MovieChat Forums > East of Eden (1955) Discussion > Two dimensional compared to the book

Two dimensional compared to the book


Now I understand it is a long story spanning over so many generations and so many characters that a movie would never be able to cover the whole epicness of the book and not give enought time to each character.

Anyway, the film is all about one character, Cal and everyone around him are just very two-dimensional in the film, I dont understand how they could make Adam Trask such a horrible wreack of a human beeing when he probably is the driving force through the whole book and also in my opinion the most interesting character in the whole story. Steinbeck's ability to make a seemingly mediocre human beeing like Adam and make us more interested about his every thought and action, make us turn every page to see if there is any light at the end of the tunnel for this tragic character, that is a true achievment. Adam Trask is never ever a twodimensional douchebag like in the movie, we understand his every action and nothing comes out of hatred or anger, he doesnt have that in him and his threatment of Cal does never really reach the boundaries where you feel that he is mean to Cal or is trying to hurt his feelings like in the movie.

Hollywood made an amazing story to a simple story about a kid who is unfairly threated while growing up and made every character around him just kind of mean and extremly unlikable. I wont even get started about Aron who simply is nothing like in the book where he is his own character with his disadvantages and truly we can see both sides of the coin with Cal and Aron.

Abra just isnt likable in the movie and they play it out a silly reason for her changing side in the relationship. In the book Aron's weakness when facing defeat turns her away from him to the stronger brother Cal, while in the movie she seems to simply go away from Aron beacause he is a douche and poor Cal is misthreated and out of empathy for Cal's weak behaviour an feeling sorry for Cal she goes after him.

This movie absolutely trashed the source material, I find it quite sad that people know more about the movie than the book.

reply

I always thought that the main thing wrong with the movie is that they left out the story of Adam and Kate, which explained why Adam acted as he did and why he never told the boys anything about their mother.

reply

What you say is true but you kind of have to forget the book; it is changed into a very 1950s story about an alienated youth. That may in some ways date it, but it also helps contextualise the movie. Dean's performance is what people respond to most, and his character (along with the way the movie is made around him).

If I have to tell you again, we're gonna take it outside and I'm gonna show you what it's like!

reply