On the other hand, I read Dalton Trumbo's Johnny Got His Gun, which struck me like a bolt of lightning. The novel, on the other hand, explores the notion that as a person who is essentially dead, the protagonist is best qualified to judge the real cost of war-he knows more than any what it means to lose one's life.ĭuring this period (early 1960s), I was very interested in doing an adaptation of Lord of the Flies, but we couldn't get the rights.

So the film is more of an exploration into the circumstances of a person living in a sensorial prison, and it is only mildly interesting. Trumbo moderated his own views considerably over the time between writing the novel and directing the film, or it could be that he felt compelled to make the film more acceptable for financial reasons. While the book is a powerful antiwar novel (I mean antiwar in the truest sense of the term, which is rare), the film lightens its stance considerably. He more or less transposes the basic ideas of the novel onto the film, but he doesn't add much, and he subtracts a great deal.

While I detest notion that films should be faithful to their original source (either to the letter, or to the spirit), I'm at a loss as to what about his novel struck Mr. The book, which I found to be profound (I read it in 9th grade), relies so greatly on the experience of an individual with virtually no means of connecting to the outside world. I've never really understood the appeal of the film. I have no advice on getting ahold of the film, but as always, I'm willing to tell you what I think of it.

Dalton trumbo's johnny got his gun 2008