Topic: From story to screenplay book

[*Froggy*]

Froggie,
You won't regret it, but have tissues handy

I will....

[backtobrokeback]

You mean this part, right after the capitalized DECEASED?

He called Jack's number in Childress, something he had done only once before when Alma divorced him and Jack had misunderstood the reason for the call, had driven twelve hundred miles north for nothing. This would be all right, Jack would answer, had to answer. But he did not.

  :'( :'( 

It's hard to watch in the movie, but you almost go right over it here - she's moved it to a later point, as she did with the explanation of the reason for the sucker punch Jack got on Brokeback. 

[chameau]

Froggy, I was about to order from Amazon, you want me to order one for you & I'll ship it to UK?  No sweats for me.

[Cowboy Cody]

That is a great resource! I devoured mine.

[chameau]

 

Finally got mine!!!

I'll post yours next week little sis 

[*Froggy*]

Finally got mine!!!

I'll post yours next week little sis 

       

[chameau]

Finally got mine!!!

I'll post yours next week little sis 

       

Yup! me too but 

I cannot believe it's 68 pounds in U.K.   

[*Froggy*]

Yup! me too but 

I cannot believe it's 68 pounds in U.K.   

It's because it has not be published in the uk yet!!!

[chameau]

Yup! me too but 

I cannot believe it's 68 pounds in U.K.   

It's because it has not be published in the uk yet!!!

  It's not a third world country...  Whatever, shut up chameau 

[bbmlover]

Atlast i got a copy of this book for myself.........guess what.......the cover is same as what ethan has mentioned here. Now i can hug the book & sleep!.......

I was so pleased & amased........... that movie - had almost same dialogues as in book. While reading - the movie was running in my mind - background.
Beautiful story - thanx Annie

[ethan]

Atlast i got a copy of this book for myself.........guess what.......the cover is same as what ethan has mentioned here. Now i can hug the book & sleep!.......

I was so pleased & amased........... that movie - had almost same dialogues as in book. While reading - the movie was running in my mind - background.
Beautiful story - thanx Annie

Wonderful, bbmlover. The book is a keeper.

[christie wood]

Froggie,
You won't regret it, but have tissues handy when you get to the part where Jack visits Ennis after getting the postcard about Ennis's divorce; it is more wrenching than what you see in the film, and of course it was only a clause in one sentence in the original. And as noted earlier, AP's essay: " Getting Movied", was worth the price of admission-IMHO-all by itself.

Backtobrokeback,
Yes I listened to the interview last week. Our Annie is priceless isn't she? I would love to hear her talk about the other stories in Close Range, and of course I'm still looking for a Wyoming dialect phrase dictionary...


Hi Proulxfan, I agree with you 100% about the part when Jack goes to see Ennis after his divorce; totally heartbreaking when seen written on the page, so stark but so effecting.  Can almost taste the disappointment and heartbreak from Jack, and the inevitable rejection from Ennis.  I actually got more from it seen written down than I did on watching it, and I LOVE this film more than any other!  It's so good to have the screenplay with me at all times, I'm forever dipping into it when I need a Brokeback fix, as soon as I open a page, any page, it takes me back to Brokeback, to Ennis and Jack, and I'm happy, for a short while....just like them!  :'( :'(

[TJ]

I haven't got the "Story to Screenplay" book yet, but, I did find a .pdf copy of the screenplay.

I have found a lot of changes in the screenplay adaptation by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana. I bought the stand-alone BbM paperback book on the last Friday of December and I saw the movie on Jan. 6.

Some of the stuff in the screenplay which is in the book is not in the movie's actual script.

In the original story, Ennis droke a truck to Joe Aguirre's office in Signal. And, while the guys are up on Brokeback, Ennis tells Jack that his brother, K.E., lives in Signal.

In the copy of the screenplay which I have where Ennis is riding with a trucker, Ennis does not even know when he has arrived at Signal.

[tireiron]

from near the beginning of this thread:
> "This little volume contains Annie Proulx's original short story version of BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
> as it appeared in The New Yorker in 1997 along with the screenplay ...

A slight error here, and scanning over this thread I didn't see it corrected, so I'll
correct it.  The New Yorker story did not have the two italicized paragraphs
that begin the story in this book.  They were added when the author put
together the book of short stories, 'Close Range', that includes Brokeback Mountain.

[TJ]

from near the beginning of this thread:
> "This little volume contains Annie Proulx's original short story version of BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
> as it appeared in The New Yorker in 1997 along with the screenplay ...

A slight error here, and scanning over this thread I didn't see it corrected, so I'll
correct it.  The New Yorker story did not have the two italicized paragraphs
that begin the story in this book.  They were added when the author put
together the book of short stories, 'Close Range', that includes Brokeback Mountain.

In what year was "Close Range" originally published? The New Yorker Magazine published it in 1997. And, the stand-alone paperback with the italicized paragraphs has it that what is in the paperback was copyrighted by Dead Line, Ltd. in 1997, too.

Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana read the magazine edition of the story first. And, they apparently based what they wrote on what was in the magazine.

Those ITALICIZED paragraphs make the whole story a flashback. And that "flashback" shows that Ennis Del Mar never quit his job at the Stoutamire ranch and he never put the shirts in a closet.

[tireiron]

I'm not sure exactly what you[re disputing, but I will try to find the date of
publication of Close Range.  Just to narrow it down for comparison, the New
Yorker story was published there in October, 1997.

I believe in the Annie Proulx interview available in this forum it is mentioned
that the two paragraphs were added after the New Yorker version, and I
have seen that said a couple of other places.  But no, I haven't personally
looked at a copy of either the New Yorker issue or Close Range.

[tireiron]

Close Range was published in 1999.  Here is an interesting web page (among many)
about Annie Proulx:

http://www.answers.com/topic/annie-proulx

[balchy28]

I've just ordered it off www.play.com , it was only £7.49 and it should be here in a few days yay!  Lauren x

[Rønnaug]

I've just ordered it off www.play.com , it was only £7.49 and it should be here in a few days yay!  Lauren x

m2 

[backtobrokeback]

From morgan, the admin of AnnieProulx.com and its board:

the italicized version is the definitive and complete version. That is the way it was originally submitted to the New Yorker, but the fiction editor there apparently felt that the story worked better without it and/or the section should be cut to reduce the overall length of the story.

  Editors!  Jeez!  Hands off! 

[tireiron]

It's not true that The New Yorker removed the two italicized paragraphs.  They
were added after The New Yorker publication, before the Close Range publication.
This is mentioned in the audio interview with Annie Proulx, available on this forum.

[jerasjr]

Received "Story to Screenplay" yesterday, but only had a chance to browse a little.  Am looking forward to being able to read the whole thing... it's going to be intersting to see how the screenplay developed out of the story.  Guess I look at it as a step toward the final product, the film.  There will have been input about  each scene probably right up until shooting it.  It's a much more intricate process than I imagined but fascinating.  Was struck by the indefinite quality of saying only (in most cases) that the scene was day, night, afternoon letting us fill in how long  it took to reach that scene in their real life.  It should prove to be a most interesting read.

[chameau]

Received "Story to Screenplay" yesterday, but only had a chance to browse a little.  Am looking forward to being able to read the whole thing... it's going to be intersting to see how the screenplay developed out of the story.  Guess I look at it as a step toward the final product, the film.  There will have been input about  each scene probably right up until shooting it.  It's a much more intricate process than I imagined but fascinating.  Was struck by the indefinite quality of saying only (in most cases) that the scene was day, night, afternoon letting us fill in how long  it took to reach that scene in their real life.  It should prove to be a most interesting read.

It is indeed very intersting, I loved also the artciles from Annie, Larry  and Diana.  I read it for the first time 2 weeks ago and I'm in the process of reading it again. Don't do like me, don't read it in the subway, I had to close the book when Ennis arrived at the Twist's house.   :'(

[backtobrokeback]

It's not true that The New Yorker removed the two italicized paragraphs.  They
were added after The New Yorker publication, before the Close Range publication.
This is mentioned in the audio interview with Annie Proulx, available on this forum.

From morgan, the admin of AnnieProulx.com and its board:
Quote
the italicized version is the definitive and complete version. That is the way it was originally submitted to the New Yorker, but the fiction editor there apparently felt that the story worked better without it and/or the section should be cut to reduce the overall length of the story.

Well, we'll have to ask morgan again when (and if) the AP site comes up again.  He seemed pretty certain.  I guess her own admin doesn't know anything.

[sam]

I've noticed: Ennis's second daughter "Francine" in the book is "Jenny" in the film.
Just a detail. A collateral damage of my PBS

I've heard other people say that her name was Jenny.  where do you get this information?  I thought she was referred to as Frannie.  Interisting...

Jim

In the french translation her name is Francine. I also downloaded the story in english (I can't remember where) and...
A little copy/paste:
"The door opened again a few inches and Alma stood in the narrow light.
What could he say? "Alma, this is Jack Twist, Jack, my wife Alma." His chest was heaving. He could smell Jack -- the intensely familiar odor of cigarettes, musky sweat and a faint sweetness like grass, and with it the rushing cold of the mountain. "Alma," he said, "Jack and me ain't seen each other in four years." As if it were a reason. He was glad the light was dim on the landing but did not turn away from her.
"Sure enough," said Alma in a low voice. She had seen what she had seen. Behind her in the room lightning lit the window like a white sheet waving and the baby cried.
"You got a kid?" said Jack. His shaking hand grazed Ennis's hand, electrical current snapped between them.
"Two little girls," Ennis said. "Alma Jr. and Francine. Love them to pieces." Alma's mouth twitched."
Also on "Characters and Quotes" see the topic"Jack Jnr and Francine"

I have the .pdf version of the screenplay too and I noticed this difference too.

In the screenplay, Ennis' 2 daughters have the names: Francine and Alma Jr..  In the movie they are called: Jenny and Alma Jr.

I also noticed that in the screenplay:

Lureen's last name is Phillips instead of Newsome

And her father is called L.D. instead of L.B. (as in the movie)

Does anyone know why these changes were made?

sam

[tireiron]

From morgan, the admin of AnnieProulx.com and its board:
Quote:
the italicized version is the definitive and complete version. That is the way it was originally submitted to the New Yorker, but the fiction editor there apparently felt that the story worked better without it and/or the section should be cut to reduce the overall length of the story.

Well, we'll have to ask morgan again when (and if) the AP site comes up again.  He seemed pretty certain.  I guess her own admin doesn't know anything.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll listen to the audio interview again.  Maybe I misunderstood what Ms. Proulx said about it.

[tireiron]

I'll listen to the audio interview again.  Maybe I misunderstood what Ms. Proulx said about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I listened to it again, and I guess I had jumped to an unintended conclusion the
first time.  The interviewer said that when the story was included in the Close Range collection
it had two paragraphs that were not in the New Yorker version, and the author merely agreed.
She did not say they were written after the New Yorker publication.  I made that false
assumption. 

Sorry for adding confusion to what you originally posted.

[Rønnaug]

My book arrived today

[tpe]

My book arrived today

Hi Esme.  Enjoy reading it!  It'll get you started all over again....

[TJ]

It's not true that The New Yorker removed the two italicized paragraphs.  They
were added after The New Yorker publication, before the Close Range publication.
This is mentioned in the audio interview with Annie Proulx, available on this forum.

Morgan, the official annieproulx.com forum moderator (before it was temporarily closed a few days ago) said that the "italicized paragraphs" at the beginning of the story which was published in books was in the ORIGINAL manuscript which Annie Proulx, or her representative, submitted to the New Yorker Magazine.

The official copyright date of the complete story is 1997 and it is by Dead Line, Ltd., Annie Proulx's official agent organization.