How Does The Movie Measure Up to The Novel
It's Kind of Not like the Actual Story
It's Kind of a Funny Story is a comedy-drama film released in the United States on October 8, 2010. The film is directed by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck (directors of the 2004 award-winning Sundance Film Festival short Gowanus, Brooklyn, which then became the 2006 movie Half Nelson starring Ryan Gosling). The screenplay was adapted by Boden and Fleck from the incredibly talented Ned Vizzini's 2006 novel of the same name. The film stars Keir Gilchrist, Zach Galifianakis, Emma Roberts and Viola Davis.
The film centers around depression-riddled teen Craig Gilner who checks himself into psychiatric hospital after having suicidal thoughts. Due to renovations in the teen ward, Craig is placed in adult psychiatric and is taken under the wing of Bobby (Zach Galifianakis). The stressed-out teen attempts to endure his mandatory five days' stay without completely losing his mind. Luckily, his detainment is made more tolerable by Noelle (Emma Roberts) another teenage patient with troubles of her own.
The 2006 novel of the same name tells an amazingly compelling story about a teenager's inability to handle the pressures of the real world (or the real world he believes he should be living in) and an honest, accurate and interesting look into the mind of a young boy suffering with depression as well as an in-depth portrayal of life in a psychiatric hospital (the book itself was inspired by Vizzini's own brief hospitalization for depression in November 2004).
The movie, on the other hand, is sub-par. Does it follow the book closely,louboutin shoes replica? Yes and no. The names of many of the characters are the same, but that's about as far as the similarities go. The only three characters who seemed completely true to the novel were Muqtada -- Craig's Egyptian bed-ridden roommate, Solomon -- a former acid addict and Hasidic Jew who's main concern is people being quiet so that he can rest,christian louboutin cheap, and Jimmy -- a schizophrenic man who only yells about three phrases, the main one being "It'll come to ya!" And in case you're wondering, yes, these are the three -- albeit very interesting -- but very secondary/almost non-speaking characters in the novel. I realize that many parts of books always get omitted/altered/consolidated for more cinematic effects and time reasons, but I feel as if there were many aspects of the book that didn't need to be changed for the movie and that would completely fit within the time.
Some of the character changes/removals puzzled me. So many in the book were hilarious/interesting/added so much to the story that changing them for the movie really took away from it. For example, one of the character's in the novel is President Armelio, a hair-lipped, loud, funny "leader" of the ward, who loves playing cards with the other patients (his only contribution to the movie is as a part of Humble, the bald, hair-lipped patient obsessed with beavers (yes, the animal). The Humble character in the film is humorous, but nowhere near as funny as the character in the novel, a perverted, older, yuppie-hating, smack-talking, immediate-friend of Craig's. And the Bobby character was just odd - he didn't have such a focal point in the book and they altered his character almost entirely for the movie (I suppose for Galifianakis to have a larger role?) without necessarily rounding out the character or even making him all that funny.
Likewise, the Craig character was so much more depth in the book, and could have definitely been further explored, especially his relationship to his family (especially his sister) his friends (a BIG trigger for him in the book) and mainly the build up of his depression and his eventual consideration of suicide. (Side note: the puke gags in the movie? really? I didn't really find them funny and no, he doesn't puke all over his parents or anyone in the book. Him puking and just being in the bathroom is actually a big deal in the novel, and an important characters tic.) And the Aaron and Nia characters could have been better examined/acted, it seemed as if the Nia character was changed greatly for Zoe Kravitz, who's below-average acting ability almost made her unbearable to watch.
Lastly, a major issue: the use of humorous comedians in very un-comedic parts. Galifianakis gets a few laughs here and there, but don't see it expecting to see a Hangover-esque role from this funny man (as the trailers will try to have you believe). Another strange addition was Jim Gaffigan as the father, who was a much more humorous character in the book. (And did they really need to make it a daddy-issue thing? The fact that the parents were completely supportive and helpful in the book was one of the most interesting aspects.)
Overall, the movie itself is fairly decent. It provides a few laughs here and there and a cute boy-meets-girl love setting in an unconventional setting. Not a laugh riot (literally only "kind of a funny story", but not a bad watch. However,cheap christian louboutin, if you're looking to see it because you really loved the book and hope it's faithful, it's pretty upsetting. I'm not usually one of those "oh the book was so much better!" snobs,christian louboutin shoes replica, but in this case it's true. Maybe it's just because it's such an impeccable and beautifully written novel.
The film: 2 1/2 stars
The novel: 5 stars
Seriously, do yourself a favor and read the book,louboutin shoes replica. Even if you have no interest in the movie. It's well worth it and you'll thank yourself for it later!
Related articles:


http://arbsw.com/vb/showthread.php?p=177647#post177647

http://bbs.haomoon.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=45313

http://patelpower.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=201849&PID=250632#250632