hellraiser7 This is one of my favorite sci-fi films and my second favorite adaptation from one of my favorite authors for one of my favorite sci-fi books "Fahrenheit 451". Most live action adaptations of Bradberry's works have always been hit or miss, but to me this is one of the hits. Yeah, it's true it's not perfect (though same can be said about a lot of other live action adaptations from famous authors) but for what it was about to accomplish I felt it did well.There is a lot about the film I really like, production value is on par, I even like the music score which is solid though to me the best music was at the end which I thought was beautiful. The suspense in this film is pretty good though like the book this isn't so much a suspense thriller it's more of a drama. Acting was really good from Oskar Werner as Guy Montag I really bought him as a man that has been nothing but a drone for a corrupt power let alone having no real identity hence his name. But then after spending time with Clarise and reading a book or two it awakens things inside him that have been long dormant, we see he is slowly but surely becoming human because he's using his brain and heart. You really find yourself routing for this guy in not so much just to join in the cause to save humanity but to save his own soul.Julie Christie is very good as Clarise and Linda, it's a duel role but I bought into it I actually did believe the actress was two different people. This choice really adds into the film in fact makes it even more interesting which I'll explain latter.The plotline I personally think is terrifyingly plausible it's the kind of place I honestly wouldn't want to live in; when you think about our technological sub culture how rapid it's evolving and how our current reading sub culture is suffering a slight decline. A corrupt government finding the chance to take advantage of the public by outlawing the very thing that gives us knowledge and even joy in life books. That's a really scary thought, one scene that displays this is a harrowing scene, where a woman that has hidden books throughout her own house, sets herself on fire with the books. This didn't just show how there was something sacred about the books that she's die for then live in ignorance, but it was also to show how much of a living hell the society created truly is as it's a world with not just no place for books but intellects as well.It's true the future looks a little more like the 60's and 70's with some futuristic equipment added, this film was made around the 60's after all. But when you think about it more it does make sense, there was some sort of war sometime in the past which means certain resources would be scarce and due to the intellectual bankruptcy, it means very little invention and technological advancement, ok a few but like I said few and most of that tech is under government control.In a way this film along with the book was sort or prolific on Reality TV and podcasting as we see there is this interactive program they have going where people at their own homes they commutate with each other live, with whatever script given to them. Though the difference is at least with reality TV and podcasting, people actually had something to say and they were about something. These programs we see in this society are bloody boring because they're not about anything, no one is really talking about anything or even engaging in real conversation. It makes sense the program would be uninteresting because the people that created it have no imagination, they have no resources of inspiration to fuel its fire.What disturbs me about this society is how intellectually bankrupt and emotionally unbalanced it has become, we don't just see that books have been taken away, but all other resources of intellect as well. Despite all the technology they have we don't see anyone playing any video games or any board/party games of any kind. Or even watch reruns of any old TV shows like "Star Trek" or "Game of Thrones". This just makes the society all the scarier the inability to enjoy those things.The reason for the whole burning is to create peace and equality and based on the old dictum "ignorance is bliss". Now peace and equality are a genuine goal for every society but the problem is their methodology is perverse and corrupt because as it means subtracting basic important human freedoms, which makes the peace and equality achieved false. Also, bliss has a double meaning which is death, which you feel is something that will happen to this society somewhere along the line. We do see that most of the people in this dystopia are happy, but the happiness isn't genuine it's the kind where people are docile and dopped up which we see most are as there are certain drugs available, which in a way is a bit prolific on our own over the counter drug culture. This happiness isn't genuine because there is no love, it sorts of reminds me of what the Seventh Doctor from an episode of "Doctor Who" once said, "Happiness is nothing without sadness, two sides one coin." And that's the main problem with the populace they have no spiritual balance, no yang for their yin which means no harmony.There is a very interesting contrasting dynamic between both Montag's wife and Clarise and Montag in the middle. It's sort of a Cronenberg like dynamic as it's sort of a contrast and clash between two different duel identities. As well as a clash on the positive ideology of what women can be versus certain stereotypical and faulty ideologies about what women should be. Montag's wife Linda is a product of her society and time, she's like a fancy car but with nothing under the hood to really bring it up to speed. One thing about her that is disturbing isn't just that she's a druggie but how forgetful she's became, in a scene she mentioned how she's forgotten how many pills she's taken, which made me worried because at that moment she could've died. This just shows how truly dangerous the society is and justifies the double meaning of bliss, doing nothing to strengthen your mind leads to dire consequences.Clarise is an alternate version of Montag's wife she's obviously what she could have been. As we see her a person with a mind and a heart. One thinks I like about her is that she's curious about a lot of things in life, like what fire man use to do which is something I can emphasize with because even I'm curious about things all the time. In that society they would regard her as an outcast, crazy but she's not she's being human which is part of what humans in fact intellectually do which is to discover and seek truth out.I even like the interaction scenes with both of them, here it's a real health relationship because both are actually interacting, talking about things and sharing them. Unlike with his wife where they talk almost about nothing, in fact Montag can't even remember why they even fell in love and got married which I'll admit is kind of sad because it just shows how absent the concept of love and emotion is. This story is about the importance of literacy, and how important a role books and any other resources of knowledge really are for our lives. But also, the importance of being a person and never settling for less in life. Books may be destroyed but the human spirit never will along with the ideas with it.Rating: 4 stars

grantss Good, but not great. I haven't read the book but central plot is great. The anti-censorship, pro-freedom-of-expression, anti-fascism, message is a powerful one. However, the story is told in mostly dull and listless fashion. Quite boring to start off with and takes a while to get going. Even once it becomes interesting, it still isn't enthralling. Performances are so-so. Julie Christie is good but the remaining cast are average, at best.Best to read the book, I think.

Lechuguilla Almost but not quite as boring as Tarkovsky's "Solaris" (1972), Fahrenheit 451 is a trial to sit through. Dialogue races along at half the speed of light, and it's helped not at all by thick accents.Characters are superficial, cold, and impersonal; I couldn't identify with any of them; maybe that was Director Truffaut's point; so be it, but they might as well have been stick figures. They are almost constantly in motion; their movements are annoyingly hyper. And given excessive dialogue, I can envision a script that must have been a thousand pages. The plot, because it is so simple, is highly repetitive. Yes, we get the point. In the future, a totalitarian regime will burn books to keep citizens from independent thinking.Truffaut seemed to think this underlying theme offers some radical vision of the future. Actually, it doesn't. The Nazis, under Hitler, burned huge numbers of books in bonfires in the 1930s. So much for the science fiction theme.As with most so-called "sci-fi" films, this one has aged poorly. What may have seemed so inventive and futuristic to some viewers in 1966 looks appallingly stodgy, fifty years later. What we have here is a film that tries to be daring and shocking, yet its underlying theme is culturally chronic. And the look and feel of the film reeks of old-fashioned 1960s James Bond.I find "Fahrenheit 451" perfunctory, uninspiring, dull, tedious, and dry. Except for the poor sound quality and difficult accents, it fits perfectly into the stereotypical image of a cheap American made-for-TV movie of the week. At least the run-time renders it less pretentious than "Solaris" (1972).

Kirpianuscus its virtue - preservation of the spirit of novel. its source of seduction - nuanced use of the images from novel. its role - to remind the essence of dictatorship. short - a beautiful film about censorship who remains an useful example of fine adaptation. a film about the freedom who, with its , at first sigh, simplicity, represents a wise portrait of terror, selfish, hope and its fragility, courage and the importance of truth at the level of individual conscience. a film about beauty. and, maybe, about books. seductive and convincing and useful and charming. because it has the tools to be one of the films who transforms the vision of viewer about reality. as adaptation. but, more important, as a honest film.