I've just read "Everything is Illuminated" twice, partly because it is a subtle novel, cleverly written, with Alex's letters to Safran Foer alluding to the truth about Alex's grandfather that is very easy to scan over. I think Liev Schreiber, an excellent actor, was always going to find it a challenge to adapt such a novel, with its two interweaving stories set in the past & present. Perhaps he was wise to dispense with the story set in Trachimbrod's past, which at times detracted from the road story & search in the book, though there is much rich tapestry in 'The Book of Recurring Dreams'.
I enjoyed the pace of this film, slow and assured - a thankful respite after being bombarded by 20 minutes of adverts for things I don't want to buy.
However, I feel that Schreiber has 'sanitised' the film's ending, by making the Grandfather a figure who has denied his own Jewish identity, when the novel presents him in a far more morally complex light and he has been forced to make a terrible choice (with echoes of the philosopher Isaiah Berlin)that he now must confront. It is almost as if Schreiber has distorted the truth of Foer's novel in the way Alex, in the book, questions Jonathan's presentation of truth and fiction.
The film deserves credit for its sublime portrayal of how the past lives on inside of us and 'illuminates' everything around us. Good performances from Hutz as the initially rather comically Alex who learns a deeper understanding of the past. I also liked the touching portrayal of the growth of closeness between Alex and his Grandfather and the final scene of the Grandfather touching Alex tenderly was very moving.
But I somehow feel the film is the sum of its parts and that something is missing. In the film, Augustine is found. In the book and real life, she remains elusive. There is so much the film misses: Alex's maturity, his final confrontation with his father, so many little things that add up, like how Alex deliberately tells a waitress about Jonathan being Jewish after she feigns interest in him. It parallels the later betrayal in the past.
I enjoyed the pace of this film, slow and assured - a thankful respite after being bombarded by 20 minutes of adverts for things I don't want to buy.
However, I feel that Schreiber has 'sanitised' the film's ending, by making the Grandfather a figure who has denied his own Jewish identity, when the novel presents him in a far more morally complex light and he has been forced to make a terrible choice (with echoes of the philosopher Isaiah Berlin)that he now must confront. It is almost as if Schreiber has distorted the truth of Foer's novel in the way Alex, in the book, questions Jonathan's presentation of truth and fiction.
The film deserves credit for its sublime portrayal of how the past lives on inside of us and 'illuminates' everything around us. Good performances from Hutz as the initially rather comically Alex who learns a deeper understanding of the past. I also liked the touching portrayal of the growth of closeness between Alex and his Grandfather and the final scene of the Grandfather touching Alex tenderly was very moving.
But I somehow feel the film is the sum of its parts and that something is missing. In the film, Augustine is found. In the book and real life, she remains elusive. There is so much the film misses: Alex's maturity, his final confrontation with his father, so many little things that add up, like how Alex deliberately tells a waitress about Jonathan being Jewish after she feigns interest in him. It parallels the later betrayal in the past.