MovieChat Forums > Captain Corelli's Mandolin (2001) Discussion > How could de Bernières let this happen?

How could de Bernières let this happen?

posted 21 years ago by punctured_bicycle
24 replies | jump to latest

I had the misfortune to see this film before reading the book. I thought it was an alright movie, y'know, nothing special, but okay. Then I read the book.

I just don't understand how they could even call this film Captain Corelli's Mandolin!!?? Because the book is so incredibly different it's just ridiculous! The film eliminates so many of the important characters, like Carlos and Valiserios, and from about halfway through, the story is just nothing like the book. For example, in the book, Mandras does not save Corelli, he comes back after the war having turned into an overweight misogynist who tries to rape Pelagia. And of course, Dr Iannis dies, and Corelli doesn't come back until they are both old.

The film misses out what I consider to be essentially the whole point of the book - the fact that Pelagia spends her whole life waiting for this man who loves but who she believes is dead, and as a result, what was once a promising life is wasted. It's the saddest thing you can think of, and the film just ignores this for a *beep* 'Hollywood' ending.

Stupid, stupid, stupid. Read the book, it's fantastic. Just disregard the film as an adaptation of the book, and think of it as a film. Because that's all it is.

[–] foxybitch 21 years ago

I AGREE!! I haven't seen the movie, but generally avoid anything with Nicolas Cage in it. I read the plot summary for the movie and saw that it was nothing close to the book. The book is such a beautiful story and the prose is just amazing. I've recommended it to anyone that will listen and will not see the movie.

[–] combat_claire 21 years ago

I had read the book before I saw the movie and having rented it on DVD we all sat down to watch what we were certain would be a cinematic classic - I had somehow missed all the reviews. It started badly when we saw Nic Cage had been cast as Captain Corelli - we need someone subtle and handsome not an oaf who makes his cash in movies like Conair - most parts of the movie were cut out to make it shorter, the ending was totally ruined and the missed out the whole of Carlos' story about his homosexuality which kind of ruined the story of the soldiers.
After the movie had finished I felt so disappointed like I had been kicked in the guts.

Claire xx

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] War_Emblem 21 years ago

de Bernieres got his money from both the book sales and the movie. I'm betting he really didn't care what they did to it, but yes, the book was much better. I don't get why in the movie, Lemony was adopted by Pelagria. She was barely in the book, atleast at the end anyway.

[–] macpro75 21 years ago

I never read the book, but I just saw the movie. Lemoni was adopted by Pelagria because her mother was killed by the nazis. It was in the scene where Pelagria runs with the child into her house and then hears a gunshot. If I was following the characters correctly, there was no one else left in that family to care for Lemoni.

I really enjoyed the movie, having never read the book, but I do have to agree about Nicolas Cage's accent! You've all inspired me to go get the book and read it!

[–] hihedge 21 years ago

The only good thing about this film was that it changed the utterly ridiculous ending to the book. In the book (spoilers ahead), although Correlli is deeply in love with Pelagria, when he returns after the war he sees her with a child in her arms, assumes she is married, has forgottem him, and leaves to return many years later when they are both v v old! He never even bothers to find out from other locals what has happened. Talk about contrived. Up to then I was enjoying the story, but that ending...doh!

As to the film, atrocious accents, acting only slightly better, no chemistry between the leads (count how many times Pelagria stops looking sulky during the whole film - none), a romance shorn of all interest, and finally a full scale sea-borne invasion by the Germans at that stage in the war. I think not.

How could de Bernieres let this happen? Money. But good luck to him. We are the losers wasting precious hours of our life on this second rate twaddle.

[–] Krustallos 21 years ago

I think the German invasion is actually a matter of historical record.

[–] gabymarkz 20 years ago

completely and absolutelt right about the accent!!!!! Oh my god!, I couldn't even finish watching the movie, because of all the stupid accents!!

[–] ladyk-4 20 years ago

Could someone give me the name of book or is it the same as the movie?

[–] neil_mc 21 years ago

The film states "This film is based on the novel...". It doesn't state "This is a true story". Nobody should really be expecting a direct transfer from novel to film - it just isn't possible.

FA Cup Winners '04

[–] Krustallos 21 years ago

1. I bet de Bernieres cried all the way to the bank.

2. One of the reasons there had to be changes is that the book tells a series of utterly outrageous lies about the Greek Resistance (ELAS) and the behaviour of the Communists. This enraged the islanders of Cephalonia so much that they would not allow the film to be made on their island unless corrections were made. This for example is the reason Mandras helps Corelli - the Resistance fought *with* the Italians against the Germans in real life whereas in the book de Bernieres has them standing by and even 'finishing off' wounded Italians after the massacre. There are numerous German, Greek and Italian sources disproving de Bernieres' account, including the man who was the model for Corelli, Amos Pampaloni. Pampaloni actually joined ELAS after surviving the massacre and fought with them for a year.

3. In fact therefore the film is nearer to being a true story than the book.

4. I agree that it was scandalous to take Carlo out and the reason Madden has given for changing the ending (it would have been too much of a jolt to go that far forward in time) is a crock - has the man never heard of a flashback framing device?

5. Also agree about the accents - incidentally Cruz' "greek" is worse than Cage's "italian".

[–] susan-andrews780 20 years ago

1 This is not the film that de Bernieres agreed to: It was to have been written by Richard Curtis and directed by Roger Mitchell. Mitchell had a heart attack and Madden took over - the only person who had approval rights over the director was Nicholas Cage

2 The Kefallinians would have gone ahead and made either version of the film - they made a handsome profit from having the island virtually taken-over during the summer of 2000. The only parts they refused to play were those of German soldiers - I know several who were 'extra' ELAS members, and several who remember some of them being as described in the book. Remember that there are two sides to most stories, both equally true.

3 Can you tell me how an altered version of a fictional story can be any more 'true' than the original fiction?

4 I agree totally - in the book it was Carlo's story that I found most compelling.

5 I think that I am the only person I know who thought that Cage was actually quite good as Corelli (it should have been John Cussack though) - Cruz as Pelagia was dreadful. John Hurt as Iatre Iannis was superb!

Proof that God has a sense of humour - George W is President.

[–] Krustallos 19 years ago

I am the only person I know who thought that Cage was actually quite good as Corelli (it should have been John Cusack though)

I tell you who I saw in the role, while I was reading the book - Saul Rubinek (Donny in "Frasier" - Daphne's lawyer fiancee). Not actually Italian, but what the hey? He fits de Bernieres' physical description much better, as I recall it.

"I don’t like the term torture. I prefer to call it nastiness."

Donald Rumsfeld

[–] mepieke 20 years ago

If you see it in german, the accents are acceptable, and plausible.

The Germans lost a lot of goodwill due to their actions in WWII, mainly against partisans, but also civilians. Only recently, due to the Greek soccer trainer, the 2nd King Otto (the first Greek king was also Otto), has this changed.

[–] sandywatson 20 years ago

I've just finished reading the novel this afternoon. I'd bought it for a 'holiday read' for a recent vacation in Corfu and finished it when I got back home. It's an utterly beautiful book, and now, after reading all the threads here, I'm almost afraid to see the movie. (It's already ordered from Blockbuster's though, so I will see it).

It's such a shame when a movie kills a novel that's already sunk into your heart and mind. And while I know movies never truly live up to the books...it's a shame when the story is ripped up and utterly changed and sanitised for 'Hollywood'. After all, the book was a best seller, surely that means the story is loved, so why not tell it as is as best you can??? Why tear it apart and change it's meaning?

Here's what Roger Ebert says about the movie: "What we get is kind of a condensed version of some of the sights and sounds of the novel, without the heart, the spirit and the juicy detail. The movie seems to exist on some sort of movie stage and not in the real world. Curious, because it looks right. Dr. Iannis' house and its surrounding hillside looked uncannily like the scene I imagined while reading the novel, and the locations have a color the characters lack."

[–] Identification 20 years ago

Hey, I saw the movie before I read the book, and while the book was much, much better than the movie, I liked the movie's ending more--- the ending in the book was so disappointing! I preferred him coming back merely a few years later, with them both young and hopeful, than him coming back after a full two generations have passed and they're both old.

But I repeat, the book is much better in everything else.

[–] turtlesforever-1 20 years ago

the book happens to be one of my favourite books ever. i just thought that nic cage was terrible - his italian accent just didn't do it for me, and penelope cruz -was a nightmare. i mean, first of all, pelagia is supposed to be quite plump, and she's supposed to be greek and not spanish. then the way she sulks throughout the movie - has this woman ever read the book? has she got any idea what the character she was supposed to play was supposed to be like?

apart from the historical changes - which i think would not have been that bad, had the script somehow reflected the books way of storytelling - the way they changed whatever happened to the characters.....i found the book a real emotional roller coaster ride, whereas the movie was flat and boring.

i wouldn't recommend the movie to anyone - and for those of you who never read the book - go and get it!

[–] Dark_Shines 20 years ago

apperently there are two versions of the movie, as I am absolutely sure that I've seen a movie, where he comes back when they're old and have grey hair and where Mandras attempts to rape Pelagia...

[–] susan-andrews780 20 years ago

You may have seen an early cut - I remember reading an interview with Christian Bale where he spoke of his revulaion at filming the rape scene. I hope some-one will do a re-edit or something, and show us the version which is closer to the book.

Proof that God has a sense of humour - George W is President.

[–] BlindLemonPye 20 years ago

Having read CCM and De Bernieres' three South American novels, there is one thing i'm totally certain of: he can't write a satisfactory ending to save his life. A real shame as much of his writing is truely stunning. The film, cinematography aside, was one of the worst i've ever seen, a true Hollywood 'video nasty'....Dumbing down has seldom looked so dumb, and left me feeling so down...

[–] honeybear13 20 years ago

I watched the film before reading the book, having bought it in the sales (ha), and thought it was okay, nothing special. Sure, the scenery was fantastic because it's Greece, one of the most picturesque countries in the world. The only part I thought was good was when Pelagia was getting all embarassed when Iannis was explaining the meaning of love to her. But then I read the book and was utterly captivated. It conveyed the true meanings and cold heartlessness of war across, and I literally could not put it down...in fact I read it until 3 in the morning.
Poor Louis de Bernières. Nine words - READ THE BOOK AND DON'T GO NEAR THIS MOVIE.
And Cage's accent? Ha.

[–] aura321 20 years ago

I agree with those who hated the book's ending.
It ruined a fantastic book for me.. it's so needlessly sad to have their lives and happiness wasted over a presumptive folly of the supposedly deeply in love Corelli! Nevertheless, the book was fantastic - charming, sad, tragic, comical - and much better than the movie.
All said and done, I suppose as a linguistic device the book's ending worked perfectly.. I felt like Pelagia.. hoping and waiting page after page as the years passed wondering why he hadn't come back! >_<

[–] fantasia_lives 19 years ago

I think it's an amazing book. And I love the ending, actually. I'm sick to death of reading saccharine endings. And I know that these books aren't meant to be real life, but I think that it's a more realistic ending too. I also think it shows that their love lasted, and we don't know if it could have done otherwise. I don't want to see the film. I'm actually scared to because I love the book so much (I cried solidly for the last third of it) and I agree, aura, the reader feels like Pelagia. Love it. Top book.

"It turned into a... splodgy, squelchy thing and squidged off down the corridor." Arnold Rimmer

[–] HashRouge 18 years ago

I went on holiday to Spain a few weeks ago with my Mum, and rememeber us having a long conversation about how much we hated the ending to CCM. However, I re-read it last weekend, and have to go back on my words - the ending is actually very good. Sure, its tragic, but there is happiness in the end.

Gene Hunt: She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot