The Word On Film

No Holes in This Movie: A Review of Louis Sachar's Holes

We’ve all seen it happen. You read the book and think, "I can’t wait for the movie!" And what happens? The movie comes out with Sarah Michelle Gellar instead of Natalie Portman (and you’d always envisioned Natalie as the ingŸnue), and before you know it-- you, a dedicated reader and devoted fan, find yourself lost and confused in your favorite narrative.

Good books and bad movies happen all the time. Why do some adaptations go awry? Well, we can partially thank a pesky little thing call time. Movies rarely last longer than 2 hours. Screenplays roughly translate to one minute per printed page. To fit a 250 page novel (over four hours) into a two-hour movie means compressing the story. Characters are sacrificed or meshed into barely recognizable amalgamations, and subplots are hacked and sliced and remade into confusing twists and turns.

As both the novelist and screenwriter of "Holes," Louis Sachar did an amazing thing. He had the ability to take his novel and make an incredibly smooth transition to the screen.

Stanley Yelnats, the young hero of "Holes," finds himself at Camp Green Lake, where, ironically, there is no lake. The camp is a juvenile correctional facility in the desert, and the reigning philosophy is that if you take a bad boy and make him dig one hole a day, everyday in the hot sun, you’ll turn him into a good boy. Stanley quickly catches on that the boys are not digging for character, but for treasure. Between lost money, lost love, lost luck, and lots and lots of digging, Sachar manages to fill every hole, both on screen and on the page.

Sachar’s owes his success to subplots that were tightly tied to the outcome of the main character, Stanley. It was imperative to tell us about Stanley’s great-great grandfather, and great grandfather, and grandfather, and father. These men intertwined with the destiny of an outlaw and a warden, and all were important to Sachar’s tale. Without the outlaw, there would be no digging at Camp Green Lake. Without Camp Green Lake, Stanley wouldn’t have met Zero. Without Zero, hell, there wouldn’t be a story.

Now, just because a subplot is important does not mean that it will survive the transition to the screen. John Grishman’s "The Firm" gave me heart-pounding, page-turning moments as our main character copied papers. That’s right, making copies kept me glued to that book for fifteen pages. Now, translate 15 minutes of high intensity coping to the screen. Look out "Fast and the Furious!" We’ve got Kinkos and Krazy Kopies goin’ on! It was impossible to translate those frantic, high-energy scenes from the novel to the screen. The screenwriters addressed this dilemma by rewriting the subplot. In the movie, Tom Cruise takes down the mobsters on a completely different pretext than what was original constructed in the novel. Did the movie lose something in its version of the story? Well, let’s just say that I would have preferred the original to the copy.

As a screenwriter, Sachar understands compression and visual narrative. Nothing seems rushed because he captures the poignancy of each scene. My favorite moment is Stanley’s sentencing. The judge tells Stanley that he can either go to jail or to Camp Green Lake. Vacancies at camp don’t last very long, so Stanley has to decide then and there. Being from a poor family, Stanley simply replies, "I’ve never been to camp." It has the same effect in both the movie and the novel.

Compression handicapped Sachar as Stanley and Zero trekked up the mountain. Poor Zero is supposed to be doubled over with pain, yet struggling forward with each step. Sachar chose to have the cramping and stumbling happen in one scene. Perhaps this reinforces Grisham’s copying dilemma, who knows?

As a film review and book review, Sachar used both mediums as an excellent story-telling vehicle for children. Sachar presents poverty and bigotry -- even prostitution -- on a plane that children can approach and understand. We feel for Stanley and the Warden and even the outlaw. My recommendation: novel and then movie. The holes missing in the story were Stanley’s subtle thoughts and emotions that Sachar did not have time to dig-in-to during the film.

Rebecca invites your ideas, insights, reviews, arguments, thoughts and incredibly wrong opinions:
back-talk Rebecca

>>Back to top<<