If there’s one thing every person should realize when
watching an adaptation, it’s that “the book is better than the movie.”
This is always true. Always. When a movie is based on a book, it is just
a visual incarnation of an established story. Movies are also limited
in the content that they can show in a set amount of time, which
compromises details from the story. That being said, the movie “Jack
Reacher” does a pretty good job of bringing one of my personal favorite
action heroes to the big screen.
The movie “Jack Reacher” is based on the novel “One Shot” by Lee
Child. This novel is one of many in Child’s series featuring Reacher as
the main protagonist. I have seen the movie multiple times since it came
out, and I have always liked it, but recently I found myself prompted
to read the book for the first time.
If I had one piece of advice for people It would be to read the book first.
The book is phenomenal, and the movie is a great supplement to it. I
wish I had read the book before seeing the movie, because I would have
enjoyed both of them so much more.
I have read at least 10 of Lee Child’s other Jack Reacher books.
They’re all good, but some of them are excellent. After reading “One
Shot,” it was clear that this novel was in the latter category. I
understand, now, why they chose to adapt this book into a movie — it has
one of the best narratives of any Jack Reacher book I’ve read.
It was hard to judge the book accurately, because I knew a lot of the
main plot points from seeing the movie. “One Shot” was still definitely
worth the read, though. There are some notable differences between the
book and the film: Characters were missing from the movie, and the book
is set in the heartland of Indiana, whereas the film took place in the
city of Pittsburgh. Other than that, the main ideas of the story
remained the same.
I thought the movie did a good job of delivering a streamlined
version of the story that still encompassed all the integral plot
points. Overall, there were very few issues I had with the movie. The
only things I was not entirely comfortable with were the way some of the
characters didn’t match their descriptions in the book, and how some of
the modified lines Reacher spouted didn’t sound entirely like something
his character would say.
If you are familiar with the book series, you would know that Jack
Reacher is described as a rugged, 6-foot-4 man with dirty blond hair and
blue eyes. This is why Tom Cruise being selected as Reacher was a
surprise to me. He is far too short and doesn’t have the right hair or
eye colors. When I re-watched the movie after reading the book, I was pleasantly
surprised at how well Tom Cruise embodied the characteristics of
Reacher, despite his lack of physical resemblance to the character. I’m
OK with him playing Reacher because Tom Cruise was one of the people who
was responsible for the creation of the movie in the first place, so if
he hadn’t played Jack Reacher there probably wouldn’t have been a movie
at all.
Even though the book and movie each have a leg to stand on, watching
the movie in tandem with the reading the book is a far more satisfying
way experience what may be Lee Child’s greatest Jack Reacher story.
The plot is serpentine enough to be absorbing, but not so complicated
that you can’t see each reveal ahead of time. The overarching theme —
justice is the best, Jack Reacher administers justice, Jack Reacher is
the best — never bogs down the story, nor do the causes for that story
existing in the first place, which are, in retrospect, thin, at best.
(At worst: filament-y.) The set pieces are distinguished, the combat
admirable.
But what’s most surprising about an unpretentious, engaging superhero
movie two years down the line is that it would somehow feature a
significant chunk of the talent that shined through some of 2014’s
highest-profile films. Let’s go name by name.


No comments:
Post a Comment