Nozz After World War II, William Saroyan gambled away all his money but he preferred to resort to hack work rather than sell movie rights to any of his novels. Not after his disappointment with the original movie of The Human Comedy. Part of it was vanity. He'd wanted to direct the movie, and MGM wouldn't let him. But it's also true that Hollywood has its own point of view and it doesn't always match Saroyan's.In Ithaca, which is a remake of the Human Comedy (now that Saroyan is dead), the main story and characters are preserved, but to me it doesn't look like Saroyan. In the book's classic illustrations by Don Freeman, Mrs. Macauley is older-looking and certainly not an attractive but obvious plastic-surgery veteran like Meg Ryan. Grogan is older-looking too. The character brought most successfully to the screen is Ulysses, although he shouldn't be losing his baby teeth if, as the dialog says, he's four. He's remarkable.The visuals are, to my taste, too expressionistic. The telegraph office is huge, the roads are wide, and things are too big in general except where Marcus the faraway soldier is involved. All the scenes with Marcus are crowded. That does emphasize the contrast between Ithaca and where Marcus is, but Marcus is not remote enough. Because there are continual voice-overs from his letters, I think the audience doesn't appreciate his absence as a factor. Even the dead father isn't completely absent, and although he adds a sorrowful note, this unkillable family togetherness diminishes the philosophical message that our human condition is one of loneliness and we must actively reach out.On the one hand, I expected a dustier, less prosperous-looking Ithaca. On the other hand, I was surprised that the choice of music verged on primitivity. More Appalachian than Californian. I think that a more realistic movie might have worked better, because of the need to carry some dialogue that can, if not handled right, sound unrealistically divorced from what everyday people really say. People declaiming unrealistic-sounding dialogue amidst unrealistic-looking scenery may be fine for the stage but it's difficult to sell on the screen.Still, the movie tries to be respectful of the original. It even includes some salutes to matters that only readers of the book will fully appreciate-- such a mention of unripe apples, referencing a whole episode involving unripe apricots in the book. I hope that since Saroyan is no longer alive to object, Hollywood will continue to mine his canon.

sophronia-00027 I wanted to enjoy this film. The setting was beautiful, but the contrast between the joyful exuberance of youth and bracing reality of adulthood was stark. I believe this was what the director was working to achieve. It was one of those films in which it feels just too real, including the surreal moments. That being the case, watching was painful, and I don't feel afterward that there were sufficient merits to outweigh that pain.

reydman It is good to see that there is movies made not for sale. Movies that bring some meaning and help to think. My English is poor so I cant good express myself, but I hope main point is clear. This movie will make you think,will leave something after to think about. And it is much deeper that it looks at the first time. War is big problem, and it is still actual , right now there is so many fights, pain, destroyed families, and people avoid to think about it. It is not fun, it is not comfortable, it is better pretend that its not exist. Thats why I think this kind of films will make word a bit better. Thanks to everyone who invested to this film.

Gordon-11 This film tells the story of a fourteen year old boy, who takes up the job as a messenger to deliver telegraphs back in the dark times of the second world war.The book might have been touching, but this film unfortunately does not work. The story does not seen to go anywhere. It doesn't develop the characters, and viewers don't understand why any of the characters are at the point that they are at. Why does the boy need to take up a job? Why does the older guy drink so much? What about the other messenger? The lack of background information makes me feel distant from the characters. It takes forty minutes of screen time to deliver the second telegraph. That's way too long for a film about a boy delivering telegraphs. The film could have explored more on how the sad telegraphs affected him, so there's wasted opportunity. I watched the film for Tom Hanks, and I don't even recall him having said a word!