Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 7:57 am

Just finished reading this, enjoyed it. How does the movie compare?

Nobody I know seems to have seen/read both.

Randorama · Post by **Randorama** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:23 am

Focused on the aesthetics of drugs, so to speak.Hilarious, but many elements of social critic and random wackery have been removed to focus on how completely fried the two guys are. Funny, at any case.

sven666 · Post by **sven666** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:25 am

one of the few movies that are superior to the book imo.. both are great tho..

Accutron · Post by **Accutron** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 1:38 pm

Never read the book, but the movie is surreal and unpleasant, which I gather is what they were going for.

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 4:33 pm

I avoided the movie for five years or more because I just knew that they would completely fuck up a brilliant thing. Well I was wrong. The movie is brilliant. Not quite everything the book was, but awesome.

Pa

it290 · Post by **it290** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:08 pm

It's Terry Gilliam -- has he ever made a bad film? Besides, Johnny Depp was good enough in the movie that he and Hunter became buds (not an easy thing to do). Depp even helped pay for and orchestrate Thompson's recent funeral ceremony.

ArrogantBastard · Post by **ArrogantBastard** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:34 pm

Loved the book and the movie. Simply brilliant.

captain ahar · Post by **captain ahar** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:37 pm

quality stuff. wasn't aware of the Depp-Thompson friendship that followed. interesting.

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:39 pm

BTW, Thompson's book Hell's Angels was more enjoyable for me than Fear and Loathing.

Pa

sven666 · Post by **sven666** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 6:01 pm

PaCrappa wrote:BTW, Thompson's book Hell's Angels was more enjoyable for me than Fear and Loathing.

Pa

word

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 6:42 pm

More truth, less drug fantasy rambling. Which I prefer.

Pa

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:21 pm

Need to read that one. I read Fear and Loathing so long ago... I barely remember it.

ArrogantBastard · Post by **ArrogantBastard** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:28 pm

If it wasn't for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, I wouldn't have tried drugs.

it290 · Post by **it290** » Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:39 pm

Favorite Hunter S. Thompson quote:

"Anything that kills two birds, two people, or two of anything on my property is going to die one way or another."

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Sun Aug 28, 2005 6:15 pm

ArrogantBastard wrote:If it wasn't for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, I wouldn't have tried drugs.

Luckily I had a big head start on the drug trying. I read that book because I was so into acid at the time.

Pa

ArrogantBastard · Post by **ArrogantBastard** » Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:55 pm

PaCrappa wrote:Luckily I had a big head start on the drug trying. I read that book because I was so into acid at the time.

Pa

Just for clarification: I was just being sligthly sarcastic in a joking manner.

I had my start way before I ever read the book, and boy, sure was crazy times.

PFG 9000 · Post by **PFG 9000** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 11:29 am

Could somebody explain what is so great about this movie? I honestly think it's the worst movie I've ever seen. What ever happened to plot, character building, climax, etc.?

MadSteelDarkness · Post by **MadSteelDarkness** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:36 pm

PFG 9000 wrote:Could somebody explain what is so great about this movie? I honestly think it's the worst movie I've ever seen. What ever happened to plot, character building, climax, etc.?

Well, since you asked: the performances, cinematography, and script (natch, since the dialogue's all from Thompson's book) are all top notch. It's not quite up to the standards set by the book, but it did a great job of bringing an "unfilmable" novel to the big screen.

Also: plot, character building, climax, etc., are features of a Hollywood-style narrative film, which I have nothing against. But there are lots of wonderful films (Un Chien Andalou, El Topo, and way too many others to list), that simply have no use for any of the above.

Jon · Post by **Jon** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 5:17 pm

If you guys liked the Gilliam flick make sure you check out the movie "Where the Buffallo Rome." Great older movie with a pretty good vintage Bill Murray as the leading role.

Post by **undamned** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:24 pm

I've never used drugs and that movie made me feel like I was on something.
-ud

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:53 pm

Having never used drugs, how would one know what being "on something" felt like?

Pa

PFG 9000 · Post by **PFG 9000** » Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:20 pm

MadSteelDarkness wrote:Well, since you asked: the performances, cinematography, and script (natch, since the dialogue's all from Thompson's book) are all top notch. It's not quite up to the standards set by the book, but it did a great job of bringing an "unfilmable" novel to the big screen.

Also: plot, character building, climax, etc., are features of a Hollywood-style narrative film, which I have nothing against. But there are lots of wonderful films (Un Chien Andalou, El Topo, and way too many others to list), that simply have no use for any of the above.

Okay, I could grant you that, since i was too turned off by the complete lack of direction of the film to care about acting, writing, and cinematography. Seriously, I hate to just bash the movie to death since it does have a significant fan following, but I simply don't understand what the point of the film is. What am I supposed to get out of it? If there is no story and the film has "no use for" character depth, what is the goal one sets out to achieve when sitting down to watch the movie? Is it supposed to be funny, or exciting, gripping, or intriguing? (I'd imagine the latter.) I sat through the entire thing wondering why anyone in their right mind would want to subject themselves to such an, erm, experience.

I honestly do want to understand what the attraction is to this movie. But it continues to elude me. (Maybe I need to do more drugs?) And I can even appreciate Pink Floyd's The Wall, which supposedly is best watched when stoned/tripping.