MovieChat Forums > Apt Pupil (1998) Discussion > The book was sooooo much better.........

The book was sooooo much better.........

posted 15 years ago by rockycairns
15 replies | jump to latest

Ian McKellan did a great job as Kurt Dussander, Brad Renfro was good but could have been better as he was a good fit for the character physically and even showed some talent at times.

But the film took no risks at all, it was totally "pussy-fied" when compared the book, the book also has one of the best literay endings I've ever read whereas the film just went for the cop out.

"It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything." - Tyler Durden

[–] Arm_the_Masses 15 years ago

I wholeheartedly agree

"Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion"

[–] OrangeBush 15 years ago

The book WAS better but this was still an excellent film.

[–] erock_531 15 years ago

Agreed completely. Plus if you're gonna attempt to include the part of the story where Dussander puts the cat in the oven put the cat in the oven. Don't puss out of it.

[–] Trist805 15 years ago

I agree. I remember my parents wouldn't let me see it in theaters but I was allowed to read the book (irony.) Anyways, it was one of the best Stephen King stories I have read, and then when I saw it on video I kept waiting for the crazy ending and it was just a big let down.

[–] worldleaderpretend 15 years ago

Agree with all the above they completely chickened out and softened up the ending. It would have been a worthwhile movie had it ended like the book but instead it just seems pointless to me. This is my opinion is the worst adaptation of a king novel/novella in terms of sticking to the basic story. Also David Schwimmer was hopelessly miscast as the teacher or guidance counsellor.

[–] jseger9000 15 years ago

I have to admit, I'm glad they changed the part with the cat.

Otherwise, yeah the book was better, but the movie is still pretty good regardless. Ian McKellan was perfect as Dussander.

A movie that was similar to the original ending was Targets by Peter Bogdonavich. There's a part in the book where Todd thinks about shooting his parents and heading for the freeway that made me wonder if King had seen the film (Targets was released in 1968), as that is exactly what happens in the movie.

[–] FortySecondStreetFreak 12 years ago

Guess it was a pussy-out if he does do it in the book, but I thought it was to show how ineffectual, weak, old and powerless he has now become...that a mass murderer can't even manage to kill one cat now.

[–] dalldorfw 8 years ago

"...if you're gonna attempt to include the part of the story where Dussander puts the cat in the oven put the cat in the oven. Don't puss out of it."

I see what you did there :)

[–] Jag_Calle 15 years ago

I really loved the novella! One of the best, most exciting, disturbing and intressting books i have read. But the movie was pure crap, very, very different from the novella. Ian did a good job as Kurt Dussander though...

[–] shellshock-6 14 years ago

It's a typical example of Hollywood adapting a story and destroying it.

The first act had so much important set-up. The movie threw most of it out in favor of a best friend who who was made up out of thin air, and a girlfriend who really wasn't important to the plot and could have been written out.

Obviously they did this for the teens (horror's biggest target demo) who want to see more young people. The filmmakers were afraid they'd be turned off by a movie that was 90% a boy and an old man. And if you don't get the teens buzzing after the opening weekend, it could make a difference of 20 or 50 million. Purely a monetary decision and indicitive of typical Hollywood garbage.

And yes it was pussified.

Dussander has no dreams, and therefore no motivation to silence them. He likes goose-stepping, torturing and killing simply because he thinks it's a hoot. Even Freddy Kreuger and Michael Myers had a reason. The book didn't even humanize him, it made him into more of a monster because remembering the sadistic superiority he once felt made him sleep like a baby. But they obviously felt the audience wouldn't be perceptive enough to grasp that.

Todd does have dreams, but they don't really motivate him to do anything. The only person he kills is an angry half-murdered guy he was trapped in a cellar with, suggesting he had no choice. In the beginning he was little more than curious, rarely showing any cruelty or disdain towards Dussander, or anyone else for that matter. He was essentially made a victim of the big bad nazi robot. Wouldn't want those teenage girls to be turned off I guess.

[–] lostn 13 years ago

I agree that the book was awesome. My only disappointment was its lack of denouement. I would really like to have seen Todd's parents' reaction when finding out he is a murderer who knew about Dussander's past all along.

[–] flobiwan-1 13 years ago

Regarding the cat, the movie does indicate that Dussander was able to finish the act later. Soon after the oven scene, Todd comes over and remarks that something stinks. Dussander states that he burned his TV dinner. In the book this is made clear that it's because of the cat having been burned in the oven. Plus, later you see a wanted poster for the cat on a telephone pole. I think it's obvious that Dussander did follow through offscreen.

That being said, the movie definitely wimped out. In the book, it was clear that Todd manifested evil from the beginning. When he first met Dussander, he mentioned a report he did on the Holocaust and how he had to adopt the same opinion that other writers on the Holocaust use (i.e. that it was a bad thing) indicating that he did not feel that way.

The movie did give Todd a hard edge but didn't even hint at any of his killings (or Dussander's except for one guy).

While Todd was affected by Dussander, i think the book makes clear that Dussander only brought out of Todd what was already there while Todd did the same for Dussander.

Too bad the movie didn't make this clear. It would have been a good statement on the evil of humanity. Perhaps the producers were afraid it wouldn't have been released ala The Day the Clown Cried.

[–] dalldorfw 8 years ago

I liked the ending; in a way, it's actually more chilling then the novel. Other then that, I agree; the movie never explored the psychology of the main characters the way the novel did and the reason Dussander turned to killing cats and hobos in never explained. Those who saw the movie but never read the book would just have to assume it's "cause he's a nazi" and nothing more.

The movie was well made but, with the exception of the ending, just doesn't have the bite of the book.

[–] Dan_Garten 8 years ago

I agree with you that the movie's ending is better.

[–] dalldorfw 8 years ago

If only the rest of the movie were more like it, huh?