'It's Kind of a Funny Story', Movie and Book Comparison

I recently read Ned Vizzini's 'It's Kind of a Funny Story'. I finished it a few days ago, but the original plan was to read the book as part of one of the challenges of Book-Tube-Athon. That challenge was to read a book and then watch the movie adaptation of it. Now that did not really go to plan and I didn't start the book until a week or so after the readathon challenge ended, but I was determined to stick to my TBR, even if it meant reading it a week or two after I planned. As mentioned on my YouTube channel, I accidentally acquired the book and film in July, (a present that was suppose to be for my sister and it turned out she had both of them already), I knew my sister really wanted to read the book and I knew it had good reviews, so I thought why not read it?! That and the topic matter really intrigued me, I wanted to see how the book would portray mental illness and how the character was affected by it.


So to start my comparison, I thought it best to include my review of the Vizzini's book first. Now when I include my review, it may not be very articulate and amazing. My grammar and spelling is often appalling in these reviews, mostly because I tend to finish the books at unearthly hours of the morning, I insist on reviewing them in case I forget anything. This review is my reaction straight after finishing the book and how it impacted me. I have taken this review from my goodreads account: BookNerd94

Review

On Goodreads  I gave this book 4 stars, however I found it hard to place as I had mixed feelings about the book. I read this book from the 24-26 July 2014.

3/4 stars, I enjoyed this book but found myself skim reading some bits and wanting something extra t0 the story. However mostly good bits about the book. Respects to Ned Vizzini who used his own knowledge to influence him in the writing of this book , also RIP, I was saddened and shocked to find out that despite everything, he died last year. 

Anyway the story.

From the very beginning I found myself weirdly reflected in the main characters thoughts and actions. No, not all of them. But some of them felt very familiar, for example the cycle system Craig talks about as a way of thinking when he is panicking or anxious. I can really relate to that, as a natural born panicker who escalates things constantly in their mind, I started to see some of my odd and more frustrating traits reflected back at me. Another thing I related to was the food issues, something I have never understood myself, but I have always had a bad relationship with food and some of the experiences of throwing up from being anxious was something I wasn't a stranger too. 

Vizzini from his own experience creates a character that thousands of people can relate to if going through or have gone through a similar thing. This books is helpful for people who have ever felt low and second guessed themselves. 

The ending although irritating in it's form and structure, made a clear point that I loved. Feeling low and depressed is not about being cured, it's about managing it. Everyone will have bad times but it's about managing and fighting against the urge to lay down and let it consume you. 

I wouldn't say this was my favourite book in the world and it didn't really make me emotional at all. But I fond this book to be simple and meaningful. It was a more realistic look at something that is now affecting a large proportion of young people and a helpful reminder that you can conquer your demons, because you are, in fact, the one in control. 

Weirdly I enjoyed the first half a bit more than the second, I know it picks up after about 200 pages but I felt the beginning was more poignant. Also I loved the relationship between Noelle and Craig, even though it was a bit of love at first sight, and I'm doubtful it will be a forever love despite loving happy endings. It just was a nice relationship between the two of them. 

In general I loved all the different characters they all really stood out to me. Even though I got confused with so many and who worked there and who didn't, once or twice, I still like the complexity and true nature of mental illness presented in the novel 

I am really glad I read this and look forward to watching the film this week, hoping to do do a review comparison of the two as even after only seeing the trailer, I can tell they are going to be two very different entities.

 So that was my review of the book, 4 days later I found some time to sit and watch the film, I would of like to watch it a bit sooner after reading the book but I felt giving me some distant from the book enabled me to enjoy the film without losing enjoyment because 'It's not exactly like the book' and still be able to give a comparison of the two. 

So my review! Lets start of with the first question. WARNING: Starts positive and then somehow turns really negative even though I did enjoy the movie and thought it was really good.

Did the film reflect the book well?

At first when the film started rolling I wanted to shout at the screen and say no, but that was two minutes in, before I had even given the film a chance! Granted I went into the film, after seeing the trailer, very hesitant that it would reflect the book well at all. But I think I deserve a slap at my attitude, especially so early on. The story starts of at the Brooklyn Bridge and thats when I got angry that the film didn't follow the book... but then it did... I felt like such an idiot. The beginning followed  the book just fine! Anyway as to the rest of the film, once I had relaxed on my brain having to think that the film wouldn't live up to the novel, I realised something. For a film this book worked really well, it stayed very close to the story line and the atomsphere of the novel came across really well on the screen. 

Was it a good movie?

As I thought to the book, the movie was okay. I don't think it was a film I loved, I know it won't be in my top 20 films of all time. But it was enjoyable all the same. I would give the film 3/4 stars, same as the book.

Casting Choices and Character Portrayal?

(I won't talk on all the characters but just the main few and not all our judgements on who played the character but how the characters were made to be seen too)

• Craig played by Keir Gilchrist: I have never seen anything before with Keir in, well not that I know of, so that made it hard to judge whether I enjoyed his acting as an actor overall. In this case however, I feel he made a good portrayal of the character of Craig. However, I felt that sometimes he appeared to happy for someone who had just been admitted to a mental hospital. (Don't hate on me, I just thought sometimes he had a lot more confidence than in the book)That may have been due to the script, but sometimes I felt he didn't portray the characters thought processes as well as is portrayed in the book. As appearance, I thought Keir worked well, he wasn't exactly how my mind envisioned him, but he was a close match.

• Noelle played by Emma Roberts: I have seen a lot of Emma Roberts work, and have really enjoyed it, most of them I saw in my young/mid teens, but I have enjoyed watching films with her in. Acting wise, I don't think she was bad, she took the role and made it work. There were sometimes when I found she was a bit more outgoing towards Craig when I found her to be a lot more shyer in the book. Also I found that the character wasn't explored enough and there is parts in the book where there is a lot more to her as a person. Appearance wise, I love Emma Roberts... but I don't think she fitted that well, Too hollywood. I think sometimes the characters are not portrayed enough as real people and Noelle looked a bit too much that way. The only other pet peeve was the scars on Noelles face, the story tells of a more mutilation and although the wounds are healing they still appear a bit rugged. The film makes them look most of the time very clean cut. 

• Bobby played by Zach Galifianakis: I have seen Zach in quite a few things, Hangover and Due Date. Both comedy roles. This role as Bobby was a lot more troubled and although not a comedy like Zach's other films, he still kept that twinkle that fitted with the almost ironic indie humour that was featured throughout. I liked Zach's acting and found it worked well in the film. The character of Bobby was made a lot more central to the storyline as well, which was interesting to watch in terms of the relationship between Bobby and Craig worked out. 

• Lynn played by Lauren Graham: Famous for Gilmore Girls, The Pacifier, Evan Almighty and much more and a very beautiful lady. I was intrigued to the casting of Lauren as Craig's mum, It seemed that there was lot of big stars caught to make this film. Not having a large role in the film, I felt it was hard to judge her character. But in the book Lynn's character was a little big bigger and I found on screen that the character didn't seem to connect with her child as much in the book and I imagined a lot more feeling and concern for her son. Sometimes the words she were saying didn't match up with her facial expressions. Although she worked well in the scene when Craig was younger.

• George played by Jim Gaffigan: Similar to Craigs' mum, I felt the emotion was missing. One of the scenes they missed out which I will talk about later, I felt was important to establish the relationship between father and son. I had nothing wrong with the actor in this case, it was more the script. I felt that that relationship wasn't very strong and the characters of the parents were very much eliminated from the movies as much as possible. 

Parts that where changed?

Okay, so for this I have just picked out a few things I can think of off the top of my head. I know there is more but I will add them in the future if they come to me.

Parents: so as I said previously,  the parents in the story became less important and were more small roles to the side than the larger roles they play in the book. This wasn't a completely bad thing but when the scenes did pop up, I felt that the parents were most of the time just stand ins. The sister worked well and felt more like a sibling, but the parents role sometimes felt pointless in the film. As mentioned above a scene from the book where Craig's dad brings over a film and stays to watch some of it with the patients is cut out. This I found quite sad as the film portrays Craig's dad as someone who is not really around due to work and only cares about his child's education, which if I'm not mistaken, I felt reading the book wasn't true. I felt that the father in the book was a lot more interval in his sons life and the scene they changed and cut out would have shown that a bit more.

Music Scene and 'Under Pressure': This scene I was unsure of, the very comical and almost tacky outfits and design took me for surprise in the context of the film. I am still not sure as to whether this worked. I am not very used to humour in these type of films and I found it hard to know whether it was funny or not. However, the signing of Under Pressure worked really well. A perfect song in terms of the reasons for why Craig was depressed. But... yes there is a but... I found that the film didn't portray the reasons as to why Craig was depressed very well. The film portrayed Craig as having very little reasons to his depression and although that can be the case, in the book it was mentioned heavily that some of the cause was pressure at his new school. Plus... SPOILER... the book talks of how he changes schools, the film doesn't give any indication of that. I know that the film has to create a focus however, so trying to focus on all the many small things would be difficult in a film.

Workings of brain: Yes, the one thing that made me really enjoy the book was the working of Craig's brain and how it was portrayed in the book as cycling and there was a lot more emphasis on what was going on up there. Yes, there was the narration over hear by Craig, but I felt sometimes if I hadn't read the book I would of found the film not as interesting. 

The way the past was weaved in:  The past was weaved in a little differently to the book, I actually think this worked well, particularly because the action in the novel does not start until about 200 pages in. It made sense to start where the books action began, even if it meant some of the memories and past that helped me understood Craig as a character a bit more had to be reduced or taken out.

Other Patients and focus on Bobby: Another thing I am torn whether it was done well was the way the other patients where hardly focused on in the film. There was introductions and small mentions, but they were taken away from their larger roles in the book. I loved getting to know the other patients in the novel, so it is a shame, however I did love the focus on the other patient Bobby. The creating of the relationship between Bobby and Craig as more of a focus relationship was really nice.

Overall?

Okay... Wow! I didn't expect so much negativity to come out of that. When writing this, I pretty much thought the film was a decent adaptation but as soon as I started pulling it apart, I think I must of gone a little crazy! I have written a lot of negative stuff about the changes but not enough about the positives! I think thats the problem with me being a much more negative person that positive. So overall, above I listed some of the issues I had with the adaptation. But in all it wasn't bad. I enjoyed the movie and as an adaptation it worked really well. I will always a little bit think its not a good enough reflection of the book, even though I know deep down that it really was. It may of had some issues but, hey its an adaptation and it isn't going to be word for word. There was a lot of stuff that worked really well, the atmosphere of the place and the characters were all intriguing. The storyline was followed almost to the point and I feel like it really does work.

Book and Film

So both of them? I really enjoyed both, the book I could really connect with and the film was a good adaptation that reminded me of the main plot points of the story. I hope to re-watch the film in a few years and see how I enjoy it then with more distance from the book. I was expecting both of them to hold a lot more emotion than they did, however the almost indie, comedic angle worked nicely and is something I didn't expect but did enjoy. At times I did find the comedy and light of the moment not personally favoured but then as we have found out, Laura is a depressingly negative person. The ending of both film and books worked really well and I still like the meaning behind it all, despite not like the listing with constant short sentences that went on just a little too long for my liking. 

Recommendations: 

I would recommend this book and film duo for anyone who is interested in a positive outlook on mental illness. I think both the film and book can be enjoyed separately and the film would be perfect for fans of The Perks of Being a Wallflower and fans of Emma Roberts. I really would recommend the book as even though its not my favourite it works well for what it is and I think there may be many people out there who could connect with the characters in the book. It is nice also to have a book and film with such a wide range of diverse characters within it as well, not only does it raise awareness of mental illness in young people, it also raises awareness of it in general, it also raises awareness of sexuality and gender and race. There is some more mature themes in the book and film looking at violence, self harm, suicide, mental illness, sex and drug use. 

Awesome book and film adaptation, let me know your thoughts on the book/film/both and if you haven't checked them out, I would say why not? Try it and see if it's your cup of tea :)

I would also like to include a review of the film and book I found online which I think keeps in line with my opinions of them both, It is pretty good :) :Shut up! I'm Reading