an obsessive search into the world of the esoteric & arcane. The Golden Dawn Teachings, Aleister Crowley, Castenada and psychic research were his particular venues. That mixed with what appears to be unaddressed substance addictions formed his singular path.
Can I make a suggestion for your next book versus movie episode?
Yeah
@ Can you do the book “Thunderball” vs the 1965 film of the same name along with the movie “Never Say Never Again (1983)” which is based on the same book.
Hey lovely review, I liked ur comments on queerness ❤️❤️ I may watch the film soon :-)
Thanks! The movie is definitely worth watching 😊
#teamfishjelly
😁 their reviews are always so insightful!