If you take the entire original book "Genius Editor" by A. Scott BergerConverted into video, then the most appropriate should be adapted into HBO drama. Each episode focuses on a single writer, preferably a script written by Aaron Sorkin, who manages to clean up all the ramblings. Just look for David Fincher as a director - it could be The Social Network in the '20s. The protagonist Max Perkins is known as the "perfect editor" of that era, and the writers he has collaborated with include Sherwood Anderson who wrote "Small Town Freak", and is known as the best writer after Mark Twain in the history of American literature. Humorist Lin Lardner, Pulitzer Prize-winning JP Edmund Wilson, one of the most prominent American literary critics of the first half of the century, along with Douglas Southall Freeman, Alice Roosevelt Longworth, Hamilton Basso, Nancy Hull and Joseph Stanley Pennell… Easier way to introduce it: He was the one who discovered Hemingway and Fitzgerald. But the most dramatic part of Perkins' editing career was his work with author Thomas Wolfe, which included the publication of two manuscripts, "Angel, Looking Home" and "Time and River." This is probably why in the whole book, John Logan ("The Aviator", "Gladiator", "Hugo"), a famous writer in the world, will take this story out and tell it separately. Thomas Wolfe is a lunatic. Jude Law, who plays him, can tell you that as soon as he shows up. He is the idol of "Beat" writer Jack Kerouac. He is used to writing against the refrigerator. He is unrestrained, loud, and talkative. beat. Heterogeneous. That's one of the things that keeps you excited about him. There is a small climax not long after the opening of the film. Wolff, eager to get affirmation, was rejected several times by the New York publisher, and he planned to put the manuscript into the hands of Max Perkins, who discovered Fitzgerald. ——After all, Fitzgerald's manuscript was not very accessible to other editors except Perkins at the beginning. In the end, Perkins himself told Thomas Wolfe, "We intend to publish your work." It was more than just a notification. This statement by Perkins provokes a complex storyline. These two people have very different personalities: Thomas Wolfe acts weird and impulsive, and can't stop writing, Max Perkins is restrained and restrained; Thomas Wolfe has been looking forward to such recognition for a long time, and after listening It was so exciting that I fainted. Max Perkins happened to be a workaholic who was responsible to the author more than his professional duties, and at the same time, they also needed their other half by their side from time to time; Thomas Wolfe was a A genius full of flaws, what Perkins has to do is to show his best side. The task is arduous and the process is sweet... There are endless discussions, the background of the big era, the madness, the misunderstanding, and the Conflict and, at the end, a heartbroken parting. The Chinese translation of "Good Will Hunter" is somewhat similar to this film. It must not only be an editor or a teacher who subdues a genius "problem boy", but he must also be an emotional counselor and a psychological counselor. He was his inspiration at first, then his spiritual support, and finally, he couldn't help but think of him as his everything.
A more appropriate analogy, or another, more daring way to do it, might be -- let's assume it's a movie that can be made into a film that looks like "Farewell My Concubine" (although these two are not the same thing). ). At least it's about the same size. This includes the process of entering the play - madness - parting. Perkins read Wolfe's manuscript and thought it was a work of genius; Wolfe carried three boxes of "Time and River" manuscripts, which seemed to have 5,000 Pages, Perkins felt that if they were to be published, they would have to be deleted in large sections. They had to work day and night together on the matter, discussing revisions page by page, for a total of nine months. into play. They are playing themselves to the fullest, making the most of what they do. In a movie where the protagonist's intentions are clearly explained in just a few shots, Jude Law's face always has a kind of "I want to become a character" energy, and then the two people started a "Not crazy, not crazy" Survival" unusual experience. You have to see Thomas Wolfe's lover, Mrs. Bernstein, in the editorial office, swallowing drugs and trying to kill herself to know how crazy these two are - they don't come back because of their work and their partners even ate it vinegar. Of course it was a pure friendship between an editor and a writer, but there was a deep reason behind the attachment the film revealed: Perkins always wanted a son, and Wolff missed his Father, and then they met each other, and both men made up for this lack of affection. At the end of the thick book cooperation, Perkins, who didn't listen to jazz very much, ended up stepping on some wear-resistant leather shoes with Wolff in a jazz bar and playing the beat on the ground. climax. In that era when you didn't need to ask the author "how many fans do you have on your public account now", the word "unique" alone was enough to justify keeping them, Perkins' hard work on Wolff could It is logically beyond the duty of an editor. The level of intimacy between the two makes both their partners jealous—a relationship like this is a screenwriter's golden fodder, because it's easy to start with, and the causes are simple, but there are many similarities as it progresses. There are rich elements, as long as you explain the reason for the mutual attraction clearly in the front, things will happen naturally like a snowball, bringing infinite rewards to this story line. But here's the crux: The amount of information generated by this relationship is too great. The editor's relationship with the writer; the relationship between husband and wife and subsequent conflicts; and a series of background questions to be addressed: what kind of special feelings people had about the story during the Great Depression; important guests Fitzgerald and What kind of state was Hemingway in at the same time? Plus, it's a time-spanning story, they don't talk about it in an office or a train station so obsessively once or twice, it's a story over a certain period of time (Mrs. Bernstein, played by Nicole Kidman, says , himself was snubbed by Wolff for two years). The expression of time span is critical. If the time span could be better expressed, the movie would be better. Based on these layered descriptions, if "Genius Catcher" is Everything is handled incisively and vividly, and it may take three hours to resolve the hatred. Take a look at the director's background: Mike Grandage, who previously directed King Lear and The Marriage of Figaro, is the artistic director of London's Donmar Warehouse Theatre Company (Sam Mendes was formerly in this position) , won the Tony Award. This is his film debut. He may also have some habit of stage expression, we are seeing the lighter side. It's not too heavy, and there are always some superficial tastes where the soul collides, but it is also very pleasing to the eye. After all, it was shot by a British director with a few British actors, and there is no lack of elegance. At the same time, it's funny and makes it easy to watch, even if you don't know anything about the setting of the movie.
You may pay more attention to your male god Colin Firth and Jude Law, who seems to have a hair transplant. After a few scenes in the movie, the two of them interacted, especially if you want people to watch more. This passage: Perkins, played by Colin Firth, reads Wolff's manuscript, and at this time, you can hear Jude Law as a Londoner specially trained in the American South (North Carolina State Appalachian Mountains) accent, read:
…a stone, a leaf, an unfound door; of a stone, a leaf, a door. And of all the forgotten faces. Which of us has known his brother?
Which of us has looked into his father's heart? Which of us has not remained forever prison-pent? Which of us is not forever a stranger and alone?
(Stones, leaves, a door not yet found; among the stones, among the leaves, within the door. After all the forgotten faces, who ever really knew his brother?
Who has penetrated into his father's heart? Who has not been forgotten in an eternally closed cell? Who is not born alienated and alone until death? )
This is the beginning of "Angel, Looking Home," which Perkins decided to publish in 1927. Ten years later, they parted ways due to some disputes and misunderstandings. Corresponding to this opening recitation, which I cannot help but recall several times, is a letter from Wolff to Max Perkins at the end of the film, also in that southern accent:
I want to write this down...I'm afraid I won't have the chance...
I want to tell you that no matter what happens, my feelings for you will never change. It will be like the day in November when you picked me up at the pier and we climbed to the top and felt the warmth, the glory, and the power of life together.
your forever friend tom
And just like that, they said goodbye. into play. Madness. parting.
View more about Genius reviews
