As I read about the film adaptation of To Have and Have Not, I saw pure Hollywood as my viewing of this film. For me as a viewer I thought the film was very slow and boring, I was very disinterested, as I was with the novel. There was no music to help it along and I found the character interactions very strange and forced. When they say its like Casablanca, they are right. It does not evoke the Hemingway feel at all really. The characters are Hollywood/flashy and there doesn’t seem to be a real plot. I enjoyed watching the sensual interaction of Bacall and Bogart but other than that, the film does not have anything else going for it. I can see why it faired so well at the time it was made, but I can not see this being a hit in modern day film.
My View on For Whom the Bell Tolls
I really enjoyed this adaptation of a Hemingway novel. I felt that it stayed true to the real feel of Heminway’s work and developed the characters really well. The time a lotted for the movie was really long but necessary for the full story. Characters such as the betraying/mischievous character of Pablo were necessary for the plot and development of Robert Jordan as a character. As for the character of Pilar she was entirely believable as this wise Spanish woman in the mountains with such lines as
“if you think you’re beautiful, man will think you’re beautiful. I am ugly, so therefore man thinks I am ugly”
The entire essence is filled with the dialogue of Hemingway. The intracacies of his dialogue and the small moments in life to make a whole, such as the love between Robert and Maria. Maria is played by Ingrid Bergman as the truth of a 19 year old Spanish girl. She is young and naive and even explains that she does not know how to kiss “where do the noses go? Do they get in the way?” Although she knows how she feels she shows that to Robert. Robert played by Gary Cooper, is a character of a “man’s man” as in many Hemingway novels. He says he has “no time for a woman” although his expressions say otherwise.
The style of the film is written as though it could be on screen.
Film does justice; novel is long and the film is long for a film at 2 hrs 46 min.
The extensive war scene along with the comrades discussing the bridge scene is shot well with regards to the “Spanish Earth” documentary.
The character of Maria explains the torture; having her head shaved, seeing her parents shot. Robert always stops her from talking about it. She speaks of “death” in conversation with Robert in the case that they need to kill themselves, “no pain if you press quickly and firmly” which is a sort of twisted fantasy of their life together and what she would do for him.
The music of this film has a very epic feel and it is the same music throughout the film, fast for the action sequences and slow for the romance element. This film did great justice for Hemingway’s work.
My thoughts on A Farewell to Arms-adaptations
1. I thought Borzage’s version was speedy and inefficient. It was very much about love but barely any of the war. The film, for me, was cliche and really just unbelievable. I didn’t believe their love and I didn’t believe the end. In the novel I felt that their experiences were real and made sense but this was obviously a film for the time it was made, using what audiences wanted at the time, and over dramatizing their expressions.
2. (cinescope color) Selznicks version I found enjoyable at least. Even though it is really Hollywood and obviously over dramatized with music, it has very humorous moments (interactions, responses that Hemingway did not include in the novel) and I see more relations to the novel in this version than the first. Jennifer Jones is obviously too old to play Catherine Barkley to Rock Hudson’s Henry. One can definitely see that the production code has changed because their are more sensual scenes in this version, so much so that I do believe their attraction at least. (they frollick in the ocean, in his hospital bed, very suggestive sexual scenes, skin to skin). The colors and presentation of this film just make it easier on the eyes and really captured me as the viewer. This version did have uneccessary scenes for Hollywood’s dramatic element and Rock Hudson’s performance is so over the top, especially Selznick’s way of showing Henry’s internal battle as he talks to himself. He seems crazy rather than the real emotion Hemingway evoked from the novel aspect.
I can see why Hemingway didn’t like either of these versions because they don’t capture the feel of his novel at all and I think they missed the point he was trying to make. Hemingway was more of a realist in his dialogue and used picturesque scenes in his novels. Hollywood just skims the surface and doesn’t reveal the deeper meaning of the story, in love and war of the characters inner developments.
Ernest Hemingway and Hollywood
A fresh view on Ernest Hemingway’s novel’s adapted to the screen. Move through the pages top of the screen to get to each different section.
Selection of Novels adapted to film:
A Farewell to Arms (1932) and (1957)
For Whom the Bell Tolls
To Have and Have Not
Hollywood Hemingway 