Never Let Me Go (2010)
12A - 103 min - Drama | Romance - 11 February 2011 (UK)
Synopsis - As children, Ruth, Kathy and Tommy, spend their childhood at a seemingly idyllic English boarding school. As they grow into young adults, they find that they have to come to terms with the strength of the love they feel for each other, while preparing themselves for the haunting reality that awaits them
Director: Mark Romanek Writers: Kazuo Ishiguro (novel), Alex Garland (screenplay) Stars: Keira Knightley, Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfiel
My Thoughts - The movie begins with 28 year old Kathy reminiscing about her childhood and the life after she left the school. Set in a time where the human life span has averaged to a 100 years due to vital organs now being available for life-threatening diseases they have the donors to thank. Specifically made to cater to these needs, these donors that everybody would like to think don’t exist. Like a dirty little secret, they don’t want to go back to the days where they were told that it was impossible to find a donor, now they have everything at the ready, so they would rather accept that these donors are not human beings, that they are not natural instead of going back to those difficult times.
It’s a chilling world that the author has thought up, and one that I can admire him for creating. World building is just the starting point though, of course you have over an hour worth of a movie to go on and it needs to live up to the great concept. Never Let me Go did a good enough job. It’s not as dark as the book, and maybe that’s because the director and writer realised the audience would find it hard to accept and come to terms with the bleakness that is portrayed without hesitation in the book, without forgiveness. I guess they were catering to people like me who found it hard to accept the bleakness of the book, from that prospect I don’t blame them. Yet I can’t help but say that I wanted them to dare to though, to go for it. Portray the movie in the bleakest way as they could, shock us and make us vent in anger, because maybe seeing it first hand on screen would make me accept those very moments that I found hard to grasp in the book. Just a thought.
They knew the basics. They would never be able to conceive. That they had to stay healthy, avoid eating anything that could potentially damage their system in the long term., avoid cigarettes and alcohol purely because they would have to one day donate their organs and most likely after their third donation be complete. i.e DIE
I finished the book and it wasn't working for me, *shall explain in my review* and after watching the trailer when I got this sudden emotional response out of nowhere whilst I shed not one tear when reading the book I already knew. The movie was for me. It was. The book did help for one thing, and this is why I would always recommend you to read the book first. First of, I already knew the characters as best as I could because of reading the book beforehand. Also, when Kathy would stare at Ruth in anger, or say when a look would pass between Kathy and Tommy I knew what they were thinking, what that look meant, because I had read and experienced those thoughts first-hand in the book.
The book seemed to go on and on about Kathy's past, in such detail, that it just seemed to drag on. The romance in the book was hardly something noticeable because it was practically nonexistent which was one of my issues with it. In the movie, however, there was a little more focus on it, in a more sympathetic and understanding light unlike in the book. So, one could say that, that is my problem. I wanted my fairytale. I want the guy and girl to have that moment when they stop and stare into each other eyes after all their hardships and longing, embrace and kiss and say how much they have wanted this all along. That moment never came in the book, and although it didn't exactly happen like that in the movie either, it was a little closer to what I had wanted, a little more wishful.
We see that Kathy is a carer now and dedicates her time to caring for those who represent what she will be one day be. A donor. She is eerily calm about this though. Regardless of the people she has lost in life, the pain she has inflicted and has been inflicted, she is no longer that; passionate, curious and the determined girl she once was. Now she is; calm, collected, and at one with herself, ready for what is to come. She doesn't look back at her life with a particular sadness or a sense of regret or guilt, and I don't know if I see that as a good thing or not.
Whilst living in Havisham Kathy and all the other students have been brought up to never question their purpose. Unlike many of us who spent a lifetime questioning what ours is they have it set up from the moment they can walk. Although they know they are to be donors one day they never contemplate running away and this will always baffle me, but maybe it's because that thought never occurs to them, because it's something they accepted from the moment they were made and know no better.
One of the things I couldn't help but notice was how much was missed out from the book. I didn't mind it really all that much because they couldn't fit in all that the author told in his book, there was simply too much detail that went into her past to fit in the movie. Considering that, I think they did a rather fantastic job. One scene I was disappointed in from the movie is where Kathy is dancing, although the scene was there she didn't quite do what the book explained and for some reason a completely different person saw her. The tears are a big milestone of a certain character in my opinion and that was sadly not shown. I was confused as to why they had completely changed the person who saw it, it really made no sense.
When I think of Kathy, Ruth and Tommy I think of these three very helpless, vulnerable people that although know their purpose in life they don't quite know what to do with themselves, and don't know what to make of a world outside Havisham. Lucy was right in a sense, they weren't prepared and I think in keeping them in a dark not only did it not benefit them in any way it was also incredibly cruel. I gained a huge dislike for Emily and Madame after the movie and book ended, I wanted to slap them both and make them suffer as they had all these students. They had not prepared or helped them at all. But left them alien and unprepared for the outside world that existed beyond the gates.
Although Ruth is the most flawed and conniving, and dare I say a bitch? She acknowledges her faults at some point at least, and strangely enough after watching the movie I sympathised with her the most. She is very vulnerable, and wants to be loved. She wants Kathy to stay with her always and is afraid of loosing her. Even though she is manipulative because of this, she has her reasons. Not to say that it's forgivable but it's more understandable. In my eyes it makes her more human than the others. The other two? Not so much. Kathy believes herself to be this great person, and sure she is caring and considerate but she is no angel. I felt this was portrayed rather well in the movie. I am thinking of Ruth often thinking of her many years later yet the same can not be said for Kathy. And Tommy I still don't get that boy. I really don't.
LOVE in the movie was something I struggled with accepting. I saw no hint of any love in the book or the movie. When Tommy mentioned the word at a specific point I found myself asking. Are you trying to convince me or yourself? I guess it bothers me because I kind of believe that they were not capable of love, that maybe they were programmed that way when they were made. Although the movie did romanticise the concept a bit more, the reason I struggled with the book was because it didn't, it laid it all down and made it clear that things were not going to be all great, and I found that hard to grasp. The movie is a bit more subtle and forgiving, sure it sugar-coats things, but I can live with that than having no hope in something at all. Maybe that's why the movie was more to my liking; it gave us a hint of what many of us wanted. It let us latch on to some hope of love, and I needed that.
Let me just say many have fallen in love with the book, and in a way I can completely see why. I am still not sure why I didn’t, but maybe I'll find out as I often do when writing the book review. Meanwhile I would recommend that you read the book first then watch the movie. The movie isn't exactly amazing, but it makes you think and those are always the movies that you know are worthwhile. Ultimately it was my lack of belief in their love that hindered me from loving it as much as I should have, and although the author explained that they were in love it was my sheer disbelief in it that made me question it many times. One of the big reasons is probably near the end, where I question. Are they even in love or are they convincing themselves they are because they know if they claim to be they can get something from it? This was a huge question hanging in the air after reading the book and watching the movie. Or maybe I'm just looking too much into it.
You then have the odd scene in the movie which was done beautifully whilst brushed aside in the book. In the trailer recall the moment Tommy is screaming and on his knees? His anger and pain is so apparent whereas in the book it was described more of a tantrum. I always felt that was a disservice to him, making it out as a tantrum when he had every right to scream and to be hurting. The movie did it with such frustration and tenderness that it's a scene which really played with my emotions. It was that very scene in the trailer that made me realise that I had to watch the movie, it was moments like those in the movie which I absolutely loved.
Regardless of my conflicted thoughts and a lot of witty and amazing dialogue that was left out from the book I can whole-heatedly say that I'm glad that I watched Never Let Me Go and read the book. They are definitely worth your time. If not one then at last the other will be to your preference, and once you have done either maybe we can discuss :)
Posts
