October 26, 2006

"Running with Scissors."

I love the book, so I'm interested -- warily -- in the movie. But I'm incredibly annoyed at the poster. It depicts scissors, running. Has any movie poster (or book jacket) ever illustrated the title in a more idiotically literal fashion? Plus, it bothers me that the hand isn't wearing pants... especially considering the worst thing that happens in the story... which the trailer -- available at the link -- does not give you a clue about. The trailer systematically introduces us to a series of actors and tantalizes us about the sort of character each plays. Then, in the end you see that Joseph Fiennes is in the movie too. But you were never shown anything about what his character -- Neil Bookman -- does. If you happen to know, you should agree with me that that hand, running in little boy's shoes, should be wearing pants.


George said...

Burroughs' new book, Possible Side Effects, comes with the disclaimer:

“Author’s Note: Some of the events described happened as related, others were expanded and changed. Some of the individuals portrayed are composites of more than one person and many names and identifying characteristics have been changed as well.”

Doesn't it say that in all of Bob Woodward's books, too?

Pogo said...

Agreed about the repellent scissor-hand sans culottes image. Something not quite right about it.

I did not read the book, and probably won't see the film either. I've become quite weary of investing any more time reading about crazy families.

Simon said...

The poster perfectly exemplifies the problem with digital image manipulation having become so easy. So busy being caught up in the fact that they could create such an image, seamlessly, that no one stopped to ask if it was actually any good. I see so many bits of graphic design these days that really are the most horribly wretched of misbegotten creations, but yet clients still buy them out of, I have to suppose, a sense of wonder that you can do that sort of thing with computers these days.

Jeremy said...

Ann - you're right that it's a glarring ommission. The trailer makes it look like The Royal Tennenbaums, an off-beat, dysfunctional family doing whacky things but that ultimately reconcile to the benefit of everyone. But Running with Scissors is much much darker than that and Bookman is an unredeemable character. I suspect that there are going to be some disappointed/disturbed viewers on opening night.

Freeman Hunt said...

Yikes--I agree that the trailer is a bit misleading. If the movie follows the book, which I love, this is no light-hearted, dysfunctional family redeems itself type movie.

I also loved Dry, but I couldn't believe that Sellevision, possibly the worst book I've ever read, was written by the same person. Dry and Running with Scissors are autobiographical, but Sellevision is not, so perhaps that is the difference. Burroughs writes fantastically about what he knows. Can't wait for the movie.