If I had skinned a cat every time a reader used the argument: ''it would do such a great movie'' on me, I would have a pretty nifty fur coat by now. Don't get me wrong, I read about 100 novels a year. I love books, but they are their own thing. Some novels should never, ever be anything else than paper: everything James Joyce has ever written, the never-ending novels of Ayn Rand, the works of David Foster Wallace (althought it could make a great series with a LOT of work) and apparently ON THE ROAD, by Jack Kerouac. I know, I fucking love that book too. I own copies in French and English and even reviewed it two years ago. Talented, yet slightly overhyped film director Walter Salles tried to turn it into a movie, in 2012. ''What a great idea,'' I thought. ''What a good, easygoing story to adapt into a killer film!'' I was SO wrong. The failure of ON THE ROAD could be used as evidence to one of my most popular theories: if you love something deep enough, leave it alone.
If you don't know the story of ON THE ROAD, it's pretty awesome. It is basically the story of a series of road trips Jack Kerouac took with his writer-friends of the beat generation, except that everybody has a bogus name. Kerouac is named Sal Paradise, Neal Cassady becomes Dean Moriarty, William S. Burrough is called Old Bull Lee, Allan Ginsberg is named Carlo Marx, and so on, until it doesn't matter who the fuck these people are anymore. Sal is young, hungry for life and adventure and loves hitting the road with his friends with no particular destination in mind. On the road, the true character of every traveler ends up surfacing at least once. Sal's dearest friend Dean has a destructive side and a lust for things that transcend his reality. He ends up alienating every people he encounters, including the women he promises the world to. But Dean has always Sal and both guys always have the road, that holy place where nothing is set and everything is possible.
Every bit of criticism I've read about ON THE ROAD, from reviewers and moviegoers alike, says the same thing: what a boring, pretentious piece of crap. It's kind of a broad assumption to make because you could ultimately call every flawed movie a boring, pretentious piece of crap, but what does make ON THE ROAD lifeless? Well, there's a problem with the cast. They are beautiful and very much resembling of the characters Jack Kerouac created. But this resemblance does not translate into movement. The zesting feeling of life that oozes from Kerouac novel is completely absent from the movie. Without the constant, ongoing narration of Sal Paradise, the characters lose their magic and appear needlessly chaotic and reckless. Walter Salles, screenwriter Jose Rivera and Garrett Hedlund particularly did their number on Dean Moriarity. They transformed a mischievous, supercharged and animalistic youth into a psychopathic and selfish thug who spreads misery wherever he goes. Dean is so important to ON THE ROAD that this tragic mistake almost invalidates the entire movie on its own.
While I could appreciate Walter Salles' idea of creating an atmosphere through minimalism and a savant use of lighting, his approach didn't help furnishing a movie that was light on emotion. A stronger, livelier cast would've thrived in such a setting, but the kids of ON THE ROAD seem to go through the motion of what they're been asked to do. It's too bad because Walter Salles thought about how to adapt ON THE ROAD a lot, but the pieces simply don't some together. There are interesting moments, the cast has a good scene or two, this is a technically sound piece of cinema, but the alchemy of what makes great movies is absent. Watching ON THE ROAD is like walking through a museum full of people, but with no art on the walls. You know you're in the right place, you know you're supposed to be awed by something, but you have no idea what.
I'm being harsh, I know. I'm in a critical mood, nowadays. I fucking love Jack Kerouac's novel ON THE ROAD and though Walter Salles was the perfect fit to adapt the movie. The Brazilian director has a thing for the intimacy and a keen eye for memorable moments. Unfortunately, his adaptation of ON THE ROAD doesn't carry the exhilarating feelings of the novel. It's flat and chaotic and that's why people call it boring. It IS a boring movie. It doesn't make you feel special the way the novel did. That angers me. I know it's silly and a little bit mean to get angry at someone who gave it his best, but there are things you shouldn't touch. If you're not adapting ON THE ROAD with the firm intention of knocking it out of the park, you shouldn't even think about touching it. If you've read the novel, don't watch the movie. If you have nothing to do, don't the movie. Consider that you've just dodged a bullet.