The Impossible Film Made Possible
25 July 2002
I read Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" when I was 16, just barely old enough to not be completely corrupted by the book. The book is a simutaneously hilarious and horrifying read. Now, almost 20 years and one heart attack later, I 've lost some of my sense of immortality and find the book slightly more horrifying than hilarious. Nonetheless, a fascinating read providing a journey to a time and a place and a culture long gone.

Terry Gilliam's film is very faithful to the book and nicely captures not only the hellbent-for-self-destruction antics of Thompson and his frightening attorney, but it also captures the very essence of early-1970s Las Vegas. Typical of Gilliam's films, the production design is astounding. Actor Johnny Depp's portrayal of Thompson is as accurate as it is funny - a considerable feat considering the fact that Thompson himself was on the set, coaching and observing the actor's portrayal. If you've read the book, you know that Thompson is a man you don't want to upset.

The problem I had with the movie is that...well, it's almost too faithful to the book. When you read the book, the print is clear and clean, and you miss not a single horrifying/hilarious detail. However, the movie is hyper-realistic in that the drug-addled main characters speak in slurred mumbles and grunts...much the way you would expect someone to do after consuming an entire pharmacy's worth of drugs. One of my favorite scenes from the book is when Thompson finds his attorney in the hotel room's bathtub, listening to Jefferson Airplane....the dialog between the two is darkly hysterical. When watching the movie, it helps to have certain passages of the book memorized (as many people do) so that you can understand the dialog. I'm not sure if the sound is poorly recorded, poorly mixed, or just deliberately muddy, but the main characters are often difficult to understand. I'm sure the movie is almost exactly as the events described happened, but the genius of Thompson's writing is his ability to recount the events in clear detail. Ironically, the book is a sharp photograph while the movie is a fuzzy memory.

This is another "2% of the population movie" (see my review for "1941"). It's definitely not for everyone. Fans of the book will enjoy seeing the fear and loathing brought to vivid life, and despite some technical problems, some parts of the film are very amusing. If you've never read the book or seen the movie, you could take two approaches. You could read the book so that you can better understand what is happening in the movie, or you could watch the movie and then read the book to find out what was going on. In either case, the film needs the book more than the book needs the film.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed