-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
March 2012: William Goldman: The Princess Bride
- Thread starter Landslide
- Start date
beer good
Well-Known Member
I picked this up for the first time yesterday afternoon, and I'm already halfway through. Loving it. I'm surprised at how faithful the movie seems to have been - the framing story is changed, there's a father instead of a grandfather and William Goldman himself has a larger role, but apart from that it's almost a word for word adaptation.
I love this book. I have to admit that
I was half-way though the book before I "got" the joke.
Peter Falk, aka, Columbo.
Fantasy Moon
kickbox
The little italicized bits that told what was "edited" out were amusing at first, but eventually they got on my nerves and half way through the book I just skipped them whenever they showed up.
The scene where Inigo and Fezzik descend through the levels to rescue Westley should have been included in the film adaptation, I think.
The scene where Inigo and Fezzik descend through the levels to rescue Westley should have been included in the film adaptation, I think.
Alix
Member
beer good
Well-Known Member
So yeah, I pretty much loved this.
I've loved the movie for a long time, of course. And the book is very faithful to... I mean the other way around. Sure, there are some slight differences in the actual story; Westley is a little more of an anti-hero (I could never buy that the movie's Westley was really
; I can just about buy it about the novel's version), there's some extra backstory, one or two extra scenes... but on a whole, it's the exact same story, even the exact same dialogue (though Goldman's characters tend to take their own story slightly more seriously than Reiner's). Apart from that, though, the only major change is the framing device; instead of having a kindly old grandfather tell it to his grandson, it's "William Goldman" telling us the story his father (barely literate in English) told him. And that's a pretty big change.
Fantasy Moon said that after a while she started skipping "Goldman's" commentary on "Morgenstern's" story (as opposed to Goldman's invention of both "Goldman" and "Morgenstern" to tell his own story). And I can understand that, because it does interfere a bit with the pure sugar rush of the wonderfully naive adventure story. On the other hand, I'm not sure those comments aren't the actual story. I mean, we have at least four storytellers here: there's "S. Morgenstern", who supposedly wrote the original book, the one full of weird anachronisms and chapter upon chapter of social satire of a system where Westley and Buttercup are really only footnotes. Then there's "Goldman Sr.", the immigrant father from the same country as "Morgenstern", who told parts of the story to his young son Billy (who wasn't entirely well at the time, either). There's "William Goldman", the (slightly unlikable) Hollywood scriptwriter who wrote the same movies that the real William Goldman wrote, who rewrote "Morgenstern's" novel to fit with his father's version and turn it into a proper fairytale that his (disappointing) son might like; and then there's the actual William Goldman who invented the whole lot of them.
You can read only the "Morgenstern" bits, and you wind up with a very fun fairytale. I do think, though, there's a point to the "Goldman" intrusions; he breaks the fourth wall and comments on his own version of the story, making sure we know that the story is exactly that - a story. One which has been heavily doctored and simplified (by a celebrated Hollywood screenwriter who, by his own admission, likes his scripts better than his family and is unable to feel the sort of True Love the story is supposedly about). It's not a huge change to the main story, and I'm not sure if it makes it one I like better than I did before, but it does add another few layers to the story.
I will say, though, that I thought the ending is a little too sudden. I like the ending, I probably like it better than the one in the movie, but it does feel a bit like... one of the narrators, I have no clue which, ran out of paper and had to finish quickly. That's half a star gone there, I think.
And as always, XKCD has the scoop.
+
I've loved the movie for a long time, of course. And the book is very faithful to... I mean the other way around. Sure, there are some slight differences in the actual story; Westley is a little more of an anti-hero (I could never buy that the movie's Westley was really
a pillaging, murderous pirate
Fantasy Moon said that after a while she started skipping "Goldman's" commentary on "Morgenstern's" story (as opposed to Goldman's invention of both "Goldman" and "Morgenstern" to tell his own story). And I can understand that, because it does interfere a bit with the pure sugar rush of the wonderfully naive adventure story. On the other hand, I'm not sure those comments aren't the actual story. I mean, we have at least four storytellers here: there's "S. Morgenstern", who supposedly wrote the original book, the one full of weird anachronisms and chapter upon chapter of social satire of a system where Westley and Buttercup are really only footnotes. Then there's "Goldman Sr.", the immigrant father from the same country as "Morgenstern", who told parts of the story to his young son Billy (who wasn't entirely well at the time, either). There's "William Goldman", the (slightly unlikable) Hollywood scriptwriter who wrote the same movies that the real William Goldman wrote, who rewrote "Morgenstern's" novel to fit with his father's version and turn it into a proper fairytale that his (disappointing) son might like; and then there's the actual William Goldman who invented the whole lot of them.
You can read only the "Morgenstern" bits, and you wind up with a very fun fairytale. I do think, though, there's a point to the "Goldman" intrusions; he breaks the fourth wall and comments on his own version of the story, making sure we know that the story is exactly that - a story. One which has been heavily doctored and simplified (by a celebrated Hollywood screenwriter who, by his own admission, likes his scripts better than his family and is unable to feel the sort of True Love the story is supposedly about). It's not a huge change to the main story, and I'm not sure if it makes it one I like better than I did before, but it does add another few layers to the story.
But the story sold quite well, didn't it?One of the William Goldmans said:
I will say, though, that I thought the ending is a little too sudden. I like the ending, I probably like it better than the one in the movie, but it does feel a bit like... one of the narrators, I have no clue which, ran out of paper and had to finish quickly. That's half a star gone there, I think.
And as always, XKCD has the scoop.
+Penny Alley
New Member
I have not read this book in years. I'm off to dig it out of the bookshelves, dust it of and have a go. I remember thinking it quite funny when I first read it, so it'll be interesting to see if my tastes remain the same. 
eclair
Member
Being an adult is arduous. When the monotony of tax bills, the failure of ambitions and the sadness of lost loved ones begins to stack up, the need for retreat becomes imperative for sanity's sake. The Princess Bride provides this in a very special way, for it is a retreat from adulthood itself. "Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Poison. True love. Hate. Revenge. Giants. Hunters. Bad men. Good men. Beautifulest ladies. Snakes. Spiders. Beasts of all natures and descriptions. Pain. Death. Brave men. Coward men. Strongest men. Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles." Nothing else needs to be said.
I love it.