|
|
I think the book was more insightful than the film as it showed more of the events that led up to this...and not to defend drugs but I really have to say that there was more to it than that.
George Diener (the supposed real name of the father) was a sort of 'What I say goes' and 'You DARE to defy me?' type and that would naturally play havoc with the personality of anyone in the most difficult of their teen years. I mean, I'm not saying that he pushed his son into drugs and a life of crime, but I think his sort of sternness would at least make any 16 year-old want to say 'Why don't you F--- OFF?!!!'
Another thing I found was that the film version tended to follow a REEFER MADNESS formula (I remember when I was in college, we deliberately planned to smoke while we watched this after seeing the coming attractions...so we could laugh at the exaggerations...and there WERE plenty). I mean, in the book the writer was more explanatory in that he'd smoked several times since he was 14 (which WAS still unusual as it was for 1966, so it figures that Brick was a hood) and acid, speed, heroin, etc., followed. What appeared to be implied was that Richie became a deranged would-be killer from the first puff, with some help from a little speed...and unless you're a total maniac in the first place, that's almost never the case.
I really think that the way the film depicted the situation belonged more in the '50s. As this was 1977 (or '73 for the book), if they really wanted to warn kids away, they should have focused on what came in between. Really!!!
score 8/10
xoxmagoosxox 24 March 2006
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw1324253/ |
|
15-4-2021 12:06:10