"But the book was better!"

[Amy Z]

Joanne wrote:

Sometimes it can work, but I hate it when it's
> done *just* for a happy ending. If there's a *reason* for it, that's
> different. Say that changing one small thing makes it possible for 
a happy
> ending, and the change was already in place, that would be fine, 
but to
> change *just* the ending would be really annoying.

There's an excellent film of an even more excellent book, Miss 
Lonelyhearts by Nathanael West (I think the movie is called 
Lonelyhearts), where they tacked on some kind of happy ending to a 
totally grim book.  It's as if Hollywood of the day just would not 
let something that depressing get through.  I just ignored the last 
few lines, because it was =so= tacked on you could just pretend the 
movie ended 30 seconds earlier than it did.  Robert Ryan translating 
all his bad guy energy into bitter cynicism (he'd have made a great 
Snape in an earlier era), Myrna Loy in a very atypical role, and 
Montgomery Clift proving he's more than a pretty face.  Great stuff. 

Amy Z