MovieChat Forums > Ramona and Beezus (2010) Discussion > Beverly Cleary had input in how the scri...

Beverly Cleary had input in how the script was written...

posted 14 years ago by rosek102
22 replies | jump to latest

According to a People Magazine article, Beverly Cleary made it very clear that she did not want the film to be "modernized" too much with overly obnoxious teenagers, bad language, kids wearing short skirts and belly shirts, etc... She wanted the movie to capture the heart and innocence of the books, and I'm so glad it was done that way.

The film reminded me of my childhood and how I felt when I read about the characters in the books. It maintained a timeless quality instead of delving too much into the contemporary. The movie looked like it could have been made 10 or even 20 years ago, and I love that about it. Even the fantasy sequences were not overdone, and that was one of my original fears--that they would take advantage of Ramona's wild imagination and make it too flashy. It was done in a way that it was part of the movie, but not all of it.

Anyone else agree/disagree? Do you like how they kept it simple, lighthearted and innocent, or were you hoping for more?

[–] artcurus-1 14 years ago

Agree, but recast Beezus. Selena is the epitomy of what Ms. Cleary was trying to avoid.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] artcurus-1 14 years ago

True but there's a lot to be said about acting ability period. Not to be a Isabelle fanboy for lack of better terminology, but because Isabelle can do a wide range of emotions, even though she's also too old for the part, Isabelle would taken the character and made it her own, even up to the point of reading the books before shooting. Dakota even fails at this, she can be a bit too professional, and it interferes with how she interacts with her character.

Disney can really hamstring and stereotype kids. It's almost impossible for kids in the Disney stable to get serious demanding roles, and even roles in "R" rated films, (while they are young).

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] artcurus-1 14 years ago

Oh, I know what you mean, and I adore Dakota. The thing that I'm really disappointed in is that Selena actually has read the books. I don't know if she read them right before shooting, but she's read them as a kid and she said she's a big fan and loves the books.

===>If this is the case, then Selena should have had a reasonable interpretation of the character. For Orphan, Isabelle drew from Bettie Davis, (Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?)

But Disney never really strives to be anything above mediocre. Mostly if you're cute, can sing and reasonably act, then you stand a chance. Lindsay Lohan seem to do okay, all things considered,(at least she continued to get work) after she left.

But when you look at child actresses like Isabelle, Jenna Boyd (The Missing and Dickie Roberts- Child Star, this girl was probably one of the best in the business of the modern actress, she was unbelievable)Stephi Lineberg from the 90's, the list goes on, most of the Disney kids can't even COME CLOSE to this level of performance.

The only current one right now from Disney that MIGHT be worth watching is G. Hannelius. But it's still too early to tell and she gets lucky enough to land a "R" rated film, she'll be able to expand.

[–] blynnpatton 14 years ago

I think some people still think this was produced by Disney. It was not. It was produced by 20th century fox. The movie was great. A movie does not have to closely or perfectly follow a book to be great.

I thought Selena was good in the movie. Her reading the books would not mean that she would be able to perfectly follow the books. Some of how an actor portrays a character is not determined by the actress. It might be determined by producers or writers. Anyway, I wasn't bothered by the fact that she might not have perfectly portrayed Beezus. I say might not have, because Beezus was not portrayed as a perfectly secure teenager. Beezus had the typical teenage insecurities that all teenagers have.

Overall, I think the movie got the spirit of the books even if it didn't follow them perfectly. Again, I thought the movie was great.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] megawhoosits 14 years ago

What are you guys talking about? She NAILED the character! Beezus IS a bossy know-it-all! That's kind of the point!

And in this movie, she's a bossy know-it-all who's also struggling with the pressure of enduring puberty. Joy of joys.

Still, she did come off a little prima donna-ish, but what else is it going to look like onscreen? In "Beezus and Ramona" (the book), I seem to recall the word "exasperated" gets used rather repeatedly- so it's an exasperated 15 year old who's huffing and rolling her eyes...ya, I'm sorry, but I think there's only so many ways you can spin that, as an actor. I think Selena did the best she could.

Don't get me wrong, Beezus is (and always was) my favourite character. But you have to remember that she's essentially very "proper" and "adult" and that leads inevitably to "bossy" when she's around her younger sister. She's the antithesis of Ramona, but she goes through struggles of her own. It's this juxtaposition that drives the story.

[–] blynnpatton 14 years ago

I agree. I wasn't saying she didn't nail the character, but some people were harping on the fact that she didn't play it perfectly. I thought she did great. I agree that she was bossy and under the pressure of enduring puberty. Also, Ramona thought Beezus was perfect, but Beezus did not feel this way about herself. I think this comes across even in some of the books. For example, in Ramona Quimby, Age 8, Ramona is happy to be changing schools, because she is tired of teacher's comparing her to Beezus.

[–] TrekBeatTK 14 years ago

I liked the way the fantasy sequences were realized in a sort of playset stop-motion kind of way, but at the same time I didn't think the movie needed them. I felt like their inclusion was unnecessary digression and takes away from the essence of being a kid; imagination is not HAVING to have the visual. You get it just from what she says and does. So though I was glad they didn't go nuts with them, I really didn't see any reason to have them in the movie, except MAYBE the one about selling the house.

-TK

[–] blynnpatton 14 years ago

I thought the imagination scenarios were great. They showed how much kids imagine. I thought it was a pretty good way to get this across.

[–] rosek102 14 years ago

I think Selena is a good actress, and as a person, she seems to have it together more than some of her contemporaries. I did enjoy her performance in this movie, but that being said, I do agree that they could have gone for a more "plain-looking" girl, like a newcomer actress or something. Joey King embodied the plucky tomboy aspect of Ramona, but Selena is more prim and proper.

As for Beverly Cleary's input in the script...I don't know exactly how much input she had, but I did read in People Magazine that she wanted the film to capture the simplicity of the original books, and for some reason or another, they honored her wishes. I guess it depends on the people involved in the film, and how much insight they take from the author. Just ask Jodi Picoult, who was thrown off the set of "My Sister's Keeper" and had to deal with a director who completely changed her ending when he said he wouldn't.

[–] blynnpatton 14 years ago

I think it depends on what you mean about prim and proper. Beezus was kind of concerned about being proper in the first book. She kind of thought she wasn't a good sister, because she didn't always like her sister. She was also concerned about her sister acting with decorum in public. There is one scene in the first book where she tells Ramona that it isn't proper to show or tell people certain things. In this scene, Ramona is showing off a scab or something along that line. Beezus is embarrassed and tells her you aren't supposed to do that.

[–] rosek102 14 years ago

I liked the fantasy sequences, too. For adult audiences in particular, it was important in showing how a child's imagination runs wild, and how they react to things that older people wouldn't think twice about. For example, when Ramona overheard her dad saying "I'd rather sell it than let the bank take our house," Beezus was able to understand the true meaning of it, whereas Ramona took it literally, as many 9-year-olds would tend to do. The visuals helped the viewer understand exactly what was going through Ramona's mind when she heard those words.

[–] TrekBeatTK 14 years ago

or adult audiences in particular, it was important in showing how a child's imagination runs wild, and how they react to things that older people wouldn't think twice about. For example, when Ramona overheard her dad saying "I'd rather sell it than let the bank take our house,"

Yes, I can see the reasons in that regard, but what about the bit with her jumping on the bed? "Oh, adult audiences won't get what she's doing, jumping around with a rocketship; we have to SHOW it!" Or the back stoop? I think seeing a kid with a sheet jumping always conjures the image of parachuting, we don't need to SEE that. And I was bothered by that because the "fantasy" sequence took ten times longer than it would have for her to actually jump and hit the ground. I mean, I'd jump from the stairs all the time with a pillowcase over my head as a kid. I got it. Didn't need the visual.

Also didn't need the visual on the playground. She SAID aloud that she was "hanging over a canyon" or whatever; we got that without them showing it. Then they showed it. Fine, but we didn't NEED that. And that wasn't the essence of the scene either. If this imaginary play was what delayed her, that I could see. But she got stuck and hung upside down. That's a totally different thing.

I'm coming across like a stick in the mud. I'm not against fantasy sequences. I love fantasy sequences, like in Rugrats and Doug and Ally McBeal. I just didn't think we needed them here.

-TK

[–] rosek102 14 years ago

Well, I'd have to watch the movie again, but maybe there were instances where the visuals were not necessary. That is definitely possible. Overall, though, I don't think they completely overdid it. Plus, the target audience for this movie included young children under the age of 10 or so, and kids like having visuals to keep them interested, so maybe they enjoyed seeing the fantasy sequences. I guess in a way, it adds to the magic of being a child and having an active imagination.

[–] cmashieldscapting 13 years ago

This is great to hear. I felt the movie was very well done.

[–] misty-63 13 years ago

Yes, I think it was extremely well done. I even thought the same thing at the wedding. The girls' dresses were very timeless, and I believe they even resembled the drawing in the book I have where the wedding took place. I loved it!

[–] kunfyooshun 12 years ago

The trailers for this movie turned me off. Cheesy music and lot of clips of *gasp* a Disney person locked and loaded to bastardize one of my childhood favorites.
I couldn't have been more wrong.
I just happened upon this movie n HBO the other day and LOVED it! Very well done.

I was pleasantly surprised that the stories and look of the film were not too modernized (so it will have longevity) and, that the edited and altered pieces of the stories were done in a way that readers of the series won't feel cheated. I didn't miss "yard ape" at all.

The imagination scenes were also on point. It illustrated the limitless fantasies of a child without getting distracted with the "look how many special effects we can use!!!" issue that can sometimes sour the magic that its supposed to portray.

Sometimes, movies can go a little too far with 'kid at heart' characters but, in this one, they even managed to pull off having Mr. Quimby be the corny/fun Dad while also remembering that he is still an adult. He stayed jovial and charming to keep his daughters from worrying about the reality of their financial situation...just like in the book. Ramona was lovably mischievous and awkward without being cutesy. Beezus, was a normal, tween and big sister,loving and acting as jr. parent to Ramona while enjoying the occasional torture of her little sister, as siblings love to do. It was refreshing to see a girl of that age NOT played as a Paris Hiltonesque over the top fashionista.

It reminded me of all of the reasons I devoured the Ramona books when I was a kid - she was just like me. Watching it was like watching all of the color and spirit of my childhood self on screen. By the end of the movie, I was misty-eyed, holding my heart and, fighting against a lump in my throat. Bravo!

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Yorick_Brown 11 years ago

No wonder this was such a faithful adaptation.

It's hard to pull off a G-rated live action flick where people of all ages can enjoy it, but this film succeeded with flying colors.

Take us down and all apart
Cherry Tree
Lay us out on the table

You're sharp alright...

[–] lysdexia-2 10 years ago

As long as there are no belly shirts? Ramona wears miniskirts most of the time.