free counter with statistics Slaughterhouse Five Movie Del Toro | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

I Don’t Care Who’s Directing — Leave Slaughter House Five Alone!
In There is no God! / Dustin Rowles

Trade News | September 4, 2008 | Comments (35)

vonnegut_slaughterhouse_five.jpgVariety has a piece up this morning, tracking the next nine years of Guillermo Del Toro’s career, as he’s pretty much locked himself into several post-Hobbit productions, after signing a first-look deal with Universal. On tap for Del Toro:

1) An adaptation of Drood, a Dan Simmons novel set to be published in February. The novel, and the movie, will be about the Charles Dickens’ survival of a train crash, which may or may not have turned him into a murderer before he wrote his final novel. Really?

2) AnotherFrankenstein adaptation.

3) Another Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde adaptation. Del Toro wants to make a more literal cinematic translation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s novel. And, finally:

4) Another stab at Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse Five. Del Toro also wants to make a more literal translation of Vonnegut’s novel, which technologically wasn’t impossible in 1972, when the original movie was released.

I haven’t actually seen the ‘72 version, but I’m of the opinion that all Vonnegut novels should stay that way — as novels — particularly this one, because I don’t think any amount of technology will allow any director — even one as talented as Del Toro — to properly capture the metafictional elements of Slaughterhouse. But then again, there’s a part of me that’s somewhat excited about the prospects of reintroducing the novel to another generation of readers, who no longer read. Eh. So it goes.


← Letterman Defends Leno | Labor Pains Trailer →



Comments

I'm game as long as the first line of the movie is:

"Listen: Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time."

Posted by: Macafee at September 4, 2008 11:40 AM

I've... never read this novel. *hangs head in shame*

It was never required of me in school, so I never got around to it. And I was a reader, too... I was never required to read Catcher in the Rye, and yet there it sits on my bookshelf, all broken binding and dog-eared pages. Same goes for all the Austens and Brontes, Edith Wharton, Ray Bradbury, Douglas Adams. And yet, I never got around to this one.

God, I feel just awful about this. Looks like a bookstore trip at lunchtime is in order.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at September 4, 2008 11:42 AM

Frankenstein (the novel) SUCKED FLAMING MONKEY BALLS. Mary Shelley couldn't write worth shit. I'm amazed that the 1930's movie was as good as it was, given the source material. This was one time where I was grateful they strayed from the book.

Posted by: BWeaves at September 4, 2008 11:42 AM

Oh between this news and my impending GREs I'm just going to start weeping now, k?

Ugh. Leave Vonnegut alone. Bastards. Contrary to popular belief, some things really are better appreciated as literature and not cinematic upchucks.

(Crawling out of obscurity twice in one day? How strange.)

Posted by: Fi at September 4, 2008 11:50 AM

The only time I thought Frankenstein was even halfway decent (let alone cool) was when Highlander: The Series did it. Basically Lord Byron was a rock star immortal (how hot is that, no really) and Shelley got the idea at one of his freaky, orgy parties.

Also, if Del Toro's doing Jekyll & Hyde, could he do a screen adaptation of the musical? With David Hasselhoff reprising his role as Jekyll/Hyde and doing the Baywatch run across the screen during the all-important "I'm gonna shoot up my crazy juice now" solo? Cause that might be interesting. Or something.

Posted by: Ava at September 4, 2008 11:51 AM


I have seen the '72 version, several times.
It shows its age a bit now, but I still think
it captures the novel pretty well.

I've read the novel several times too.

A couple of years ago I was in line someplace
and a couple of college kids were talking about
the novel and how someone should make a movie
of it. I pulled up my pants to my armpits,
adjusted my spectacles and told them that someone
already had, just before they were born.

As for the remake, although I love Del Toro, I
think I'd prefer to see it left alone. Because
if one creature showed up with eyes in a strange
place, I'd be really pissed.

Posted by: Drake at September 4, 2008 11:52 AM

Hmmmmm, well I'm intrigued. While I don't think anybody will ever fully be able to capture what exactly the fuck Slaughterhouse Five was, Del Toro's take ought to be interesting.

Posted by: Jeremy at September 4, 2008 11:56 AM

I don't know how Del Toro could improve the Frankenstein canon, since Frankenstein Unbound is absolutely the best interpretation ever and there's no way anyone could top that.

(P.S. BWeaves, I liked that novel... I avoided it [along with Dracula] for years, but when I finally did read them, I loved them.)

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at September 4, 2008 11:56 AM

"Another stab at Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five."

Impossible for him to direct, Mr. Rowles. Although not yet released to the public, I've got pretty solid evidence that Mr. Del Toro will be shipped to the Department of Alternative Fuel Development, where his girth will be renedered down and converted to a more economic source of energy.

Posted by: Skittimus Maximus at September 4, 2008 12:00 PM

Don't feel bad about it, AvB. Nobody reads all the great books--not even an English major like me. For instance, I've never read any Steinbeck. I know.

I do love and adore Kurt Vonnegut. Unfortunately he's one of those writers whose work does not translate well to film. Slaughterhouse-Five was one of the best adaptations, and it's pretty terrible.

Here are some others: Mother Night. Breakfast of Champions. Slapstick. These movies were labors of love. The directors, actors and in some cases the producers fought and sacrificed for the privilege of bringing Vonnegut to the screen. All of them are fucking dreadful movies, just miserable.

However, if it is humanly possible for a director to do justice to Vonnegut, I think Guillermo del Toro might have it in him. I love his stuff and I think he has the skill and imagination for it.

Posted by: Jerce at September 4, 2008 12:00 PM

For instance, I've never read any Steinbeck.

Same here, and I was an English major as well. And I've also never read Catcher in the Rye, but it's on my list. Of a bajillion books, but it's on there. I'd like to think that del Toro has the skill to pull off an adaptation of SH5, he's one of the most visually creative directors working today.

Good luck on your GREs Fi!

Ooh, and I loved Frankenstein and Dracula. Dracula is one of the most beautifully descriptive novels I've ever read.

Posted by: Julie at September 4, 2008 12:07 PM

I don`t remember Slaughterhouse Five having fantastical creatures and clock gears and stuff in it ... I thought that was pretty much all del Toro could do. Rather see someone like Lynch or Cronenberg try it, if anyone.

No one ever tried to shoot Cat`s Cradle? Could make for some pretty ice-9 special effects ...

Posted by: dan at September 4, 2008 12:40 PM

The guy who taught me screenwriting in grad school is the one who wrote the Slaughterhouse Five screenplay. Stephen Geller. He's absolutely out of his fucking mind. And awesome.

Posted by: insertclevernamehere at September 4, 2008 12:40 PM

Drood and Jeckyl & Hyde I'm excited about. Frankenstein is hit or miss and it all depends on the focus of the screenplay.

But Slaughterhouse Five? I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm just saying an alien zoo isn't the same as a trip down Tolkien Lane. With del Toro at the helm, it's probably going to be closer to an Invader Zim live action film (please someone do this yesterday) than Slaughterhosue Five.

That said, when I read the book again recently, I did think a straightforward, point by point adaptation could be an interesting film. The issue is the editing for all the momentary time skips and how the film probably wouldn't make money if it was 4+hours long.

Posted by: Robert at September 4, 2008 1:06 PM

Anna: To each his own. I loved "Dracula" (the novel), and hated "Frankenstein" (the novel). I loved the idea of both stories. Stoker pulled off a really neat way of telling the story (through reading other people's letters and journals, and I know there's a word for that type of novel and I can't think of it). However, Shelley just went on and on and on without really saying anything. She doesn't even say how the monster is made. Again, I think the idea of the story is great, but I would have loved to have seen someone else write it.

Posted by: BWeaves at September 4, 2008 1:11 PM

BWeaves:

it's epistolary

Posted by: bibliophile at September 4, 2008 1:20 PM

"Have you heard what they're teaching down at the high school?! 'Slaughterhouse Five'!" "*gasp*" "What a terrible book!"

"Oh yeah, that's a great book!"

"____________"

"'Slaughterhouse Five'? Yeah it's a...it's a classic!"

"Do you read much?" "Maybe in another town it's a classic"

"In any town!"


In "The Red Pony" there was a tracheotomy....on a horse. "The Grapes of Wrath" was no barrel of laughs either. Just felt thirsty the whole time we were reading it. Then we "got to" watch the movie in class when we were done. Woo-HOOOOO. FUN. I can pass on Steinbeck.

Posted by: Jay at September 4, 2008 1:27 PM

Why do all of the projects slated for del Toro start with "another" as a description?

.....oh wait, we're done with originality. Fuck.

I was supposed to see Vonnegut speak at the Indianapolis Museum of Art but he died like three days before he was scheduled. I was heart broken. I might have flown into a rage and killed some people but I was blacked out so I don't remember.

Posted by: Kash at September 4, 2008 1:45 PM

Hmmmmm, I'm a Computer Science major and I did read Steinbeck -- and Vonnegut and Salinger and Pynchon, which pretty much brings me up to modern times (people kept writing after that?). Enjoyed them all, too...even Steinbeck, although depression does run in my family and my grandpa was an Okie.

The news that Del Toro is taking on Slaughterhouse-Five does not produce the kind of stomach-knot that hearing Brett Ratner is doing anything does. Could be OK, or...not so much. Vonnegut can be boring; I would hope Del Toro could stay out of that trap.

Posted by: Che Grovera at September 4, 2008 1:51 PM

The '72 movie actually isn't that bad, but nowhere near as good as the book.

Posted by: mark at September 4, 2008 1:52 PM

Ava, I gotta give you a high five for the Highlander:TS ref! I loved that show, and I remember that episode as being highly fucked up, but awesome.

oh, and I hated Holden Caulfield with every fiber of my black little heart. I wanted him to die. hated that book.

Posted by: lizzieborden at September 4, 2008 1:57 PM

Dear Sr. del Toro,

Listen, I love your work. I think you're a fine director, most of the time (see Hellboy comment thread for clarification). However, I must humbly request that you leave Vonnegut alone. A book like Slaughterhouse 5 can never translate well to film, no matter how badly you want it to. I get that you love the book, I do too. Now please show the proper fucking respect for it and leave it the fuck alone.

If you refuse to cease and desist immediately, I will be forced to bring all kinds of hurt down on you and every member of your family, Kaizer Soze-style. I assure you that I will not be alone in doing so.

hugs & kisses,
thejodester

Posted by: thejodester at September 4, 2008 2:04 PM

FUCK

Posted by: dsbs at September 4, 2008 2:31 PM

Doesn't matter what Del Toro does to Slaughterhouse, I'll never be able to watch it. I can't stand for the version of a character I have in my head to be replaced with the face of some douche-sack actor. Never seen the 72' version, never seen any of his novels turned films, and never want to see this one. I'll cut a bitch for fucking up my Vonnegut.

Posted by: the bees knees at September 4, 2008 2:52 PM

"Have you heard what they're teaching down at the high school?! 'Slaughterhouse Five'!" "*gasp*" "What a terrible book!"

"Oh yeah, that's a great book!"

"____________"

"'Slaughterhouse Five'? Yeah it's a...it's a classic!"

"Do you read much?" "Maybe in another town it's a classic"

"In any town!"

YES!

Footloose ref FTW!! Jay, you ROCK.

Why aren't John Lithgow and Dianne Wiest in more movies these days?

I seem to recall reading "The Pearl" going into 8th grade, and liking it at the time, though I haven't the faintest idea what it was about now. Course, that was quite a long time ago. I did start reading "East of Eden" at some point, and while I have not yet finished it and yes it was depressing, at the same time it was gorgeous. His descriptions are quite striking. I wanted to move to Cali in the early 20th century.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at September 4, 2008 2:52 PM

Thanks Julie, I think I'll need it.

Posted by: Fi at September 4, 2008 3:21 PM

*puts on pretentious humanities major hat* I think Vonnegut novels fail as movies because there's no way to translate the Vonnegut voice to a visual medium. The charm of the novels, no matter how bleak the subject matter might get (I mean, Cat's Cradle was my first Vonnegut, and it gutted me at 15) there's always Kurt the Omniscient Narrator in there somewhere, and he makes everything bearable. *takes off pretentious hat*

Posted by: minorblue at September 4, 2008 4:00 PM

Introduced my teenaged daughter to "Slaughterhouse" and she loved it. She is now quickly plowing through Vonnegut's catalogue.

Posted by: James S at September 4, 2008 4:27 PM

I think I read Cat's Cradle. IT was damn good. Slaughterhouse Five is looooong, I think I read the first 20 pages, but my mind draws a blank. It was a miracle that I even finished Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides yesterday...I'm temping as a receptionist this week and have been bored outta my mind. So there you go...I know I need to read more...but I think I suffer from adult ADHD!

Posted by: ph at September 4, 2008 4:46 PM

The only director who I think may -- please note the qualification -- be up to the challenge of adapting Slaughterhouse-Five is Michel Gondry. The Science of Sleep has thus far eluded my grasp, but Joel's journey through his own memories in Eternal Sunshine immediately brought to mind Billy Pilgrim's in Slaughterhouse-Five the first time I saw it.

Having said that, if I'd been pinned on my back by a Weinstein and forced to throw up a name, this'd be the result. If it was up to me, they'd just stay the fuck away. Lord of the Rings, Catch-22, . How many more good books/dead authors/childhood memories do we have to pollute!?

Posted by: Xiphoid Process at September 4, 2008 7:09 PM

And Hitchhiker's! Don't even get me started.

Posted by: Xiphoid Process at September 4, 2008 7:11 PM

Any time, Ms. BP

oh, and I hated Holden Caulfield with every fiber of my black little heart. I wanted him to die. hated that book.

So does Chi-Mo

http://www.frankportman.com/index2.html aka Mr. Mr. T Experience

The audio's good too, including performances of some of the hapless band's songs.

Posted by: Jay at September 4, 2008 9:12 PM

Yoohoo, Mr. Del Toro, over here! Yes, hi. So, I wondering if you've seen these little books here, I think you should read them--Madeleine L'Engle wrote them, and they are just CHOCK FULL of whimsical-yet-frightening creatures, and they even have alternative dimensions in the them ... Excuse me, is that Slaughterhouse Five in your back pocket? So as I was saying I think these novels would just be perfect for your unique vision. And, I know how much you like trilogies! I think you should just put any other projects on hold until you can really invest in these. I'll check back in with you in about, oooh five years? What do you mean what's this in my hand? Nothing at all! Okay, gotta run...

Posted by: JenK at September 5, 2008 8:04 AM

Mr. Nolan! Yoohoo! Over here! Yes, hi... I was wondering if you've seen this book here? Yes, I know it's a classic, and hard to put to screen, but I really think you should consider another adaptation, you know, before someone else gets to it? Your usual cast would be just fine for this one I think...

Posted by: JenK at September 5, 2008 8:11 AM

Slaughterhouse Five. Del Toro. Is nothing sacred anymore?

Posted by: Arthur Dent at September 6, 2008 12:07 AM