weewarrior

Aka a 2022 novel set in the Appalachians during the late 1990s and early 2000s with the euphemistically called "Opiod Crisis" very much a main theme, and simultanously a modern adaptation of David Copperfield by Charles Dickens. The last Copperfield adaptation I had seen or read was the Iannucci movie starring Dev Patel in the title role which emphasized the humor and vitality of the novel and succeeded splendidly, but had to cut down the darker elements in order to do so, with the breathneck speed of a two hours mvie based on a many hundred pages novel helping with that. Demon Copperhead took the reverse approach; it's all the darkness magnified - helped by the fact this is also a many hundred pages novel - but nearly no humor. Both adaptations emphasize the social injustice of the various systems they're depicting. Both had to do some considerable flashing out when it comes to Dickens's first person narrator. No one has ever argued that David is the most interesting character in David Copperfield. As long as he's still a child, this isn't noticable because David going from coddled and much beloved kid to abused and exploited kid makes for a powerful emotional arc. (BTW, I was fascinated to learn back when I was reading Claire Tomalin's Dickens biography that Dickens was influenced by Jane Eyre in this; Charlotte Bronte's novel convinced him to go for a first person narration - which he hadn't tried before - and the two abused and outraged child narrators who describe what scares and elates them incredibly vividly do have a lot on common.) But once he's an adult, it often feels like he's telling other people's stories (very well, I hasten to add) in which he's only on the periphery, except for his love life. The movie solved this by giving David - who is autobiographically inspired anyway - some more of Dickens`s on life and qualities. Demon Copperhead solves it by a) putting most of the part of the Dickens plot when David is already an adult to when Damon/Demon is still a teenager (he only becomes a legal adult near the end), b) by making Damon as a narrator a whole lot angrier than David, and c) by letting him fall to what is nearly everyone else's problem as well, addiction.

( Spoilers ensue about both novels )

In conclusion: this was a compelling novel but tough to read due to the subject and the unrelenting grimness. I'm not saying you should treat the horrible neglect and exploitation of children and the way a rotten health system allowed half the population to become addicts irreverently, but tone wise, this is more Hard Times than David Copperfield, and sometimes I wished for some breathing space in between the horrors. But I am glad to have read it.

As far as musical biopics go, they tend to be more of a miss than a win in many cases, with the plus side that at least you, potential watcher, get to listen to some good music even if the script fails. There are exceptions, i.e. films where both the music is good and the film doesn’t feel like a visualized wikipedia entry, for example, Love & Mercy, which escapes the formula by picking two distinctly different and important eras of Brian Wilson’s life instead of his whole life, with 1960s Brian on the verge of creating his masterpiece and having a mental breakdown played by Paul Dano and 1980s Brian, in the power of a ruthless exploitative doctor but about to freed via encountering his second wife, by John Cusack. The performances are great, the different eras are poignantly commenting on each other, and even were Brian Wilson a fictional character, the film would be worth watching. If Love & Mercy wins for originality with the template, Walk the Line (about Johnny Cash) wins for doing the formula expertly, in fact so well it became endlessly copied and parodied thereafter. James Mangold, who directed Walk the Line to a lot of commercial and critical success back in the day, waited for near two decades before going near another musical biopic again, but he did last year, resulting in A Complete Unknown, starring Timothee Chalamet as Bob Dylan, which courtesy of the Mouse channel I have now watched.

( You who are so good with words and at keeping things vague )

All in all: good, very good, though not great. But it’s the first film in a while where I absolutely want to have the soundtrack.