Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events

For the longest time I didn't want to see this movie based on the review of my son, who has read all 11 books as I have, and enjoyed them immensely - which here means "quite a great deal."

However, I finally watched the movie over the weekend, and I have to say that my son has fallen into what can only be described as the "Trap of the Nearsighted Purist" or the "Purist Trap of Nearsightedness" or the "Myopic Purist Pitfall." Something like that - if you can think of a better name, please let me know. Suffice it to say that the condition I'm describing is known to everybody: You read the book; you expect the movie to be just like the book.

But it never is. It can't be. For two reasons: 1) the FORMATS are incompatible. There is no way to turn a 150-800 page novel into a movie (although I must admit that the Harry Potter series does a fairly good job of it!) and 2) in NO WAY will a director's vision be the same as yours.

Break it down: When you read a book you have a mental image of the whole thing - characters, events, background, action, etc. When you see a movie all the visuals are laid out before you. Movie watching is much more passive than book reading, but the very nature of the medium.

Ergo, it seems obvious to me that, while there are many many ways in which to judge each medium, one of them is How well does the creator establish the mood? In a book it's the words chosen; in a movie it's the visual&sound.

Don't worry, I'm getting back to Series of Unfortunate Events, just be patient! The movie established a dark, dreary tone equal to that of the book - with the sets that at times looked like stage sets - there was a (dare I say it?) Tim Burton-esque feel to the entire movie, and while purists like my son panned it for its differences from the book, I would like to extol the virtues that it shares with the book, namely the tone (setting) and the narrative voice (as spoken by Jude Law) and the characters - and yes, you can't mention this movie without mentioning Jim Carrey.

In fact, let me tell you the main points why my Purist son hates this movie. He told me 1) this movie was nothing but a Jim Carrey vessel, i.e. there was more Carrey than the kids, 2) Klaus didn't wear glasses, which is integral to the character (he's right on that point - the entire 5th book depends ENTIRELY on Klaus's glasses), 3) Sonny is too old - she's supposed to be an infant with only one wisp of hair, and 4) the plot was completely collapsed and inverted as they tried to shove three books into one two-hour movie.

S'okay, still trying to shake off my Book-Purist Motifs myself, I had my reservations, but I have to admit that this film isn't as MUCH of a Carrey vessel as I had supposed. Sure, he plays multiple characters, but the other characters have only about 10 lines at the most. Sonny has to be a toddler; there's no way possible you can film an eighteen-month-old baby doing the things that Sunny is supposed to do. Klaus's glasses, well, we'll just have to see how they deal with that issue in the next movie . . .

and yes, it was obvious that they pushed three books into two-hours, and even if you hadn't read the books you would still feel that there's something missing here, such as there was not enough character development with the orphans' other relatives (which was good for me for the last 1/3 of the film - because I have a chronic revulsion to Meryl Streep, but that's an entire essay in and of itself!). Also, the plot was a little too fragile, too harried.

Basically, I think it wouldn't hurt to watch the film then read the books. Certainly it might color your book-reading, augment your visuals - you won't see Count Olaf or Violet with your inner eye, you'll see those actors in those roles, certainly, and in that aspect you will have cheated yourself of one of the many pleasures of true book enjoyment. However, you will probably enjoy the story much more, with the colorful sets and sounds wafting through your mind, especially having given a good sonorous voice to the omnipresent narrator.

Like I said: Books vs. Movies - each have their advantages and disadvantages. They can be enjoyed together or independently, but you can't have a preconceived notion that one is going to reflect the image you made of the other. If you do, then that would be very unfortunate indeed.