| Reviews: |
|
Eileen & David (USA: NC) (2006/08/17):
The book is (like most) soooo much better than the movie which was also good. Its got all the fantasy & adventure of the movie but it has hilarious comments on the history of the original story and the background. It's on my 'oh my gosh, you haven't read it yet? here borrow mine.' list.
Brookeworm (Canada) (2007/10/14):
This doesn't happen often, but I have to honestly say that I think the movie is better. But then, in some ways it seems like it's supposed to be. The book contains a frame to the narrative that alleges that it is William Goldman's abridged version of a satirical novel writen by the novelist S. Morgenstern. This, of course, is fiction. There is no S. Morgenstern and Florin and Guilder have never existed. But the point is, if Goldman's novel is supposed to be "the good parts version" of Morgenstern's original novel, than Goldman's movie (he wrote the screenplay) is supposed to be "the good parts version" of his book.Not that the book isn't worth reading, especially to someone who is a fan of the movie. It gives all the back stories and little details that just can't fit in the movie, like exactly what Inigo's father went through to make the six-fingered sword and how Fezzek just happened to have a holocaust cloak on him when they needed it to dress up as the flaming Dread Pirate Roberts. And there are some ways in which the book outdoes the movie. Buttercup, for instance, is a rather stupid, whiny, child of a female lead in the book - at least at first. But she is given character growth and becomes more self-assured (although still childish), whereas in the movie she is simply the goal of Westley's big adventure. Fezzek get's much deeper characterization in the book as well, but since he doesn't really have a big goal to strive for, he is simply another member of the adventure party in the movie. Of course, one can't simply ignore the frame that Goldman sets up (and reinforces with contant asides and interuptions) as being simply about his ficticious abridgement. It is full of commentary about the nature of abridgement itself, literary scholarship, satire, the publishing industry, and even contemporary issues like the state of child rearing in the 1970s. Unfortunately there isn't room to go into all of this in a review, but it is another reason I recommend reading the book.
Amy (USA: IN) (2008/03/23):
This book is Awesome!!! I loved it so much I almost wore it out! lol.
|
