Notes on Cant

Comment by SydTheSkeptic on November 27, 2010 at 2:55pm

Regarding the north/south error: Could it be it was intended by the writer(s)...? The theme of the film is a slight against conservative values and the myth of post-WWII innocence (a liberal meme). The South is not considered by liberals to be a bastion of enlightenment, so perhaps it was a jab...(not unlike your ending)? ;o)

Comment by Holger on November 27, 2010 at 4:09pm

Lots of interesting points.
Here no politician would survive politically if he supported Ron Hubbard in any way. But lots of politicians make a fool out of themselves when asked to mention their favorite novel. I think our new president Wulff said "Petit Prince" which is surprisingly very similar to Huck Finn, isn't it?

I once read from a literature journalist, that when he made it to the latter novels of "In search of lost time" he had forgotten the content of the first novel. I think I own one or two novels of the volumes but never finished it due to the density.

Comment by AnnelidaFilms on November 28, 2010 at 1:54am

I loved "Pleasantville," but I think the up/down river mistake is no more than a mistake.

My father had a game with me since childhood: Spot the mistakes in the movie. It developed in me a nasty habit to find and point out fault, which I try to suppress in my older, wiser, more polite years. Still, I get a bite-my-tongue satisfaction every time I find one of these gems.

The original script reads "they were going up the river trying to get free," but a couple of lines earlier Jennifer says "But like only up to the part about the raft, because I didn't read any farther."

It should be "further," but somebody - director, actor, script assistant - somebody corrected it. Maybe the "up" line was simply another mistake, but not caught. In fact, the shot of the title page of the book shows "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn," when in fact the book's accurate title does not include the word "The."

My Dad would be proud.

But you're so right, Geoff, that the mistake is indicative of today's sloppy, unresearched media preaching. The message would be so much stronger if stated clearly and accurately. Nevertheless, the two books in the scene (the other is "Catcher in the Rye") are their examples of books that didn't exist in the sterile TV sitcom world because of their raw, real nature. I think it worked on that level.

Comment by Chig on November 28, 2010 at 10:33am

So weird. I am watching Sunday Morning and Andy Borowitz is on TV. He wrote/created Pleasantville and the Fresh Prince of Bellaire. He quit Hollywood while doing very well in 1995.
15 years later... this Sunday Morning he seems to be the hot topic through his early 90's works.
LOL.

Comment by Geoff on November 29, 2010 at 9:51am

I love these comments. I don't think the north/south confusion was a deliberate jab at southern conservatism or a simple mistake. My guess is that the writer(s) vaguely remembered the book and knew it was about a runaway slave. Why would an escaping slave go south? (The answer is to reach the Ohio River where it joins the Mississippi but Huck and Jim overshoot.) If you listen to Tobey's explanation, he says "they realize they are already free". Again, some vague recollection of descriptions of how nice it feels floating down the Mississippi. The writer and everyone else has forgotten Jim crying at night, the near escapes, and the fact that the last section of the book has Jim caught and locked up while Huck and Tom work up crazy schemes to help him escape a la The Man in The Iron Mask, etc.

Maybe I should have included the footage of Jeff Daniels mooning over the art book, I thought about it. Basically, I think the filmmakers were taken with an image of themselves as enlightened liberals but their shallowness and self-satisfaction keep poking through. I don't think it is a failure of research, it's just an insincere pose collapsing in on itself.

Good point about Catcher in the Rye. Included like Huck Finn and Lady Chatterly's Lover because they were banned or at least pulled from library shelves during the Pleasantville era.

Another thing I should have emphasized is that Romney very clearly said he disagreed with L. Ron Hubbard's religion while he was praising his novel. But the inconvenient echoes of Mormonism and Scientology made his enjoyment of the scifi book an issue anyway so Huck had to be dragged front and center again as a "great" book that most people wouldn't find odd or intimidating.

Comment