Check out the trailers for the two film versions of East of Eden.
This one was made as a TV mini-series in 1981.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KViALN9bwo8
This 1954 version starred James Dean.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RAoXn0RGgQ
Having seen the previews, which do you think is most true to the book and why do you think so?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Yeah, the 1981 version seemed a lot more realistic. I could actually see that the actors in the 1981 version actually did some research on the characters in East of Eden. While the 1954 version was just about Adam and Charles fighting over some chick (I'm assuming Cathy). I already see that the 1954 version would be completely inaccurate, and probably suck... even though it has James Dean in it...
ReplyDelete-Simone
I disagree with Simone since the 1954 version was mostly about Cal and Aron and mostly stuck to part four of the book, but i really think that the 1981 version was true to the story, but the 1954 version was truer to the characters.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI personally think the 1981 version stuck more truly to the story. The 1954 one to me overplayed the drama way too much and tried to turn East of Eden into more of a story of action when in reality it is just a calm tale of the way of life of the Trask family and the Hamilton family. What bugged me about the 1954 version was the combination of the dramatic music and pop-out captions which tried to make East of Eden much more action than it really was. The 1981 version on the other hand seemed to tell the story in a more calm manner which in my opinion was more true to the story.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the 1981 East of Eden was a to soft to portrait the evil of Cathy and Charles. The trailer reminded me of a western "Gone with the wind." Yet the 1981 stayed closer to the storyline and actually included the first half of the novel as opposed to the 1954 version. The 1954 version did not stay true to the storyline. Since it didn't include the first half of the book it had to put in more scenes to fill in the gaps. The added scenes didn't even relate to the book. It was so unlike the book that for the first 30 seconds I thought you had attached the wrong trailer. Out of the two, the 1981 is definitely closer to the plotline of the book.
ReplyDeleteMatthew Imel
I believe that the 1981 version definitely stayed more true to the story. While the 1954 version focused only on Cal and Aron's story, the 1981 version played through the entire book, which is necessary to understand the whole meaning of the book and how it plays through the theme of good and evil. In the 1954 version they didn't even include Lee, who to me is a big part of the book because he is the man that eventually ends up keeping the Trask family together. The 1954 one also didn't include the earlier life of Cathy, which is so important to really knowing and understanding the essence her character. I liked how the 1981 version the music and the way the scenes were shown made it seem more peaceful or calm, because that is how the book is. The book is really not about major action scenes which is how the 1954 one made it seem with the powerful music and fast pace scenes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most people, in saying that the 1981 version stayed most true to the story. However, I felt that it focused mainly on the first Trask generation. In other words, they omitted crucial characters like Cal and Aron. On the contrary, the 1954 version tells only of the second Trask generation and of sibling rivalry between Cal and Aron. In my oppinion, the 1954 version was too dramatic (with interesting choice of music to play in the background)and with action scenes that I do not recall reading in Steinbeck's novel.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the James Dean version is a better portrayal of the book because it shows the most crucial part of the book which was Aron and Cal's conflict. Also the 1981 version seemed to show Cathy and Cal less evil than they really were in the book. The James Dean version includes the major characters that were really important and still managed to portray the characters with the same feelings and emotions that they had in the book.
ReplyDeleteI definitely feel the 1981 mini-series looked like it was much more true to the story. It seemed to tell the story at a much more comfortable pace, as opposed to the 1954 film which seemed to rush from one dramatic point in the story to the next. This probably can be attributed to the fact that a mini-series doesn't have the same time constraints that a feature film has, so the makers didn't have to try to cram everything into a 1-2 hour film. The 1954 movie didn't even include basically the entire first half of the story, so obviously it wasn't very true to the original work. Beyond this, film definitely evolved quite a lot between 1954 and 1981, so the newer version would probably seem a lot less corny. So yeah, the 1981 version definitely seems like the one to watch.
ReplyDeleteEven though the 1981 miniseries covered the entire book, the 1954 version was about what I believed to be the most important part of the story. It seemed like the first 2/3 of the book, although containing insight into the themes of the good vs evil and timshel, were more of build up to the main storyline. That of course being the conflict between Cal and Aron. (Maybe we should just watch both in class so we can know for sure)
ReplyDeleteFor the most part I would have to agree with what everybody has said so far, that in fact, the 1981 version of East of Eden stays much more true to the story than the 1954 version. That being said, with the 1954 version not even taking notice of the first half of East of Eden, all the themes and underlined meanings Steinbeck wanted to convey are lost. I believe in the 1954 version the narrator referred to Cathy as, “the most wicked woman you will ever see.” The problem with that is without the knowledge of what she did in the first half of the book, the true essence of evil associated with her name whenever she is mentioned is almost meaningless in the movie.
ReplyDeleteunless you have something new to say, I think this one has been covered.
ReplyDeleteI think the TV mini-series in 1981 is more true to the book because even though I have not completely finish read the book I heared some quotes for the book as while as some part, unlike the verison with James Dean where I didn't reconize any parts form the book. It seen like they add parts that weren't in the book just so it be big in the box office.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I agree with what the majority of my classmates have to say about these trailers, I feel that neither of them were fully able to capture the true meaning and heart of the plot. I realize that it is nearly impossible to fit a 600 page book into a two minute summary, however I did not feel that either trailer was able to encompass the true meaning of the story. Both versions focused on specific characters and conflicts, but they did not show the bigger picture. Not one of the previews brought up the idea of timshel or good versus evil. And further more, they hardly showed Lee and Sam Hamilton who I believe are very important characters in the novel, for they initiate much of the idea of "thou mayest" as well as questioning oneself.
ReplyDelete