|
Post by miriel68 on Sept 25, 2017 14:17:31 GMT
Since not everyone was able to catch up with it, I thought it would be useful to have a separate thread where we don't need to avoid spoilers. The movie was surely thought-provoking, so there is a lot to discuss about.
I am really busy today, so will add more later, but just the first thing I was wondering about: I am not quite sure the subplots were really necessary/ leading somewhere. The whole dystopian/ political theme was a bit cryptic, IMO, especially for the people who didn't read the book and so was Charlie's transfomation. I didn't really have a chance to connect to the character BEFORE it happened to him, so it left me rather cold, although Stephen Campbell Moore played him brilliantly.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 25, 2017 14:49:17 GMT
I just watched it for the second time, and I like it even more. I have to admit that political storylines are usually beyond me, especially the politics of a country other than my own, but the Charles character was clearly having a breakdown. He was searching for something that he couldn't find, and eventually gave up hope. I think the whole movie was about how hope keeps you going.
It was interesting to notice things I had missed the first time! There were a lot of people on Twitter asking if the new baby was supposed to be Kate. And others asked how we knew it was a brother, saying that only people who had read the book would know that. I just wanted to scream reading that! Pay attention! They tell us it's a brother, in case you missed the other clues!
I've said it before and I'll say it again: as long as idiots have Internet access, we're going to have idiots proudly sharing their opinions with the rest of the world!
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Sept 25, 2017 16:38:59 GMT
McEwan is never explicit about if the baby is a girl or a boy. Actually the movie with the "ghost boy" and KM saying it it's much more explicit. One interpretation in the book is that indeed it could be Kate's birth.
The sex of the prime minister is also an enigma. He/She seems based on Tatcher and seems in love with Charles but McEwan didn't use a She or He.
Also Stephen and Julie have sex during the birthing. I wonder how people would have reacted if they would include that.
About the two sub-plots of the government and Charles, they are related because they are about childhood. The government want to control it meanwhile Charles, the writer of the handbook, is the savage id of uncontrolled childhood. He also is the opposite of Stephen, an adult man who not just lost his little girl but (he feels) failed in the role of protector or fixer. His sense of masculinity and adultness are teetering and his biggest desire, apart of finding the girl, is to regain that role of adult, father and protector. The book is slightly different because it let Stephen enjoy a childhood dream of visiting a train driver cabin before becoming a father (again?). It suggest he is better adult because he permits himself to be a little like a kid (but just a little! Being an adult child is very dangerous!). In the book he originally wanted to be an adult writer not a child novelist.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Sept 25, 2017 18:54:40 GMT
I watched it again this morning and loved it even more this time (and cried more too but I also laughed more as well).
One of my most favourite funny parts was so personal... the scene where he is walking with the woman from the Education Committee along the banks of the Thames and they are having a bit of an awkward conversation. Part of it was about Stephen going into bookstores and seeing his own works. She asks him if he ever "sneaks a peak at them" and he answers "Oh, yeah, of course." And then he said something that almost made me fall out of my chair - about how, if his books are hidden, he puts them out front on the shelf and hides the competitors' books. My hubby does the exact same thing for his books!!! LOL!!
Not only do I relate on a personal level with this scene but I also absolutely adore the way BC delivered the lines! Just the right amount of silliness and yet just a hint of raw truthfulness as well.
:-))
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Sept 25, 2017 19:03:15 GMT
Wasn't McEwan involved with the movie? It seems that he's fine with the movie being explicit about the new baby - Julie says "a brother" - so there shouldn't be any wondering if it could be Kate. Otherwise, a lot of those Twitter complainers would be right that you needed to have read the book to understand the movie.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Sept 25, 2017 19:07:21 GMT
I've heard of sex to start contractions, but this is a new one. For one, you're in pain!
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Sept 25, 2017 19:14:26 GMT
I've heard of sex to start contractions, but this is a new one. For one, you're in pain! But then this is an Ian McKewan novel. Everyone is in pain. Including the readers. Sorry, did I let my feelings about Ian McKewan's work slip through there?😚 I was out last night so have recorded TCIT. Even though I'm not a McKewan fan I intend to watch it but don't mind spoilers. It's good to see its getting a pretty positive response. Perhaps BC will get to lose out on his seventh BAFTA for it. 😄
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Sept 25, 2017 19:26:04 GMT
I've heard of sex to start contractions, but this is a new one. For one, you're in pain! But then this is an Ian McKewan novel. Everyone is in pain. Including the readers. Sorry, did I let my feelings about Ian McKewan's work slip through there?😚 I was out last night so have recorded TCIT. Even though I'm not a McKewan fan I intend to watch it but don't mind spoilers. It's good to see its getting a pretty positive response. Perhaps BC will get to lose out on his seventh BAFTA for it. 😄 Being in the U.S., I'll have to wait to see TCiT, but I did read the book. I had never heard of couples having sex during labor, so I looked it up. Yes indeed, there are people who do this - some right in the delivery room where they are seen by hospital staff! You learn something new every day! Probably best that they changed the ending, because that's all people would be talking about. In the book, the baby is born at home with Stephen acting as midwife while the're waiting for the doctor to arrive.
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Sept 25, 2017 19:37:33 GMT
But then this is an Ian McKewan novel. Everyone is in pain. Including the readers. Sorry, did I let my feelings about Ian McKewan's work slip through there?😚 I was out last night so have recorded TCIT. Even though I'm not a McKewan fan I intend to watch it but don't mind spoilers. It's good to see its getting a pretty positive response. Perhaps BC will get to lose out on his seventh BAFTA for it. 😄 Being in the U.S., I'll have to wait to see TCiT, but I did read the book. I had never heard of couples having sex during labor, so I looked it up. Yes indeed, there are people who do this - some right in the delivery room where they are seen by hospital staff! You learn something new every day! Probably best that they changed the ending, because that's all people would be talking about. In the book, the baby is born at home with Stephen acting as midwife while the're waiting for the doctor to arrive. Sorry to go off topic but I'm fascinated. What on earth is the purpose of having sex during labour? I'm presuming there is a purpose and not just that some couples are kinky that way. 😃
|
|
|
Post by coolclearwaters on Sept 25, 2017 19:47:52 GMT
Nope. Pure kinkiness.
|
|