Milton Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 I am quite a bit late, no need to tell me. Johnny Depps god-awful take on Hunter S. Thompson is making me want to hurt myself. Why did they ruin the wonderful book like this? A few questions related to the book/movie: 1) Do people still use ether? 2) Does adrenocrine actually exist? 3) Was his attorney actually an attorney? etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF1 Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Never read the book but the movie was bangin. You're crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Dazzle Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 That's it, you've officially lost your fucking mind. Gone. Not coming back.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF1 Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Buy the ticket.........um......take the ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadWithNames Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 the movie is awsome no question. and yes his attorney was a real attorney and apparently rather high up in the whole justice department kinda thing, the details escape me. thast why hes only known as the attorney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casekonly Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 yes, people use ether. brake cleaner...filtered. yes, adrenocrome...in the brain. epinephrine related i don't think his attorney existed. it was his 'other' persona. got it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadWithNames Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 nah im almost certain he existed. his name was oscar or something like that i read an interview where hunter explained that he wanted to have his name put in the book but hunter refused because of who he was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casekonly Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 ahh. i didn't know that. very cool. it's funny though, he uses his attorney as an excuse in some ways... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milton Posted October 15, 2005 Author Share Posted October 15, 2005 I don't think the movie does the book justice on several counts. 1) The book is full of Thompson's personal and social commentary, it's virtually lost in the movie except where it is sprinkled awkwardly between scenes. 2) The movie tries too hard to recreate the feeling of the book and does so by exaggerating subtle parts of the book. Case in point, the doctor at the drug convention, they make him look like this complete weirdo, but in the book he's entirely more subtle. 3) Two of the best parts of the book are utterly left out of the movie: the part where they are discussing the "American dream" and the manage of the restaurant sends them to the Psychiatric Hospital; the scene where they convince the police officer that in LA there are cults that are killing people on a daily basis. 4) Johnny Depp is not smart enough to pull off Hunter S. Thompson. His attempt at portraying Thompson is completely unconvincing. There's more but I have work to do... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Wallbanger Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 In answer to your questions, yes. People still do, real drug, and real attorney. Also, Depp and Thompson were very close friends, and lived together for several months before the movie started production. I would say that this may be the best attempt I've ever seen at turning a book into a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF1 Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Originally posted by BadWithNames@Oct 15 2005, 06:04 AM nah im almost certain he existed. his name was oscar or something like that i read an interview where hunter explained that he wanted to have his name put in the book but hunter refused because of who he was. Quoted post Wait a minute... That shit was a true story??? :huh2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteOx Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 the movie was pretty funny, but it wasn't a particularly great movie although the scene where he terrorises the waitress is hysterical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaolinmasta Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Milton your trippin', ive also read the book tahn seen the movie and yes it's true books are always better the film was damn close to perfect too, it kept extremely close to the book and was pretty funny/cool, Depp did do a great impression of him and Del Toro was also good. You couldn't really get a better director to direct this type of film than Terry Gilliam, the film was awesome and your opinion sucks. Eat my shorts bitch! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milton Posted October 15, 2005 Author Share Posted October 15, 2005 I don't know, I think it's commendable that they would try to turn the book into a movie, but I think they bit off more than they could chew so to speak. I hadn't heard that Depp and Thompson lived together, wasn't Thompson more than 30 years older? I just read the book to be a lot more arrogant in tone than the movie?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milton Posted October 15, 2005 Author Share Posted October 15, 2005 Please explain to me how one's opinion can "suck"? My opinion may be different from yours, it may be less educated than yours, but I fail to see how it "sucks." I wasn't impressed by the movie, however I was particularly impressed by the book. Period. If there is disagreement as to how large the disparity between book and movie is that's fine. I believe the book to be substantially superior to the movie. Feel free to tell me that my grammar sucks as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deposit Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 really...if you read that book, its a cunt of a job to put that into film...i thought it pulled it off pretty well.... and yes ether is still about...met some student hunter s copycat with a bottle of it at a afterparty....big brown lab jug, oooft...sit back down! rip hunter s :king: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harvey Wallbanger Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 I don't know, your grammar seems to be much better than Shaolin's. Yes, there was a difference of about thirty years. Depp moved in with him (and his family) to prepare for the role. I definitely see what you're saying about the tone of the book as compared to the movie, but I still think it was a pretty great interpretation. And yeah, SF, my understanding is that that book is loosely based on Thompson's perception of the actual trip. A lot of it is exaggerated and/or fictionalized to serve as a metaphor for what he thought to be a particularly fucked up point in American history, but he really did go on that trip and do most of that shit. Hunter S. Thompson was a fucked up dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drewWrite Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 no movie ever does the original book justice. that said, the movie is the best adaption i've ever witnessed. also, i used to not like johnnny depp. until i watched that movie. that was his best roll. i don't agree with your view at all. diff'rent strokes i guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deposit Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Hunter S. Thompson was a fucked up dude he had an original mind....great style of writing that took hold of people at the time and still till this day.....read hells angels and rum diary's...its not all about fear and loathing. pce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milton Posted October 15, 2005 Author Share Posted October 15, 2005 It's how he pauses between words. I think of Hunter as having a more fluid style to him than that. It just seems like he's forcing the act. Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUMPKIN ESCOBAR Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 hahahahaha. I remember I made a thread about the movie a little while back and said I thought it sucked....couple of people got all pissy about it... I don't understand all the fuss about that movie. or the book..... From what I understand it's just him and his attorney getting fucked up in Vegas, and Thompson is supposed to be covering a race or something... Is that it? I mean does the book have some subtle message or anything? Or is just pages and pages of nonsense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElectricitySucks Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 thread on this topic #59405834085. i sometimes consider myself a big fan of thompson's work and ive read fear and loathing 7? times and seen the movie many, many times. however, bottom line- the book is always better than the movie. cmon. no need to get on here and tell us that. i do think the movie is very good and in comparison to most books made into movies, fear and loathing does follow the same line. but like many other people have said, your not going to be able to fit everything from the book into the movie. anyone know whats going on with the making of the rum diaries? del toro is directing it and depp is playing thompson, again. the rum diary is not like fear and loathing though. my bottom line: the movie kicked ass but the book kicked the movie's ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Originally posted by harvey wallbanger@Oct 15 2005, 12:15 AM People still do, real drug, and real attorney. Quoted post Adrenochrome was essentially an urban legend. Although it exists, it has no effects in man. The semicarbazone is the only form that is active, and then only by injection, and not in as exciting of ways as portrayed in the movie, certainly. Whatever he was doing and wrote about was not adrenochrome, although it makes for an interesting piece of fiction. A mixture of ether and heptane / hexane is still done by teenagers all over the country thanks to bad information floating around the internet. The bad information claims that the ether fraction can be seperated from the mixture of it and heptane in starting fluid by adding water, shaking, and collecting the organic portion. This is supposed to work because of different solubilities of the two organics. The problem is, of those two, heptane / hexane is only something like .01% soluble in water, whereas ether is around 5% soluble. If anything, these instructions are purifying the heptane, not the ether. Some people are still buying real ether though, it is pretty easy to find online and not regulated in any way, so ordering a jar isn't a problem, although it is expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GnomeToys Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 His attorney: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Zeta_Acosta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sillysiphilis Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 biggus, you lost me after adrenochrome ive heard stories of guys in vietnam sucking down the adrenaline glands of fellow soon-to-be fallen soldiers, and then going on crazy rampages mumbling 'charlie' while chewing on their own tongues. I really doubt there is any truth in these stories, but it sounds really cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casekonly Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 ahh, nice. BG: we used water filtered ether for some 'experiments' none of which involved huffing. extracts is all i say. i had an aquaintance who may have ingested too much heptane b/c he thought ether from break cleaner was cool... interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Your opinion isn't wrong, it's flawed. It's a Terry Gilliam movie. His films are never, ever grounded in reality. Don't like it, go cry about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_dowmagik Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 i thought depp played a convincing hunter. he was a little over the top at times, but nonetheless well acted (is acted a word?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnimeeOne Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 The book was great, the movie was quite good also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorc bcj Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 adrenochrome or whatever does not exist as a drug, it was made up by thompson his attorney was based on oscar zeta acosta a real attorney and one of the leaders of the brown movement. depp spent several months living in thompsons bsement and following him around...thompson really does speak in short spurts with pauses...maybe not when he was younger but certainly in his later years depp does exaggerate a bit though...and both the movie and the book are great. Rum diaries is probably my favorite, curse of lono is an easy read as well. and rum diaries is still in pre production...rent or buy breakfast with hunter if you want to get a glimpse of what he was really like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.