to be slightly sickened by anyone who wants to see the movie of The Lovely Bones?

[Buckets]

I mean really, why would anyone want to see that?

Five People You Meet in Heaven on the other hand was FAR better.

Based on the bit I read, the book seemed to be the most overrated rubbish ever. Normally, I hate not to finish a book but with that one - really, life's too short.

Yes, I felt very hard done by having swallowed the hype and bought the book - only reason I ploughed through to the end, in case there was an astonishing twist or something which made it all worth while.

I don't think the violence of her death was central to the book. It's been a while since I read it but I felt it was more about how a family moved on after death. I think it depends who makes the movie, it might be some mawkish dreadful Hollywoodised crap, or it might be very moving and sweet.

Yes YABU, you don't know how they're going to interpret it.

I don't know why people would be irritated not to be told anything about death by this book. It ain't about death.

(am loving the use of the word sinews by Threadworm!)

They're making a film of it??

OMG that will be a total blubfest

YABU - The book was brilliantly and sensitively written IMO, not remotely sensationalist. It moved me and helped me with my own personal grief - I will go and see the film - especially in the hands of the director who made Heavenly Creatures...

I can't see why one would pick on this film when there are a million and one other far more worthy targets that have no artistic merit whatsoever.

Have you read the book, Buckets??

Just my gut instinct, that's why I'm asking the question

IMO it's not in the same genre as Saving Private Ryan / Schindlers List - those help to illustrate an important historical era which we can learn from. What do we learn from watching a re-enactment of child rape and murder?

If you have read the novel and know how awful the scenes are, why would you want to see that on screen?

BTW I didn't get any 'huge emotional aftermath' stuff from the book because the writing itself is so awful but that's another debate I think. Perhaps I might feel different if she was a better writer...

I thought it was Alice Sebold's other book Lucky that was her own rape memoir - Lovely Bones is fiction.

Yes, Lovely Boes is fiction, but clearly formed by her process of recovery. If you remember from her account of her own rape, she mentions the murder of a child in the place where she was raped. That connects the two books, I think. Particularly in respect of the moment when the Lovely Bones child's fleeing 'soul' hits Ruth.

The story, like the title, is about the family's recovery. And although the book isn't brilliant I think it is really valuable in drawing the very very imperfect but nonetheless valuable nature of the recovery.

In her factual account her recovery seems very imperfect too . Perhaps that's why The Lovely Bones is a limited success.

Can't imagine why anyone would feel it sckening to want to read the book or see the film.

HerBeatitudeLittleBella
LFC said this >>>And I will go and see the film as I thought it was an important book about death.

So I said it told me nothing about death. Wasn't irritated or expecting book to 'tell me' anything.

As someone who lost a very close family member young to a tragedy (albeit not a brutal rape and murder) I can say the book had worth to me in its exploration of the family issues following the death of a young girl. The sister's reaction helped me deal with some of my issues and my reaction to grief. So to say it doesn't have anything to say on death is harsh - it has a lot to say about bereavement and the senseless loss of a young life.

i read the book, and have read 'lucky' which i found far more visceral and upsetting. I would not have thought for a second it would be too upsetting to see on the big screen, but it would be easy for it to stray into 'angel from heaven communicating with family and bringing sadness out of the dark' shmaltz quite easily. which would be a shame

Lulumama - i don't think Peter Jackson would ever be schmaltzy, so I think it's in safe hands ...hopes.....

I see Saoirse Ronan is to play Susie - she was very good in Atonement, I thought.

I think it will be a classy film. I can't imagine they are going to make a big deal of the more traumatic scenes, I think PJ is more interested in the Heaven and Earth aspect of it - what he can do with that cinematically.

As soon as you mentioned Heavenly Creatures I had a strangely strong feeling that the tone and the visual feel of that film is exactly right for the book Lovely Bones.

For what it's worth, I can't even remember the actual violence in LB, only that there was an underground place. It is the recovery, and lack of recovery, that is the subject of the book.

The heaven thing is a difficult device -- easy to get very wrong. But I don't remember it being dreadful in the book, and I agree it will be an interesting cinema challenge.

i hope you are right sycamore. ! i will certainly go to see it, but i am often disappointed with the film adaptations of books i have really enjoyed

I know, me too. I think because so many of the great ones really aren't that suitable for adaptation - they need to be much longer than the 2 hours most people with tolerate sitting in a cinema for - so they end up having to make choices about what to leave out, what to tweak - inevitably all your favourite bits!

And if they get the casting wrong....grrrr!

Buckets: so glad I'm not the only one who thought the book was badly written!

I loved the book, didn't realise it had been made into a film.
The only problem I'd have with it is that I would sob the whole way through, like I did with the book. Not a good look first thing in the morning, every morning for a week whilst reading the book on a busy commuter train into London Waterloo!

Its got Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weiz & Susan Sarandon in it.

Message withdrawn

topic matter doesn't bother me.it was a dreadfully written schleppy book with rotten narrative

cant imagine the screenplay and film will do any better