Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I have high hopes for this film as the book (by Cormac McCarthy) was excellent.

The Road Set to be released 11/26/08.

"The Road follows a man and a boy, father and son, journeying together for many months across a post-apocalyptic landscape, some years after a great, unexplained cataclysm. The story takes place in the former United States, in the lower Appalachian mountains, where civilization has been destroyed, along with most life; the precise fate of the rest of the earth is not made clear, though the implication is that the disaster has affected the entire planet. What is left of humanity now consists largely of bands of cannibals and their prey, and refugees who scavenge for food."

Definitely looking forward to it. I loved the book and hopefully the movie can live up to it.

McCarthy's writing style seems to be one of those rare gems that is perfect for adaptation - his way of tackling difficult themes etc. through landscape and sparse narrative is amazing.

Haven't read the book yet, but it's on my "to-read" list, so hopefully I'll do so before the movie comes out.

I just read The Road last week and really enjoyed it, was thinking it would make a good film while I was reading it. First book I've read by the man.

The book is astounding.

I've been following the film for a long while now and from the screens that they've released, it looks excellent. I love the subtle look of the scenery and the environment, it's exactly how I pictured it while reading.

I'm anxiously awaiting a trailer for the film. I have extremely high hopes. If the film is even half as powerful and affecting as the novel it will likely be the best film of the year.

We shouldn't have too long to wait for the trailer.

I know, should be in the coming weeks.

I'm very interested in how they're going about showing the more barbaric images described in the book. There are some horrific things in the book that I can't imagine getting an R rating by the MPAA, and it would be very easy to make those scenes gratuitous.

Look forward to this. Always been a fan of Charlize Theron and Guy Pearce

Originally posted by BackFire
I know, should be in the coming weeks.

I'm very interested in how they're going about showing the more barbaric images described in the book. There are some horrific things in the book that I can't imagine getting an R rating by the MPAA, and it would be very easy to make those scenes gratuitous.

You're thinking about the cellar full or people being slowly cannibalized, right?

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Look forward to this. Always been a fan of Charlize Theron and Guy Pearce

If they follow the book closely, she won't have much of a role.

I've read the book and if they follow the book to a reasonable degree, I think that the movie will either be:

a) An amazing film about a father and son that will touch all our hearts and give us feelings of happiness despite the horrific setting they reside in.

b) Be the most depressing movie ever made.

The book was phenomenal though, I must say. Definitely an emotional rollercoaster.

Robtard - Also probably means the baby + fire scene. I didn't imagine that right, read that in the book.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're thinking about the cellar full or people being slowly cannibalized, right?

That, and more specifically I was referring to the scene with the gutted, charred half eaten baby on a spit

Anyways, here's a review of the script -- http://www.quietearth.us/articles/2008/08/25/Quiet-Earth-World-Exclusive-THE-ROAD-script-review

Sounds like they're really going all the way with it. The guy says he was shocked by how dark and despairing the script is. I'm so glad to hear that.

Is there baby rape in this movie? I might have to see this.

Originally posted by Impediment
Is there baby rape in this movie? I might have to see this.

No, McCarthy does use the term "catamites" a few times during the book, so it implies similar.

Imp,

Read the book before the movie, it's a decent book and a fast read. It will especially mess with you since you're a father of a young child, makes you think, at least it did to me.

-

This pic really brings me back into the book.
http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/4708/roadmw2.jpg

The pictures they've released of this film really get my hopes up. It looks awesome so far, like they really captured the tone.

I'm reading the book now. Just started last night.

Looks so awesome... the images are nuts looking... excellent location.

Picked up this book after watching No Country for Old Men. Dark, absorbing, incredible stuff. Mortensen is a good fit for the lead.

Has anyone seen Dir. John Hillcoat's last movie, The Proposition? I might check that out to get a sense of how he might handle this story.

See The Proposition, it's rather good.

Looks like we might not be seeing The Road till next year if this turns out true:

http://oscar-watch.ew.com/2008/10/is-the-road-bei.html?xid=rss-oscarwatch- Is%20%27The%20Road%27%20being%20bumped%20to%202009
?

Balls.

LW4cbIw3IW8

something that was shown as a 3MW (three minute wonder) on channel 4 on UK tv tonight

Just finished the book the other day...It's made me want to see this film even more. Although it's hard to see them being able to put in the dead baby on a spit scene in and it still getting past censors.

Originally posted by jaden101
Just finished the book the other day...It's made me want to see this film even more. Although it's hard to see them being able to put in the dead baby on a spit scene in and it still getting past censors.

Director's UR cut?

I actually heard that scene is in the film.

I certainly hope it stays there as well, it was one of the most powerful and horrifying images from the novel.

They could probably pull it off with an R rating, just obscure the image a bit somehow.

its an amazing film...

Ah yes. Subtle spamming with signature links. Very original.

It's got a 16th of October 2009 release at the moment. They say it's official...

About ****ing time.

Originally posted by Robtard
About ****ing time.

Cosigned. I just finished the book last week or so and I really hope they do this book justice. If the film stays true to the novel, I think it'll be Best Picture material, straight up!

http://www.esquire.com/features/movies/the-road-movie-review-0609?src=rss

One of the first reviews here, and according to this reviewer it's one of the most important films of the year, I haven't read it yet so don't know if there are spoilers in it or not, so read at your own whatever(can't think of the word...).

Risk, reservations, discretion, these words would have worked.

Reviewer thought highly of it, said it stayed true to the novel, makes me want to see it even more now.

One thing that got me, he said zombies, I'm 99.879542% certain he didn't mean this literally, at least I hope so, as it would be a divergence from the novel.

http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/the-road/trailer

Trailer. Me likes the look!

Game me a hard-on, noticed several exact scenes right out of the book. Can't wait.

One thing of note, it seems they're going with massive/global natural disasters as the cause of civilization's destruction, in the book it never specifically stated what happened, but it leads you to believe it was all out nuclear war.

This trailer kind of upsets me. I realize that I have to reserve full judgement until I see the whole film, but still. The tone of this trailer was completely different than the book, which was one of sadness, desperation, survival, and the relationship between father and son. The trailer, however, was like "Get ready for an epic adventure!!" etc. There were some scenes from the book that I recognized though, which was promising and the acting seems good.

And yeah Robtard, I noticed the whole environmental thing as well. If they go that route, or even if they explain what happened at all, I'll be kind of pissed, because, like you said, the novel doesn't explain what went on, it just alludes to nuclear mishaps.

Also, I've read that the mother character (Charlize Theron) has been expanded for the film. Not sure how I feel about that.

Guess I'll have to wait and see another trailer or something.

*crosses fingers that they don't **** up this movie.

Originally posted by Robtard
Game me a hard-on, noticed several exact scenes right out of the book. Can't wait.

One thing of note, it seems they're going with massive/global natural disasters as the cause of civilization's destruction, in the book it never specifically stated what happened, but it leads you to believe it was all out nuclear war.

If I remember correctly, wasn't the only mention in brief paragraph saying that the man looked out the window and saw a glow on the horizon? I took that as maybe an asteroid strike.

I'm not sure if I like the idea of the mother being in it more. I hope it's flashbacks rather than the main timeline.

I noticed the quick shot of the starving guy. I take it that's the bit where the find the guy who's alive and his legs are half eaten off and burnt and all the other people are begging for help

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
This trailer kind of upsets me. I realize that I have to reserve full judgement until I see the whole film, but still. The tone of this trailer was completely different than the book, which was one of sadness, desperation, survival, and the relationship between father and son. The trailer, however, was like "Get ready for an epic adventure!!" etc. There were some scenes from the book that I recognized though, which was promising and the acting seems good.

And yeah Robtard, I noticed the whole environmental thing as well. If they go that route, or even if they explain what happened at all, I'll be kind of pissed, because, like you said, the novel doesn't explain what went on, it just alludes to nuclear mishaps.

Also, I've read that the mother character (Charlize Theron) has been expanded for the film. Not sure how I feel about that.

Guess I'll have to wait and see another trailer or something.

*crosses fingers that they don't **** up this movie.

That's addressed in the review further up the page. The guy said he'd seen the trailers after seeing the film and the trailers are a totally different feel to the film...Obviously the trailers have to grab people who haven't read the book's interest. Hence the more up tempo feel to them.

Originally posted by jaden101
If I remember correctly, wasn't the only mention in brief paragraph saying that the man looked out the window and saw a glow on the horizon? I took that as maybe an asteroid strike.

I'm not sure if I like the idea of the mother being in it more. I hope it's flashbacks rather than the main timeline.

I noticed the quick shot of the starving guy. I take it that's the bit where the find the guy who's alive and his legs are half eaten off and burnt and all the other people are begging for help

That and all the ash, I took it as a nuclear war/fallout. But yeah, it was vague at best.

Hope it is flashbacks, like in the book. The trailer probably had all of Theron's parts, as to draw attention that she's in it.

Possible, there was also the bit with the old wandering guy who was hit by lightning, he didn't look old enough though. So you're probably correct.

Originally posted by Robtard
That and all the ash, I took it as a nuclear war/fallout. But yeah, it was vague at best.

Hope it is flashbacks, like in the book. The trailer probably had all of Theron's parts, as to draw attention that she's in it.

Possible, there was also the bit with the old wandering guy who was hit by lightning, he didn't look old enough though. So you're probably correct.

The descriptions in the book and by the look of the film the cities seem too much still intact to be have been nuclear. I'm not sure if I like the idea of just weather phenomena though. That's what it seems like with the huge tornados.

The sepia/gray look of the film is spot on what I imagined though. Except for one thing...The leaves on the ground on 1 of the shots don't look decomposed enough and are all still yellow. I envisiged really bleak gray. Especially with the many references to water being choked up and sludge like.

Could also be some kind of super volcano....Yellowstone going up or something. That would fit.

I do hope you're right, asteroid strike sounds the best, considering how the book described the landscape.

I noticed that too, they were also not as filthy in some parts, so I take it time is passing and things are getting worse and worse. Though the novel pretty much had things all rotted and decomposed, as several years had passed before they went on their journey I'll keep an open-mind, but it does look like a divergence from the novel.

Possible, but it looked like a bunch or mega-storms from the trailer. I'd accept either that or the asteroid as following the book best.

You will be pleased to know the Charlize Theron scenes are dream sequences/flashbacks according to another review I read.

Robtard is please, as the book was great, so the closer they follow the book, the greater greatness of this film.

Sorry can't be arsed to look back if already said, but apparently the weather/distruction footage at the start of the trailer is only for the trailer, will not be in the film for some reason. I read.

Good...I don't want any crap explanation.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kDoyvibiZag/R2kfOv6rdpI/AAAAAAAABNw/l8YqAjfeIEU/s320/BurnsExcellentSticker.jpg

Just saw the preview.

I think, Robtard, that I may have to take your advice and actually read the book.

You should...It's ace.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Just saw the preview.

I think, Robtard, that I may have to take your advice and actually read the book.

WTF are you waiting for, my advice is solid, always is. After you're done with that one, pick of World War Z, another good book and it's being made into film.

BTW, I know I told you this before, but Road will especially **** with you, since you're a father. Have fun reading.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Sorry can't be arsed to look back if already said, but apparently the weather/distruction footage at the start of the trailer is only for the trailer, will not be in the film for some reason. I read.

Thank God. Having that in the film would greatly hinder the power. The mystery of the disaster is paramount to the power of the story. There should not be any footage at all in the film.

As far as the trailer, I'm not going to start casting judgment based on a 2 minute spot, but I didn't like that they seemed to be trying to pace it as a thriller/action story, when it's really anything but. Of course, trailers are infamous for implying things about a film that are completely untrue, so we'll see.

I do really like the look of it, though. Very gray and despairing which is great. And like Robtard it was very amazing to see a few segments directly from the book in the trailer.

Oh and I really liked the music.

As far as the cause of the disaster, I seem to remember reading something where McCarthy himself said something along the lines of "we did it to ourselves". Which would fit with the theme of the book, since it paints humanity as a very ugly and grotesque bunch, for the most part.

Originally posted by BackFire


As far as the cause of the disaster, I seem to remember reading something where McCarthy himself said something along the lines of "we did it to ourselves". Which would fit with the theme of the book, since it paints humanity as a very ugly and grotesque bunch, for the most part.

Bit of an ambiguous thing to say really. Climate change wouldn't really explain the ash...Nuclear war and the cities would be far more totalled and the ash would be nuclear fallout meaning they'd have been dead long before.

Still. It's not really worth speculating anyway. I'd prefer it to be unexplained.

Frankly, I bet McCarthy himself never really figured out exactly what happened. He probably just came up with the idea and theme of the story and went with it adding all sorts of effects from a number of different possible scenarios to make the atmosphere as rich and detailed as possible.

But really, yeah, it's not really all that important what caused it.

It's been said, but people who have seen it have said the trailer is quite misleading. I too liked the music used in the trailer, will have to find to download.

Oo saw another review in the newspapers today from a critic who saw it at the Venice film festival, gave it four out of five.

Oh, found it:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/sep/03/the-road-adaptation-cormac-mccarthy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mopKOdrjspg

A song from the OST. Beautiful.

That's a beautiful piece. Good to see the two are doing the whole score. Reminds me of Spiegel im Spiegel by Arvo Part.

I'm keeping a close eye on this movie....now where is the nearest bookstore.

I'm kinda bummed, I just read that the baby on the spit scene is not in the final film.

Originally posted by BackFire
I'm kinda bummed, I just read that the baby on the spit scene is not in the final film.

I figured that would be case after reading the book. They'll no doubt be aiming for a 15 release and so some of the scenes from the book simply wouldn't make it in. That one being the most extreme example.

I have a feeling you wont see all of the detail from one of the scenes shown briefly in the trailer. Namely the basement of the house and the man lying on the floor with his legs cut off and caurterized

There's always the director's cut.

Originally posted by Robtard
There's always the director's cut.

Not always.


Originally posted by BackFire
I'm kinda bummed, I just read that the baby on the spit scene is not in the final film.

Aww....

Opened up today, unfortunately the closest it opened to me is in San Francisco, about 20 miles away.

20 miles isn't that far... bus? or is 20 miles difficult in America...

Originally posted by MildPossession
20 miles isn't that far... bus? or is 20 miles difficult in America...

No, it's not. I could drive there in 30-40 minutes, if traffic isn't that bad. I'm just horribly lazy, that and all the gays in S.F.

if you come tomorrow we can see it together.

Will you guarantee a hand-job?

no. o.o

but blax might.

Yeah, stupid of them to do a limited release for this movie. As if they're trying their damnedest to make sure the movie fails.

I'll probably actually pay $10 bucks to see this movie at my local artsy theatre when it comes out. Looks interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------

On a side note: The trailer posted (on page 2 of this thread) was great. But I couldn't stop laughing when I saw that they used the silly "Yaaaauuuuuuarrgh" scream in it at 2:20--- totally killed the mood.

L_818rcC0DA

Wilhelm scream.

Originally posted by BackFire
Wilhelm scream.

Nah the Wilhelm scream is different.

cdbYsoEasio

Those screams remind me of another bloody annoying sound effect used over and over in films, when someone opens a door or a gate, the same noise. I've never heard a door make that noise...

Okay, I saw it earlier. Just got back.

Overall it's a very solid movie. Great acting by all involved. The kid at times is a bit weak, but you can't really blame him.

Also the film has amazing visuals and it does a pretty good job of capturing the tone of the novel.

That said, it's missing the core emotional connection, I thought. I cried at the end of the book. In the film, though, I didn't.

Definitely a good film, though. Great music as well. Just don't go in expecting anything close to the power of the novel and you'll be happy.

i wanna see this so0o0o0 badly! >.<

there was a death in the family yesterday so i wont for awhile though. =(

Originally posted by BackFire
Okay, I saw it earlier. Just got back.

Overall it's a very solid movie. Great acting by all involved. The kid at times is a bit weak, but you can't really blame him.

Also the film has amazing visuals and it does a pretty good job of capturing the tone of the novel.

That said, it's missing the core emotional connection, I thought. I cried at the end of the book. In the film, though, I didn't.

Definitely a good film, though. Great music as well. Just don't go in expecting anything close to the power of the novel and you'll be happy.

So....it will be a great movie if one hasn't even read the novel at all right?

Yeah. Would be fine.

Definitely recommend reading the book, though.

Originally posted by BackFire
Okay, I saw it earlier. Just got back.

Overall it's a very solid movie. Great acting by all involved. The kid at times is a bit weak, but you can't really blame him.

Also the film has amazing visuals and it does a pretty good job of capturing the tone of the novel.

That said, it's missing the core emotional connection, I thought. I cried at the end of the book. In the film, though, I didn't.

Definitely a good film, though. Great music as well. Just don't go in expecting anything close to the power of the novel and you'll be happy.

Hahaha, you crying ***.

I hear you though, the book draws you in and ****s with your mind and emotions. Was hoping this was transferred over into the film.

Parts of it did. Some parts were lost in translation. The biggest thing lost was the pure sense of urgency that pushed the book forward. Just didn't capture that in the film.

Too bad, that impending feeling of doom at every corner is what did it for me in the book.

Originally posted by BackFire
Parts of it did. Some parts were lost in translation. The biggest thing lost was the pure sense of urgency that pushed the book forward. Just didn't capture that in the film.

Out of curiousity, is there any narration of the strange sequences from the book? An example being "Like pilgrims in a fable swallowed up and lost among the inward parts of some granitic beast"

I found some of this to be the most powerful aspects of the book. It's what really emphasised the sheer isolation and devastation of the world in which the book was set. I think the film would miss it greatly.

Agreed. The prose is a very large part of the power of the novel.

They did do that a little. Viggo has some voice over. I can't remember specifics, other than he did say in voice over "If he is not the word of god god never spoke."

Watched the film. As has been said, it's very powerful.


When they meet that old man, and the father and the old man are talking: As the old man started to describe and discuss how important and signifacant children are, and how precious his own son was, I couldn't helped but get just a tad choked up about it. Very nicely executed. I didn't see two actors acting out lines, I saw a desparate father talking to an old man that cherished his son more than anything, but had lost him.


The book sounds like a reader as I remember a couple of times, the narration had some very nice lines...and if the book is chock-full of this kind of prose, it's definitely a shame that NO LOCAL LIBRARY HAS THIS BOOK!


Overall, I give the film a 7/10. Some great acting. Everything looked old...but, other than that, I was overly impressed with anything else.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Watched the film. As has been said, it's very powerful.


When they meet that old man, and the father and the old man are talking: As the old man started to describe and discuss how important and signifacant children are, and how precious his own son was, I couldn't helped but get just a tad choked up about it. Very nicely executed. I didn't see two actors acting out lines, I saw a desparate father talking to an old man that cherished his son more than anything, but had lost him.


The book sounds like a reader as I remember a couple of times, the narration had some very nice lines...and if the book is chock-full of this kind of prose, it's definitely a shame that NO LOCAL LIBRARY HAS THIS BOOK!

You should buy it. It's the only book i've ever read in a single sitting and when I got to the end of it I turned back to the start and read it again. It's astounding. Macarthy's writing gets criticised for being technically flawed but it's actually deliberate.

I'm going to see the film on thursday and it's one of few western made films that i've been both hugely excited to see and have doubts about how the novel can be well translated to film.

I watched the movie tonight. It was pretty good. The story itself is incredible. The only really bad part of the movie is the ending which I don't want to spoil, but still it did nothing to diminish it's powerful story. 7.5/10.

Originally posted by jaden101
You should buy it. It's the only book i've ever read in a single sitting and when I got to the end of it I turned back to the start and read it again. It's astounding. Macarthy's writing gets criticised for being technically flawed but it's actually deliberate.

Cool. Thanks. Robtard says things similar.

Just curious: what technical aspects are you referring to?

Originally posted by jaden101
I'm going to see the film on thursday and it's one of few western made films that i've been both hugely excited to see and have doubts about how the novel can be well translated to film.

From the reviews, they say it follows the book much better than most book to movie adaptations. Of course, some stuff was cut out...and the mother plays a slightly larger role.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Cool. Thanks. Robtard says things similar.

Just curious: what technical aspects are you referring to?



The grammer is incorrect throughout the book. Most of the time you don't notice as the book still flows well but occasionally it makes you re-read a line because of the sentence's structure.

Originally posted by jaden101
The grammer is incorrect throughout the book. Most of the time you don't notice as the book still flows well but occasionally it makes you re-read a line because of the sentence's structure.


Oh, okay. Yeah, he's definitly a smart person, and obviously very educated, so I can see why it would be intentional...and logically nothing else.

Hahaha...The irony is that I just realised how bad my previous post was when talking about grammar (not grammer).

Apparently, after doing a little more digging into why he doesn't use formal grammar, it's another mechanism for putting over the starkness of the book's setting. He doesn't use apostrophies in contractions to strip down the language to further portray the emptiness of the world that is left.

My mom had an interesting thought about his writing style, in how it relates to The Road.

She felt that it seemed as if the narrator was so exhausted that he couldn't be bothered with an abundance of grammar and all that. That it felt like the world in the book, which the narrator inherently came from, drained so much out of him that he was kind of forced to simplify his speech and use run on sentences and what not, simply because he's so tired.

My take, it was written almost as one would talk to a child who's ignorant of the world around him/her, this going back to the father-child relationship in the book.

Just saw this is was ok.......at times it was kinda boring.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Just saw this is was ok.......at times it was kinda boring.

Damn it, I should be watching this tonight or tomorrow and I keep hearing similar comments. Sucks, as I had high hopes.

Don't think it helps that the music in the trailer made it seems like it should be an action movie. Anyone who's read the book knows what to expect in terms of pacing and content.

Indeed. The movie isn't any slower than the book.

Well...Just back from seeing it...After waiting patiently for quite some time.

I was worried that they wouldn't capture the starkness and bleakness of the world described in the book. I was wholly wrong about that. Visually it was perfect. What makes that all the more astonishing is that very little of it was CGI.

Unfortunately I don't think they got much else right. Robert Duval was tremendous for his small part. He was the only character I felt anything for especially when he was talking about his son.

I felt Sorry for Viggo Mortenson because he had to work with the most hopeless and unconvincing whiny little shit possible. Bring back Halley Joel Osment...All is forgiven.

The structure was all wrong. They packed in the 1st 100 pages of the book into about the 1st 10 minutes. They made no mention of the father's lung condition and the fact that he was dieing until far too late in the book. It was the main reason that he couldn't run from the cannibals for too long and that he was desperately stifling his cough so as not to be caught

I did like the scene in the cannibal's house...I think they showed probably more than is described in the book in terms of the hacked off limbs

Most of the rest of it was completely wrong though. The swapping of the baby on a spit scene with the woman and child being chased and killed was a very poor decision. I personally think they shouldn't have compromised on it at all and even made the film an 18 purely for that scene alone.

I think they failed to portray the relationship between the father and son completely.

Overall i'm hugely disappointed with large aspects of the film.

I thought it may well be in the running for Oscars glory for best actor and supporting but unless Duval gets a mention (which he wont because his part was too small) then it wont. I think best cinematography is about all it can hope for.

So in terms of scene construction and visual power it is by far the best i've seen for a long time. In terms of acting it fell far short. For the father role, perhaps out of poor casting...For the son's roll...DEFINITELY out of poor casting...Surely it can't be that difficult to find a boy that can act.

Who did Robert Duval play in the movie? I missed him.

Originally posted by jaden101
Well...Just back from seeing it...After waiting patiently for quite some time.

I was worried that they wouldn't capture the starkness and bleakness of the world described in the book. I was wholly wrong about that. Visually it was perfect. What makes that all the more astonishing is that very little of it was CGI.

Unfortunately I don't think they got much else right. Robert Duval was tremendous for his small part. He was the only character I felt anything for especially when he was talking about his son.

I felt Sorry for Viggo Mortenson because he had to work with the most hopeless and unconvincing whiny little shit possible. Bring back Halley Joel Osment...All is forgiven.

The structure was all wrong. They packed in the 1st 100 pages of the book into about the 1st 10 minutes. They made no mention of the father's lung condition and the fact that he was dieing until far too late in the book. It was the main reason that he couldn't run from the cannibals for too long and that he was desperately stifling his cough so as not to be caught

I did like the scene in the cannibal's house...I think they showed probably more than is described in the book in terms of the hacked off limbs

Most of the rest of it was completely wrong though. The swapping of the baby on a spit scene with the woman and child being chased and killed was a very poor decision. I personally think they shouldn't have compromised on it at all and even made the film an 18 purely for that scene alone.

I think they failed to portray the relationship between the father and son completely.

Overall i'm hugely disappointed with large aspects of the film.

I thought it may well be in the running for Oscars glory for best actor and supporting but unless Duval gets a mention (which he wont because his part was too small) then it wont. I think best cinematography is about all it can hope for.

So in terms of scene construction and visual power it is by far the best i've seen for a long time. In terms of acting it fell far short. For the father role, perhaps out of poor casting...For the son's roll...DEFINITELY out of poor casting...Surely it can't be that difficult to find a boy that can act.

I just about agree with you on everything. The child-aspect and the father's hopelessness knowing what the future will ultimately bring just didn't carry over onto the screen, at least not like the book.

I think you nailed it in part with mentioning that the kid-actor in the film was pure shit.

They also cut out where they see the slave-drivers keeping people for food and children as catamites (aka sex-slaves), think this scene would have also added some of the grimness from the book.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Who did Robert Duval play in the movie? I missed him.

Old man wearing cardboard for shoes they meet on the road. Make-up was great, didn't recognize it was Duval until after a few minutes.

Same goes for Guy Pierce, took sometime to recognize him through the makeup.

Originally posted by The Nuul
Who did Robert Duval play in the movie? I missed him.

http://img5.allocine.fr/acmedia/medias/nmedia/18/67/04/72/19194991.jpg

This was a very hard movie to finish. Almost nothing interesting occurred. I really would have liked to see more of the world. It felt like 90% of the film took place on a never ending road in the middle of desolate country. This would have been fine if something was happening but the entire movie was nothing but a father and son walking aimlessly. The movie definitely conveyed a drab and bleak atmosphere but it also felt very confined. Visually, i never felt like i was observing a story that was taking place in a post apocalyptic world. Other than the scene where the father and son take refuge in the well stocked bunker i was bored out of my mind. Nothing of interest or consequence ever happen in the movie. I did like the message of survival and strength but even that went no where. I really liked how the movie ended but because the rest of the film was so empty it felt incredibly anti-climactic.

Oh snap! thats him, thanks. Doesnt even look like him.

Originally posted by Robtard
Old man wearing cardboard for shoes they meet on the road. Make-up was great, didn't recognize it was Duval until after a few minutes.


Indeed. Duvall had to say a few lines before I recognized that classic Duvall speaking ways...

I enjoyed his character.




Also, there was plenty of time to incorporate the catamite/food thing. I don't understand why they cut that out.

Well shit. The DVD just came today from Netflix and I was excited because I had thought that they would include the baby on the spit scene as a deleted scene, since it was filmed but just left out of the final film because the director thought it was too much.

But no, it's not even a deleted scene. The director apparently doesn't want anyone to see the scene. I wish they had gotten another director. One who was willing to show the grimness and viciousness of the world of the story, which was so important to the story and is a big reason why the movie doesn't work nearly as well as the book.

In protest, you should go out and sodomize an animal.

But I did that before I saw the movie.

Well you have learnt your lesson, doing what you did to an animal = no baby scene in The Road. Your own fault really. Punishment. You ruined it for us all!!

^

BF, your animal has made herself known, sodomize away.

*slaps Robtard * - wash your mouth out!

Now, should I buy this, or just rent it? Someone, I think Jaden, mentioned that the cinematography was rather beautiful in this film.

Just a rental imo.

it's to movies what Fallout 3 is to games, imo. It's well made, it's well acted, it's interesting at times...

Yet it's just so... Depressing.

Yeah, the film was depressing; only a slight glimmer of something resembling hope. But the book was grimmer, and also I think more hopeful. I felt like the movie played it a little safe and it lacked the prose (obviously) that makes McCarthy's book so good.

In the end, I just keep thinking the same classic thing about adaptations - "the book was better."

Unlike No Country for Old Men; in that case the film was just as good, if not better, than the novel. But I'm afraid with the Road that just isn't the case.

It's not as good as the book, imo. There are things about the book that just can not be put in to a cinematographic adaptation.

I seen this the other night,my ex girlfriend hated it beacause it was too depressing,but I loved it,was well written and every minute was entertaining,a great movie

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
This was a very hard movie to finish. Almost nothing interesting occurred. I really would have liked to see more of the world. It felt like 90% of the film took place on a never ending road in the middle of desolate country. This would have been fine if something was happening but the entire movie was nothing but a father and son walking aimlessly. The movie definitely conveyed a drab and bleak atmosphere but it also felt very confined. Visually, i never felt like i was observing a story that was taking place in a post apocalyptic world. Other than the scene where the father and son take refuge in the well stocked bunker i was bored out of my mind. Nothing of interest or consequence ever happen in the movie. I did like the message of survival and strength but even that went no where. I really liked how the movie ended but because the rest of the film was so empty it felt incredibly anti-climactic. Pretty much. LOL @ cannibalism.

i read this book story and i find it is the good movie and i will try to watch it online