Happy Birthday, Jacob Grimm

[filkertom]

On this date in 1785. He became famous for being transformed by cosmic rays into the Ever-Lovin' Blue-Eyed...






... Sorry. Wrong guy. This Grimm, and his brother Wilhelm, collected Grimm's Fairy Tales.

Different approach from normal: What fairy tales bug you the most? For me, trying to describe the plot of Rumplestiltskin is like trying to describe the plot of The Rocky Horror Show. It makes absolutely no frickin' sense at all.

Comments

[dr-zrfq.livejournal.com]

Okay. Number One: Dahl *wrote the script for the Gene Wilder movie*, as well as the book on which it is based. So Dahl does bear some responsibility for the movie itself. That said, Number Two: Wilder's W.W. is much scarier than the character in the novel, IMO. And nastier too: the "You've broken the Rules" bit is *NOT* in the novel. At all. (Having read the book a year or two before the movie came out, I was shocked when we got to that scene in the movie.) I don't really know why Dahl remade the movie Wonka into a borderline nutcase, when the guy in the book came across as "eccentric but somewhat lovable" to me.

[batyatoon]

I was utterly shocked when that bit came up in the movie. And also by the earlier bit that leads into it, where Charlie and his grandpa taste the Fizzy Lifting Drinks. Because the whole point in the book is that Charlie doesn't break the Rules, and he's the only kid who doesn't.

It's a bit of a shock to me now to hear that Dahl wrote the script for the Gene Wilder movie. I wasn't even sure how it made sense that he'd approved it.

[dr-zrfq.livejournal.com]

OK, imdb.com doesn't give a screenplay credit for the movie -- but the poster (which a non-LJ friend has) says "Screenplay by Roald Dahl" followed by "Based On His Book..." What struck me about the movie, even at a young age, was how well the movie followed the novel -- about as well as a movie musical could, really -- *except* for those two scenes! And you're absolutely right about the point of the novel.