I just finished watching the four-part Netflix adaptation of the novel Lord of the Flies.
Each part runs about an hour.
I taught high school English, but I never taught 10th grade, which is the traditional grade in which this book is taught. I never read it in high school, but I read it on my own 57 years ago, so my memory of the original is a bit rusty.
Several times in the last 30 years I have seen the black and white film released in 1963, and I have always thought it a very fine version of the book.
TRAILER
A few thoughts:
The acting is first-rate. Piggy and Jack are especially good, but all the boys do remarkable jobs.
The casting is "diverse." In the book, the war that is going on is never named, but is assumed to be WWII.
The war is never named here either, so we as viewers are not confined to a particular time period as far as imagining who would be at an expensive private school for boys in England or in one of the colonies in the Pacific.
At any rate, the diversity is not distracting.
The authors of the script have added some backstory for Jack and Ralph, and especially for Simon.
I do not think these additions were especially helpful, but they do not generally detract from the film.
Spoiler alert:
The exception to that is the backstory on Simon. In this version, Simon has been keeping a diary in which his relationship with Jack plays a prominent part. The diary is found in the luggage that has been scattered around the island during the plane wreck, and Jack keeps it and reads it to himself.
Recall that none of that happens in the book. The diary entries reveal that Jack and Simon were both left at the school during vacations by negligent parents.
Simon admires Jack, a natural athlete and leader, very much and enjoys their time together. Simon is apparently something of an outcast during the regular school year and appreciates the attention that Jack directs his way.
When school resumes and Jack's friends return, he drops Simon like a stone and Simon is hurt by it.
There is nothing in the diary that is sexually suggestive at all. There is a moment on the island early on in which Simon helps Jack paint his face for the pig hunt.
I believe the writers want us to see Simon's admiration and natural "crush" on a popular, charismatic boy as evidence that he is gay.
That's not in the book and it adds nothing to the story, but it was not so overt as to be bothersome.
The film does not do a good job of conveying the scene in which Simon hears and speaks to the pig head on a stick. The head does not get to say the great lines about how the Beast is not an external threat but rather resides inside all the boys, and Simon knows the truth.
Also, the pace is quite slow. The story takes its own sweet time getting told.
But the film does a fine job of conveying the depravity that seizes control on the island. It is truly horrifying.
It's a well-done version that I will not watch again, but I'm glad I took a look at it.
Each part runs about an hour.
I taught high school English, but I never taught 10th grade, which is the traditional grade in which this book is taught. I never read it in high school, but I read it on my own 57 years ago, so my memory of the original is a bit rusty.
Several times in the last 30 years I have seen the black and white film released in 1963, and I have always thought it a very fine version of the book.
TRAILER
A few thoughts:
The acting is first-rate. Piggy and Jack are especially good, but all the boys do remarkable jobs.
The casting is "diverse." In the book, the war that is going on is never named, but is assumed to be WWII.
The war is never named here either, so we as viewers are not confined to a particular time period as far as imagining who would be at an expensive private school for boys in England or in one of the colonies in the Pacific.
At any rate, the diversity is not distracting.
The authors of the script have added some backstory for Jack and Ralph, and especially for Simon.
I do not think these additions were especially helpful, but they do not generally detract from the film.
Spoiler alert:
The exception to that is the backstory on Simon. In this version, Simon has been keeping a diary in which his relationship with Jack plays a prominent part. The diary is found in the luggage that has been scattered around the island during the plane wreck, and Jack keeps it and reads it to himself.
Recall that none of that happens in the book. The diary entries reveal that Jack and Simon were both left at the school during vacations by negligent parents.
Simon admires Jack, a natural athlete and leader, very much and enjoys their time together. Simon is apparently something of an outcast during the regular school year and appreciates the attention that Jack directs his way.
When school resumes and Jack's friends return, he drops Simon like a stone and Simon is hurt by it.
There is nothing in the diary that is sexually suggestive at all. There is a moment on the island early on in which Simon helps Jack paint his face for the pig hunt.
I believe the writers want us to see Simon's admiration and natural "crush" on a popular, charismatic boy as evidence that he is gay.
That's not in the book and it adds nothing to the story, but it was not so overt as to be bothersome.
The film does not do a good job of conveying the scene in which Simon hears and speaks to the pig head on a stick. The head does not get to say the great lines about how the Beast is not an external threat but rather resides inside all the boys, and Simon knows the truth.
Also, the pace is quite slow. The story takes its own sweet time getting told.
But the film does a fine job of conveying the depravity that seizes control on the island. It is truly horrifying.
It's a well-done version that I will not watch again, but I'm glad I took a look at it.
