The Re-Telling

 The main things to consider when taking an older text and making it more modern are language, comparisons, and how true to the original to be. As Shakespeare was so long ago, quite obviously the language must be changed, the comparisons updated in a new and original way, and as far as how true it is, that's up to the director.
 Much Ado About Nothing (Shakespeare Re-told Version)  gives you a lot to think about. Focusing on language specifically we can notice that it's obviously modern. What's really interesting to look at is the way insulting language transfers across the ages. Looking at lines like, " And a good soldier to a lady: but what is he to a lord?" in the original text compared to it's counter part in the modern version: "The housewives still love him" -Leondard
"We call them women now." - Beatrice
Well, Women all love him. - Leonard
"Not all women Leonard, Not All women." - Beatrice
Shakespeark Re-told has taken prim and proper  to modern day. Where Beatrice spoke her opinion in Shakespeare she didnt come off as hateful but more of dislike , where the modern version has Beatrice and Benadick going to head to head in their battle of 'wit,' and frankly they're sometimes plain old insulting remarks toward one another, just to see who caves first.
 I also found intriguing the beginning of the modern version of the movie starting with Beatrice going to a restaurant and being stood up and the ending of the movie where she's back at the same place and he finally shows up and she says hes a few years late. 

If you watch this clip until about one minute and forty seconds you'll see Beatrice sitting at a restaurant and being stood up by Benadick.

If you watch the clip above you'll see them finally meet at the same restaurant a few years later (after all the drama has happened) at about five minutes ten seconds.
This may not be intriguing to anyone else, but it seems like a well played tool the director has used to pull these two together. We see the tragedy in Hero and Claude and the comedy/romance of Beatrice and Benadick.   And as the director takes the modern spin on marriage you see Benadick and Beatrice laughing, and asking each other what they're doing, even as they stand at the altar together.

Let's Clue In To Clueless

CLUELESS- LETS BUY A CLUE:

This film has personally been a favorite of mine for a while. As a child in our home Clueless was just as classic as Matilda was in others. (Don’t get me wrong, we loved Matilda too!) There are some key things to notice in this film. We have some “valley girl” persona going on and mixed amidst this is some very sophisticated lines that they dole out.

 

For example, when Murray calls Dionne woman and she corrects him and says, “street slang is an increasingly valid form of expression. Most of the feminine pronouns do have mocking, but not necessarily in misogynistic undertones. “ WOW, after watching this movie so many times I never expect to hear these girls say things like this. 

Another example of the odd smarts of  Cher? The car ride with Heather: 
                                                           Heather: It's just like Hamlet said,  "To thine own self
be true."

 Cher: Hamlet didn't say that.
 Heather: I think I remember Hamlet accurately.
 Cher: Well, I remember Mel Gibson accurately,
            and he didn't say that. That Polonius guy did.

Clueless provided a lot of details similar to Emma, it seems to be a radical interpretation due mainly to the huge time frame change. The two seem to parallel each other in a way. Emma happened and now Clueless, seemingly, Clueless was a way to show how Emma would happen in the 90’s. Emma and Cher are both smart, quirky, a little oblivious at times, and quick to say whatever they want without recognizing any sorts of consequences. (Hey, speaking of look at those faces!)

Stranger than Fiction

Stranger than Fiction

   Harold Crick is an interesting character even though he on the outside, appears to be extremely boring. He is a very straightforward person and practical. He liked to keep the same routine and is very dependable. His values would include being on time, being dependable, and his relationships that he does eventually develop.He values his routine and completing his task and values efficiency.
   It appears to be significant for her to come up with his death because it snaps him out of his day to day life. It causes him to begin truly living his life even though he also appears to enjoy the life he was living until he realizes he's being narrated and going to be killed. This is a problem for her because she can't figure out how to do it and she doesn't want to be cliche' about it.
   The questions the professor asks Harold are important to the story because it narrows the plot line down. We are able to cross so many different story types off the list for what kind of story we're being told by these questions and able to realize progressively with the questions that it's a tragedy and then the foreshadowing of all the people connecting and the story in the end and all of the particular scenes that she is seen looking at things going on in life to try to figure out how to kill of Harold. It shows all the connections up until the end of the movie.
   The wrist watch plays so many important roles in this movie. The watch is basically Crick's lifeline. It chimed at key points in the plot that showed it's importance. The watch shows the time constraint of Harold's life and how there's a struggle to decide how to end his life. Also, in the end that watch saved his life so there was importance in that of course. The cookie scene showed a lot and it seems to depend on the viewer if they saw a relationship change. I definitely saw a change, especially because she came away from her attitude and offered him a present even though he couldn't accept the gift.
    The relationships between film and literature are commented on through out the movie with the idea that Harold is a character in a book and can hear his life being narrated and is therefore, able to interact within those limitations. Even if the limitations are his life story and the author has complete control over him. The relationship between character and author is usually limited unlike what we saw in this movie where there was interaction and persuasion on Harold's part to the author to not be killed off. The author in the movie's books call out the cliche' that she always kills off her main character in the end and she varied from that which was a good thing to do and the film calls out it's own cliche's by not letting him be killed in the end because you can kind of see that coming when Harold tracks down his author and she realizes what she's doing. All in all it was a very interesting movie to watch.

Rear Window

The beginning sequence shows us at an apartment building and it depicts many camera angles. It shows a lot of details of the apartments, the clothes hanging from balconies, the thermostat, the sweat on his face, the crowded rooms, and the radio playing, the couple sleeping on the balcony because it’s cooler outside than inside, the woman leaving her windows open while she got dressed, the screaming kids, and the shaking of laundry out the window, and then the man’s cast and the sign on it. The broken camera and the cameras on the wall can lead you to for shadow that the equipment is for a reporter and he most likely got his leg broken for butting into a situation for a story. Jefferies seems to be an investigative journalist and he seems to take too many risks. However, it seems that the early assumption of getting into trouble is wrong and turns out he just stepped in front of a racetrack to try to get a good picture. The beginning scenes and conversation tells you that he lives in a poor neighborhood.

            A few dangers could exist for Jeff as he has the main point of view. He creates a story about murder and could potentially be in danger himself, he’s stuck in a wheelchair and trying to send other people to investigate a murder. He endangers Lisa by letting her slip the note under the door asking what they had done with the wife. Lisa puts herself in danger after finding nothing and going inside the apartment and gets trapped, which is not necessarily Jefferies fault since she chose to sneak into the apartment. The sounds of birds and the music and nature around the area seem prominent to the story to add effects. The fact that the windows are opened at all times says something. That Thorwald leaves his window open while he cleans the silver case seems weird even if it is too hot out and he can be seen restocking his case. That doesn’t really make sense if he’s trying to hide what he did. The movie ends with the irony of Jefferies ending up with two broken legs, it seems the Jefferies can’t resist getting himself into some type of trouble.

Adaptation

          Charlie in the movie was more chaotic and disorderly than Harold Crick in "Stranger than Fiction". Charlie is especially concerned with keeping the film and book in unison. He wants to make a movie about flowers because no one has done it before. The progression of events gets a bit confusing if you don't pay close attention to what is going on. The screen play writing going on during the actual events was helpful because you got a better grasp of what was going on, it was an interesting contrast to see those things happening and how they got involved the way the author would want you to see it.

       Adaptation happens through the movie. There was the brothers, reversing roles through out the movie. There was the adaptation of relationship from reporter to girlfriend. There was the literal sense of adaptation with the plant adaptations. The end of the movie is awfully conflicting. When we were done watching the movie I had come to a conclusion that the movie appeared to be a movie about a movie about a book. Seems a bit complicated to me.