Hacker Cinema
The English Patient
1996 · Film · 162 min
Directed by Anthony Minghella
In the 1930s, Count Almásy is a Hungarian map maker employed by the Royal Geographical Society to chart the vast expanses of the Sahara Desert along with several other prominent explorers. As World War II unfolds, Almásy enters into a world of love, betrayal, and politics.
2 positive2 negative2 neutralfrom 6 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
6 comments on Hacker News
In general you're better off reading the book when the film is just an adaptation, as the book can give more context, inner dialogue etc than a film can, simply due to the medium.
There are of course exceptions. Famously, Palahniuk has said the Fight Club film captured his intent better than his novel did. I also think film of The English Patient, which covers only a tiny section of what I consider a forgettable novel, is quite good, but even if you disagree I think almost anyone would say the film is better. And of course plenty of films aren't novel adaptations.
Regardless, if you're looking for a "story that could change my life" you're likely to get much more from the text than the adaptation. The strengths and weaknesses of the two media are just too different.
You're right. There are certainly some "make you think" movies that win for their portentousness and are promptly forgotten ("Crash" and "The English Patient" -- lookin' at you).
I ran the Google Cinema Club for 10 years. In all that time, no one ever asked for those movies, and we never even seriously considered them.
On the other hand, "The Princess Bride" was constantly being requested, as was "Office Space." There was some reason we couldn't show them; can't remember now what it was.
This is so subjective. I’ve seen people jerk themselves silly over Heart of Darkness and it is so ordinary. It is the epitome of “tell, don’t show”. I can’t believe something so mediocre is considered a classic.
The English Patient - didn’t read it but the movie is pretty terrible. Exactly nothing interesting happens for 3 hours.
Reasonable people can disagree, but at least don’t present these examples as universally acclaimed books and movies.
The movie is in the running for greatest American movie made; so much of it is so very good, and so many things went exactly right. The book, as others have said, is a pulp potboiler; no serious critic would place it on a list of 1,000 best novels.
Funnily enough, Die Hard is similar. It’s a great action movie, legendary and timeless. The book on which it’s based is awful.
It’s so rare that this happens, when usually it’s the reverse — a great book is made into a bad or mediocre movie. The true exceptions — great books made into great movies — seem vanishingly rare to me. Off the top of my head I can only think of a few: Lawrence of Arabia (from The Seven Pillars of Wisdom), The English Patient, The Name of the Rose. Apocalypse Now from Heart of Darkness, perhaps?
I'm sympathetic. My first personal website (after a couple of, ahem, not personal ones) was about the film "The English Patient", and yes, I know that smile.
However, I think you're making a mistake that I also make quite often, of conflating the use and mastery of the technology required with the actual end goal.
Lots of people might like to create their own dedicated websites focused on some particular interest of their own. Very few of them have any interest in Apache, Amigas, FreeBSD, servers, operating systems, bandwidth, IPv6 or any of the technology that would underpin them doing this.
Hence ... Squarespace ;)
We (computer technologists in general, and web folk in specific) failed to make running servers a trivial matter, and as a result in 2022, the honest truth is that running your own website no longer has much to do with any of the skills we might have smiled about back in the day. At least not for 99% of the people who don't already do it but might somehow have an interest in the idea.
Just another counterpoint, the airing of which is therapeutic in stopping me from downvoting due to rising tension at the thought of what you've suggested and my experience with managerial-ilk and their uselessness in the past (and I haven't, because I think you're contributing, but understand just how visceral my feelings are towards this). There needs to be a counterbalance to your advice.
Just no. Just GOD NO. Want to be a good manager? Get the hell out of my way. You're not there for my benefit (i didn't hire you, and odds are, I probably don't think you should have a job at all, let alone one that pays more than me) so don't pretend you are. Its insulting to both of us. I'm there because you've hired me, given me money, to do some labor that you can't/won't do. If I want you, I will come to you, and it will usually be because some genius decided that I don't have the authority to fix a problem or do something. If you come to me, its because you're telling me to spend my labour on something else.
If you're going to make yourself even vaguely useful, be my human shield to keep the rest of the useless people (read: management/executives/marketers/HR) and distractions away from people actually doing work.
I appreciate this is all context sensitive and my response is filled with hyperbole, but you'll also hopefully understand that i'm particularly frustrated with managers/employers in our society wanting to be my mother/psychiatrist/friend? If I wanted to be your friend or meet with you, do you think people would have to pay me money to be in your presence?
Its not a very Hacker-esque movie, but there's a brilliant line from the English patient:
"I once traveled with a terrific guide, who was taking me to Faya. He didn't speak for nine hours. At the end of it he pointed at the horizon and said - Faya! That was a good day."