Page 1 of 4

Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Thu May 13, 2010 10:59 pm
by Liz
Image
Obviously, by now this is common knowledge......Yeamon is not a character in the movie. And it appears that Sanderson becomes a combination of the two characters.

Why do you think the screenplay would be written as such?

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:58 am
by gemini
Yeamon not being in TRD to me is about the same as the facts out of sequence or wrong in Dillinger. I can see saving money by eliminating characters so they may combine some of Yeamon into Sanderson.. Then I think, is there ever a film that leaves a good story in tact?

The biggest problem I see is most viewers will accept Kemp as a young Hunter ( as do nearly all the book reviews) so his character will be cleaned up to not reflect bad on Hunter. Which is a shame because Hunter portrayed Kemp as a flawed character as he did Yeamon. Even flawed Chenault, I am sure, will be cleaned up for a love affair with Kemp instead of Yeamon.

In the you tube link deppaurra posted, Hunter rambles on about Kemp, "There is room for movement here. This isnt rigid interior monologue That isn't what happens, is what your thinking."
Charlie changes the subject here and should have let him ramble a bit more to clear up the thought. I think he was alluding to there was more to the story than meets the eye.

I am rambling off the subject here like Hunter. Yeamon and Kemp were both a young Hunter, both flawed in different ways but contributing to the story. In my opinion, Hunter would not approve of Yeamon absent from the film any more than I do. Sanderson, was a minor character in the book compared to Yeamon. They could have thrown him out and kept Zimmerman as the villain. The only difference is how Kemp looks and they get to add another heart throb actor (aron Eckhart) to the film.

To me the comparison of Kemp and Yeamon both the younger characters in the story is a major plot point. They are competing for the same girl, have the same job, lifestyle, and journalistic views. Yeamon, unable to follow the rules, and Kemp following them but hating himself for it. This is a strong story thread as he watches Yeamon and Chenault through the story. In the end he starts becoming Yeamon and sees it enough to help Yeamon get off the island in the end.

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 8:13 am
by nebraska
I am with gemini on this one, it seems every movie that is "based on" a book goes off on some tangent of its own. Even CATCF added dear old Dad, which changed some of the dynamics of the story. And I was appalled at what was done to Public Enemies.

No Yeamon? Why even bother, he was crucial to the story. Start over, write something new. I suppose it is a matter of avoiding accusations of plagiarism and still being able to draw publicity from the original name. Business not artistry. :mad:

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:36 pm
by Liz
That makes 3 of us.

I don't really get it. I could maybe see combining Yeamon and Sala or even Yeamon and Moberg, but with Sanderson?????? :perplexed:

Aaron Eckhart, in my opinion has a perfect look for Sanderson, but I see Yeamon more as a younger Nick Nolte, Jeff Bridges type--maybe Josh Holloway. Did someone already suggest him?

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 12:38 pm
by Liz
gemini wrote: In the you tube link deppaurra posted, Hunter rambles on about Kemp, "There is room for movement here. This isnt rigid interior monologue That isn't what happens, is what your thinking."
Charlie changes the subject here and should have let him ramble a bit more to clear up the thought. I think he was alluding to there was more to the story than meets the eye.

That really bugged me. I wanted to hear more on that from Hunter.

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 3:11 pm
by DeppInTheHeartOfTexas
I'll join the chorus of :perplexed: in regards to Yeamon. I suppose it waits to be seen if we some of Yeamon in Kemp, it would seem unlikely we would see him in Sanderson, other than the connection to Chenault. I will trust Johnny's instincts here when it comes to his good friend's story but I hope someone asks the question if we get a press junket.

nebraska, I'm not sure what you mean about the plagarism angle? If they have the rights to the book then it seems they have the rights to the characters?

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 4:10 pm
by gemini
I think I see Nebraska's point on plagiarism. It fits if they don't buy the rights and write a similar story. Instead they buy the rights and change the story the way they want which is worse. Especially since they always ruin a good book. I know I am a broken record on this subject but so many people wont read the book and take the movie as Hunters story. :banghead:

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 6:05 pm
by nebraska
DeppInTheHeartOfTexas wrote:I'll join the chorus of :perplexed: in regards to Yeamon. I suppose it waits to be seen if we some of Yeamon in Kemp, it would seem unlikely we would see him in Sanderson, other than the connection to Chenault. I will trust Johnny's instincts here when it comes to his good friend's story but I hope someone asks the question if we get a press junket.

nebraska, I'm not sure what you mean about the plagarism angle? If they have the rights to the book then it seems they have the rights to the characters?


I meant if somebody wrote a completely new story about a journalist who drank rum in PR during that time frame ....would somebody say they were stealing Hunter's story? The "based on" thing usually means they have made a new story with some of the same characters, but not stayed true to the book. But plagiarism becomes very tricky and if you use similar stories or similar characters, even unintentionally, you can be in lots of legal trouble..

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 6:06 pm
by nebraska
gemini wrote:I think I see Nebraska's point on plagiarism. It fits if they don't buy the rights and write a similar story. Instead they buy the rights and change the story the way they want which is worse. Especially since they always ruin a good book. I know I am a broken record on this subject but so many people wont read the book and take the movie as Hunters story. :banghead:

:highfive: I think you explained what I meant better than I did!

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 8:14 pm
by ladylinn
I agree with everyone. Leaving Yeamon out of the film makes no sense to me - but of course I don't pay the film bills. I think they missed an important side of the story.

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 9:20 pm
by gemini
oops mis post again. How come whenever I try to fix a typo I get another post. Sorry I called Zimmburger Zimmerman in my previous post.

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:36 pm
by deppaura
gemini wrote:
In my opinion, Hunter would not approve of Yeamon absent from the film any more than I do.


Well, that's what's missing here, no Hunter. If he was alive wonder how influential he would be in the screenplay adaptation of his book. He did have some ideas of his own regarding the film. He mentioned Depp, Benecio, Nick Nolte and some British screenwriter named Michael Thomas. So, instead we have, I guess what is called "artistic license". It's tricky when you read a book, absorb it, identify and make it your own. You have such expectations. What do they say, is it better to read the book first or see the movie???!!!

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:37 pm
by Liz
gemini wrote:oops mis post again. How come whenever I try to fix a typo I get another post. Sorry I called Zimmburger Zimmerman in my previous post.

Been there, done that. I remember getting the name wrong of the main character in a book that we were discussing for my local book club a few years ago. And I was the hostess. :blush:

Zimmerman is pretty close to Zimburger anyway. Besides I have a better name for him--one of Hunter's favorite expletives. :yikes:

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:48 pm
by Liz
gemini wrote: I know I am a broken record on this subject but so many people wont read the book and take the movie as Hunters story. :banghead:

This is the problem in a nutshell. You nailed it, gemini. And those of us who have lived and breathed this book by discussing it ad nauseum (twice for some of us) have such a hard time with major changes.

But with Hunter, I think some of us are more emotional about it because we were expecting the movie to retain the purity of Hunter....to do right by him.

Having said that, we have not seen the film yet. So I think that we need to be cautionary at this point in making any judgments.

Keep in mind, that Yeamon is just one character (even though Hunter said that he was part Yeamon). And maybe the message in the film will outweigh the absence of Yeamon and, in the end, be true to what Hunter was trying to get across. And maybe the Sanderson character will actually work towards expressing that. :hope:

Re: Rum Diary Question #26 ~ Why Not Yeamom?

Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 10:56 pm
by Buster
Seems to me that Yeamon is an archetype - I agree that leaving him out seems very odd. Distributing his characteristics among the other roles seems like a recipe for confusion. Yeamon's place in Hunter's book is very specific and well defined, and I think I'll miss his character in the movie.
That said, it is a movie, and I suspect I'll like it for what it is, rather than being too concerned about how it strayed from the book. When I read, I read; when I watch a movie, I take it for the art form it is...