quote:

Originally posted by Rose237:
I was in awe when I read the part where the mechanical hound lost Montag and killed an innocent man to keep the people that were watching the chase entertained.

But really the reason was so the authorities would not lose face with the public, not to keep them entertained. But, yes - that is a very important aspect of the story.

I also thought that, but I wasn't entirely sure. In class we discussed it and I must've misunderstood. From my understanding, we said that the man was killed to keep the audience. It makes more sense that publicly punishing someone for doing something wrong in any case is only to keep the other people in line.

When we watched the movie in class, there were some big differences from the book that I didn't like. In the movie, Clarisse didn't die and she was a teacher, not a student. I was disappointed that there were no mechanical hounds in the movie. I thought that if they would've created the mechanical hound it would've be really cool. I would've loved to see how it differed from the mechanical hound I visualized while reading F451. In the movie Montag and "Linda" actually communicated and loved each other. I thought that their lack of a relationship in the book was an important part of the story. Since there was no Faber in the movie I didn't understand why Montag killed Captain Beatty.

Yes, we have often criticized these shortcomings in the initial movie - made in France. It would be interesting to have the members of this RB board offer input into the screen "musts" if the new version ever takes some serious directions!?

The mechanical hound has to be in the film, terrorizing and collecting data as it wanders the streets and scans houses of those locked up safely watching their big screens on all walls!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGoSnnzzEhM

That looks really cool. If the movie had something like that in it, it would've been a lot more interesting!

Mechanical Hound, you say!? An update in your neighborhood, perhaps!
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl...0126,0,5814428.story

Rose237, I wonder if you noticed the curiously antiquiated technology used in the film. For example, the old-fashioned telephones and the old-fashioned fire engine. Apparently, the film's director Francois Truffaut wanted to make a film that didn't look like a James Bond film; a kind of anti-Bond film in fact. He therefore tried to steer away from flashy gadgets. (Not consistently, though.)

This is one of the reasons that he abandoned the Mechanical Hound. The other reason is that it would have been impractical. If you look at the section later in the film where we see men flying on jetpacks - with terrible special effect! - you will understand why he was averse to anything that would require special effects.

I think changing Clarisse from a student to a teacher is one of the most crucial changes Truffaut made. If you notice, Montag is ALSO a teacher in a couple of scenes in the film... but then gets summoned to see the Fire Chief, in a sequence which makes him look like a naughty schoolboy who has been summoned to see the headmaster. Truffaut is clearly striving to achieve something here, but it isn't thorough or consistent.

My friend complained about the bicycles looking old-timey and wrong. My biggest problem was no writing was displayed anywhere--newspapers and street signs were all in pictures. The whole idea of the book was people could read--just literature was banned. In other words, the written word existed but had lost meaning. A much more powerful message, I think, and much more sensible explaining how Montag was able to read at all.

Rose237

The beginning of Faherient451 was also slow at the beginning for me as well. I had a hard time of catching all the information at first. By the end of the book like you said did pick up and become interesting. Thunder05: While first reading the book I had the same thoughts as you. It was very difficult to catch all the information when you can’t understand the book. Once I became interested and spoke to others about it everything became clear to me and I started enjoying the book.

-flower03

I agree with weedeater917. I think the end of the book is fascinating. Bradbury tells the story in intricate detail but then leaves you to create or imagine your own ending. I think that is the beauty of this book. When the reader is so intrigued by the story to begin with, its great to be able to write your own ending so to speak. I really enjoyed reading this book. The way Bradbury wrote the book was what got me, I couldn't put it down. Yes, there were parts that weren't as interesting as others, but isn't there parts such as those in all books? You can't have excitement on every page. There has to be something to look forward to reading about in the book. Once your past a great part you stumble across another.

quote:

Originally posted by dandelion:
...My biggest problem was no writing was displayed anywhere--newspapers and street signs were all in pictures...

This is the biggest "strategic" difference between the book and the film. Truffaut was really very consistent about eliminating written text - even the filing cabinets in Beatty's office just have numbers on them. Montag is shown learning how to read, in a way which would only make sense if had earlier learned some reading... so there is a slight implication that people used to read. But it does lead to some difficulties.

Bradbury, in interviews, has said that "of course" in his novel people had written materials such as instruction manuals and the like; it was LITERATURE that was outlawed, not text.

Truffaut was taking a different angle, which was the erosion of communication. Notice how there are many instances of characters forming incomplete sentences in the film. Not only have they lost written language, they are losing the ability to communicate in ANY form of words. (I wrote a paper on this once!)