MovieChat Forums > Charlotte Gray (2002) Discussion > Why did they change the ending?

Why did they change the ending?

posted 16 years ago by tinicatnicola
8 replies | jump to latest

I thought this film was ok, but they changed a lot of the storyline and left out a lot of crucial things, so really I feel like, once again, this is a pretty good film, only if you haven't read the book, which is about 10 million times better.

I mean, even though I love Julian, the whole point of the book is that she is searching for Peter, who is her soulmate, which they really underplayed in the film.

And aside from Peter, in the book perhaps the most crucial aspect is the fact that Charlotte is haunted by her past and her broken relationship with her parents.

I sometimes wonder, if they're ever going to make a film adaptation that truly lives up to the book.

I think Atonement does.

What does anyone else who's read Charlotte Gray think?

[–] theunderstudy1610 16 years ago

Interesting, I hated the book - I read it straight after birdsong (which I loved) and I guess I didn't think it compared at all. I found Charlotte Gray to be slow, a bit boring, I didn't care about the characters.
However, I did like this film, it captured my attention which the book didn't, but I guess we can all have our own opinions!

[–] kathrynuk 16 years ago

Hm, that's interesting. I want to read the book both because I love Birdsong and because I found this film an interestingly flawed one. I'm curious to see if I have the same reaction to the book.

I automatically draw comparisons with Atonement too, which I thought was a fantastic cinema-isation of everything the book was about.

I just wish they'd adapt Birdsong now - though some of the images are so horrific I imagine it puts off many directors... coming back to atonement I thought that was a good example of where a single powerful image (the quiet, murdered bodies of the children) summed up in one go the numerous awful moments of Robbie's walk to Dunkirk the book.

[–] henrymale 16 years ago

I read the book and thought it wonderful. The film was a sorry disappointment, lacking all the rich detail, with all sorts of distracting dramatic touches (desparate bike rides after trains etc.) and a substantially different plot.

[–] DreamCatcher7 16 years ago

I haven't read the book but rarely, very rarely are readers satisfied with books turned into movies.

This movie, however, was not very good. I enjoyed as an easy watching and as I hadn't read the book, enjoyed the happy ending very much as well - except I found it odd that there was no closure on the boys and M. Levade. I know what happened probably, but still....

Anyway - I never expect a movie to be similar to the book it's based upon.

[–] aaron-leaver 16 years ago

Gday mate
just watched it then.
i read and finished the book a few days ago after many months of starting it but being unable to get into it.
The book ended up being, for me, simply awesome.
i KNEW that the movie had to be different as it wasnt going to be long enough and was pleasantly surprised at the way they changed the start. i thought that they did it very well ( the train bit ) though was disspaointed with the speed that the realtionship between Peter and Charlotte grew.
After that it was a little downhill.

aaron

[–] olsontd-1 15 years ago

My take is that the movie is actually much better than the book precisely because of the rewritten ending. Perhaps the movie is consistent within itself whereas the book's conclusion was consistent with the Peter-Charlotte "soulmate" idea, it was dis-satisfying because it did not show character development.
Specifically, I see Charlotte starting out as a patriotic, somewhat naive, and character of minimal depth or "character." That is, she originally went to France for self-centered reasons, and then, after an initial egotistical (or again, naive) mis-step that costs a woman her life, begins to understand the depth of danger, the reality of good and evil, and begins, as she puts her heart into a cause greater than herself, becoming a woman of substance. With the news of Peter's apparent death, her commitment to do right by others to preserve life and protect the vulnerable, moves to center stage. The key line in the movie for me is when she tells Peter, during the surprise reunion, "I can't go back." She has become something deeper by having risked her lives with others to save others. The return to Julian is a hugely satisfying climax of her journey to moral understanding and ethical commitment.

[–] schuhj 10 years ago

Blancett is a little too strong to show us the shallowness you mention. She should have shown herself as more “romantic at the start, despite the answer she gave the shrink; then the shock that came with the arrest of her contact would have been that much greater. Her transformation is, after all, the result of a series of shocks.

[–] CindyH 13 years ago

I sometimes wonder, if they're ever going to make a film adaptation that truly lives up to the book.

Maybe your expectations are a little high though. I don't mean that in a bad way, just a fact.

Look, think about it like this... How long did it take you to read the book? Two hours? See, that's the amount of time they have to tell a story. Now, try cutting out parts of your book until you can read it in just under 2 hours. I wonder how much of the story you'll have to dump?

Can you now understand the problem here? I see this same complaint many times and I even fully confess to having said that myself a time or two. You just have to think about the time factor.

Personally I'd love to see a six hour movie, so long as there are intermissions. Alas though, Hollywood would rather you pay for three tickets and chop the movie into parts. For them it's all about the money.

Spare me your 6th grade Michael Moore logic! ~ Secretary Heller; 24, Day 4, 7:30:00 a.m.