The unfortunate thing about Hunter S. Thompson adaptations is that his novels were simply not meant to be movies. There are a great many things you can get away with in writing that won't translate to film, even in the care of the most brilliant and enthusiastic directors and actors available.
So the director faces a difficult conundrum before the film is even shot; do you gut the source material in order to make a good film, or do you stay true to the novel and risk turning it into an incoherent disaster? There's very little middle ground here.
Unfortunately, The Rum Diary chooses to remain as true to the original as possible, and predictably fails as a movie.
It has a few funny moments and a few interesting lines... and that's about it. The plot is shallow, as are the characters. You never reach a point where you feel fully invested in the story or the protagonists; they're all just people doing things. The 'bad guys' are bad essentially because we're told they are, and ditto the 'good guys'. The audience is never given any opportunity to really draw their own conclusions; the rich dude who wants to open a hotel is 'bad', and the drunk journalists and natives are 'good'. I was never really clear on any of the reasons though, although Johnny Depp's character seemed to be pretty sure of it. It comes off as lazy storytelling, but really it's because the director didn't want to take liberties with the book.
The cast did a good enough job with the material; Depp always does good work, and the supporting actors were up to the task as well. Although Amber Heard was out of place in the ensemble; the only reason she gets any work whatsoever is because of her apparent eagerness to walk around naked on camera. Not that there's anything wrong with that of course (ahem), but her looks exceed her acting ability by a factor of ten.
Honestly, I didn't enjoy the film very much at all. I tried to get into it in the first half, but after an hour it had completely lost me. I would only recommend it to die-hard Hunter S. Thompson fans.
So the director faces a difficult conundrum before the film is even shot; do you gut the source material in order to make a good film, or do you stay true to the novel and risk turning it into an incoherent disaster? There's very little middle ground here.
Unfortunately, The Rum Diary chooses to remain as true to the original as possible, and predictably fails as a movie.
It has a few funny moments and a few interesting lines... and that's about it. The plot is shallow, as are the characters. You never reach a point where you feel fully invested in the story or the protagonists; they're all just people doing things. The 'bad guys' are bad essentially because we're told they are, and ditto the 'good guys'. The audience is never given any opportunity to really draw their own conclusions; the rich dude who wants to open a hotel is 'bad', and the drunk journalists and natives are 'good'. I was never really clear on any of the reasons though, although Johnny Depp's character seemed to be pretty sure of it. It comes off as lazy storytelling, but really it's because the director didn't want to take liberties with the book.
The cast did a good enough job with the material; Depp always does good work, and the supporting actors were up to the task as well. Although Amber Heard was out of place in the ensemble; the only reason she gets any work whatsoever is because of her apparent eagerness to walk around naked on camera. Not that there's anything wrong with that of course (ahem), but her looks exceed her acting ability by a factor of ten.
Honestly, I didn't enjoy the film very much at all. I tried to get into it in the first half, but after an hour it had completely lost me. I would only recommend it to die-hard Hunter S. Thompson fans.