Film Talk
Public Group active 4 years, 10 months agoWe talk film. Creative Commons-licensed avatar courtesy of Mr. Wabu .
Film Adaptation of Alive: The Story of the Andes Survivors
- This topic has 6 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by Cassidy Brighton.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 23, 2017 at 10:16 pm #975Arden ZavitzParticipant
One element from Read’s literary version of Alive that Frank Marshall chooses to emphasize in his film adaptation is religion and its role in the survival of (except for a couple characters) the members of the flight. In terms of dramatic effect and visual representation, there were two specific points that stood out to me that worked well in portraying religion’s hand in the fate of the victims.. Both scenes depicted in the book and the film revolved around the saying of the rosary. While the crash was occurring one of the boys (men?) is saying the rosary and as soon as he says “Amen,” the crash stops. Later on in the film, after the victims recover from the first avalanche, they begin to hear the rumblings of what they believe to be another avalanche. The agnostic character refuses to say the Hail Mary along with the rest of them, but the rumblings continue and he soon joins in. When he does, the rumblings stop. I believe that the use of religion and how it seems to influence the fate of the victims, and the events that occur given by Read, were tactfully used by Marshall to a.) convey the importance of religion to the victims and b.) create dramatic effect. While, I do not believe that it was key to incorporate the victims’ religious beliefs, I think that Marshall used Read’s words and scenes centered around religion to add to the overall dramatic effect of the events that occurred.
One drastic difference I noticed between the book and the film was I noticed was the tone. The actual event of crashing and having to survive in the Andes for an extended period of time is obviously tragic, with detrimental effects on all parties involved. In the book the reader is brought into the mindset of the victims because the scenes constantly portrayed the drudgery and hardships that were faced. I think that Marshall did a good job of breaking up the tragedy and the extreme degree of mental and physical toll, by incorporating humor and a significant amount of sarcasm. The humor was mostly incorporated by the boys sarcastic, snarky comments towards one another regarding their current state of affairs. One specific scene that Marshall added in the narrative that added to the lighter tone of the film was when the group of men come back from one of the expeditions to the tail of the plane by sledding on parts found at the scene. I believe that this scene was relevant and overall believable, given their specific location and their need to keep their minds from hardship. It conveyed an element of fun to the audience and illustrated the point that in the face of adversity one can choose to dwell on the negative or make the most of their circumstances. If the film constantly focused on the negative it might leave the audience feeling down and uninspired.
One last thing that I felt was necessary in capturing the true emotion of the film was the cutting out of the outside world’s role (the government, parents, friends, etc.) or narrative in the book itself. With the characters being hard enough to follow as is, due to the sheer number of them, the switching between plot points made it difficult to get back into the main narrative and remember what was occurring previously at the sight of the crash. Therefore, Marshall’s choice to eliminate these narratives was key in creating a cohesive image, narrative, and overall message and emotion of the event depicted.
Arden Zavitz
March 25, 2017 at 6:40 pm #978Darby DalyParticipantArden,
I found myself agreement with a majority of the points you made regarding Alive. I felt very similarly with your main idea behind the religious aspect of the film. I think that because Read was so adamant about including religion in the book that it was important for Marshall to include religion as well. Religion was such a key part of the boys’ lives, and if Marshall had eliminated it from the film then there would have been a lack of understanding their characters. I also felt as though including the religion made the boys appear more humane regardless of them eating the human flesh. Overall I believe that Marshall did a good job by including the right amount of religion in the film
As for your comments on the tone, I did not really observe a change in tone between the book and the film upon my own watching. However, after reading your post I can definitely see what you mean and agree with you. I think that the book was far more intense and had a more serious tone than the movie did. Making the actors sarcastic was an interesting touch, as it kept the overall mood a little lighter than the books mood. I do not know how I felt about the amount of “humor” the movie had. While it made it a little more entertaining to watch, I believe that it eliminated a lot of the seriousness and importance that the story carried.
March 26, 2017 at 4:04 pm #979Natalie LaCourtParticipantI definitely agree with both Arden and Darby about the significance of religion in the movie. To me, it seemed like religion was Marshall’s main focus with the most powerful and emotional scenes being the rosary scenes. Their prayers seemed to give them the ability to transcend the gloom and despair of the plane and come together with a faith that provided community and support. I could not imagine the movie without the central focus of religion.
I also am in agreement with both of you on the difference in tone of the movie and I understand Arden’s idea of why the director could have decided to take a different tone to create the idea that even in the most dire circumstances, it is better to keep a positive attitude. However, after reading the book, the depictions of this disaster seemed entirely unrealistic, whether it was the comparatively spacious and cozy nature of their sleeping area on the plane or the seemingly short journey that Parrado and Canessa took to get back into the paradise-like valley. What do you think the people who experienced this plane crash would think of Marshall’s tone?
Also, personally I am a little disappointed that the parents were not involved in the storyline. While reading the book, the most emotionally charged parts for me were when Paez Vilaro found out they had found the plane and was hiding the dog in his coat, when he was reading the names of the survivors and read his sons name, and when he was finally reunited with him so personally I wish that these parts had been included.
March 26, 2017 at 4:19 pm #980Kevin BurkeParticipantArden, I think you do a really good job drawing attention to the role religion plays in the film adaptation, as well as the book. We discussed in class, prior to watching the film, how much of the religious element we would choose to put in the film if we were to direct it. My personal opinion, based on how the book presents the situation, is that religion was immensely important to the survivors in their lives before, during, and after their time on the mountain. As presented in the book, religion strikes me as a crucial element of the survivors’ real life experience that has to be emphasized in any adaptation. I think Marshall did an overall good job at emphasizing the role religion plays for the survivors, without making and evangelical statement about religion itself.
Natalie, I think you make a really interesting point about tone with the way the film ends. As a viewer, the ending seems very quick and easy. Like you pointed out, after so much horror, tragedy, and impatient boredom, Parrado and Canessa seem to just hike down the mountain and stumble upon this beautiful valley with water in a way that made me think, “Well, why have they been eating humans all this time if they could have just hiked a little bit to civilization.” As a reader, the journey came off as much more extensive and dangerous than it did in the film, and I imagine that it was more perilous in real life. Of course, all films need to end at some point, and there is so much to cover that some things need be left out, but I was also vexed at times about the scenes I’d just read that were omitted.March 26, 2017 at 9:04 pm #981Rachel CampbellParticipantI agree that the film’s tone was significantly more lighthearted than the book’s tone. The book had a much more melancholic and darker feel to it and this made it seem almost unbearable at points, but it was also what made the story seem so real and powerful. The one scene that stands out to me in particular is when one of the guys has a metal pole sticking out of his stomach and one of the medical students laughs it off and reassures him that he is fine (obviously, the medical student did this to distract him from his grim situation). However, reading this scene in the book felt really awkward for me. I had no idea how they would film this without it coming off as too weird, but I was surprised to find that it came off really well and natural.
As I was reading, there were definitely scenes that were very powerful and even made me tear up. The letter that one of the boys writes to his girlfriend was really powerful and emotional to read. In the film, however, I did not feel as deeply about the characters. However, I do think this mainly has to do with film’s general limitations compared to books. Books are obviously lengthier and thus provide an opportunity for the reader to become more emotionally connected. Overall, I really enjoyed both the book and the movie, but I did think the book invoked a much more emotional response from its audience. However, the one problem that came to me when I was reading was the fact that I thought the book was a bit too depressing at times, and this can be hard for an audience to digest if there is no comic relief. In this way, the director made a smart choice in lightening a situation that was beyond the realm of tragic in order to cater to the film’s viewers.
March 27, 2017 at 2:19 pm #984Max RiegerParticipantI agree with everyone who believes Marshall did a good job by focusing on the boys’ unyielding religion and their eventual submission to cannibalism. Excluding the importance of either of these factors would be ignoring the boys’ desperate struggle for survival day after day and how they found the will to survive for so long in such hopeless circumstances.
However, I couldn’t help but feel disappointed by the portrayal of some of the characters. I understand it is very difficult to include more than four or five main roles, but the Strauch cousins (and to a lesser extent Numa Turcatti) played a significant role in the mountains that was largely ignored in the film. In fact, Fito Strauch was hailed in the book as perhaps the wisest and smartest of all the characters, and perhaps held more control over the group than even Parrado and Canessa. It is apparent that he and Eduardo are the ones who are able to maintain order and keep everybody civilized in the face of death. Unfortunately in the film they are reduced to only a few minutes of screen time and we hardly remember they were even included at all by the end. I think we can all agree that in reality they were perhaps as important as anybody else in the boys’ survival, and the only thing that separated them from the most prominent heroes (Parrado and Canessa) was physical health/strength. Personally I would’ve preferred more scenes depicting the stoic seriousness and intelligence of the cousins rather than some of the comic relief provided by Carlitos and others.
March 27, 2017 at 8:30 pm #989Cassidy BrightonParticipantArden, I think you made a lot of good points about this film. While I was reading the book, I felt a strong emphasis on the aspect of religion. I was happy that Marshall made a point to include key scenes that emphasized religion as well. This is a true story, even though it has been creatively adapted now on film. The religion was obviously important to the men and their spirits, so I think including the scenes that showed the rosary or the praying was necessary. Also, when making a film about a real life event, it is important to depict it with some accuracy, so this does that to a certain degree.
As for the tone of the movie differing from that of the book, I agree with you on that point as well. I think this could have been done for a number of reasons. This could be a stylistic choice from Marshall. This also could just be a mistake on the part of the writer of the book. Another writer for instance may have written it with a different tone. I think it is also important for the movie to include some funnier or lighter scenes. Watching over two hours straight of something so heavy could get gruesome. When reading a book, at least you can take breaks between the pages of misery.
As for your last point about leaving out certain scenes of the outside world, this is where I disagree with you. In my list of scenes that I would include in a movie adaptation of this book, I included some scenes of the players parents and flashes to the search party in the beginning that gave up. I think showing people actually missing and mourning these missing players is and important part in humanizing them and making them characters that the audience cares about. I understand that there were already almost too many characters to keep track of without including these scenes, though. Adding them in might just add to the confusion, but I did think they were important.
-Cassidy Brighton
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.