tieman64 Martin Ritt adapted William Faulkner's "The Hamlet" in 1958 (the film was released as "The Long, Hot Summer"). He followed this up with another Faulkner adaptation, "The Sound and The Fury", released one year later. It's a trite and plodding melodrama.To the ire of Faulkner fans, Ritt's adaptation condenses the vast time spans of Faulkner's novel down to but a few days. Gone too are most of the novel's characters and subplots. Ritt does make one interesting change, though, choosing to tell his tale through the eyes of a teenage girl who was but a minor character in Faulkner's original novel. This lends the film an interesting perspective; the antithesis of Ritt's earlier Faulkner adaptation.The film's plot, like the plays of Tennessee Williams, is mostly overcooked melodrama, filled with antebellum landscapes, totems of the Deep South, wealthy land owners, backwater Mississippi characters and many familial dysfunctions. It co-stars Yul Brynner as Jason Compson, a once wealthy man who is forced to sell his land, shop and work for a new owner. Compson's desire to cling to the past – his previous wealth, and the heydays of antebellum life – exhibits itself as a manic desire to prevent his step-niece (Joanna Woodward) running away from the family. He thus interferes in her life as a means of preserving his own past. The film boasts a jazz score by Alex North.5/10 – For Ritt completists only.

miss_lady_ice-853-608700 This is "based on" William Faulkner's classic novel, The Sound and The Fury. If you were wondering how they managed to get the nifty incomprehensible narrative onto the big screen...they didn't, instead opting for all the clichés of the Steamy South.Of the two Quentins in the novel, the filmmakers decided to do away with male Quentin and instead focus on Caddy's illegitimate daughter. This did not upset me as much as it does some fans of the novel- all Quentin really does is lust after his sister. The scene in which the incestuous desire is most apparent is transposed to the big scene, except it's girl Quentin (Joanne Woodward) being forced to say her sleazy travelling circus artist's name by her "uncle" Jason (Yul Brynner).In this film, the novel is re-done as Quentin's coming-of-age. Jason is now adopted rather than being her blood uncle so the writers can have their cake and eat it. Quentin is Jason's only hope to save his adopted family's good name: his adopted sister Caddy (Margaret Leighton)is an ageing nympho; one brother is an alcoholic; and the other one, Benjy, is a mentally-retarded mute. The parents were no good either.It's almost a parody of Southern Literature: nymphos, lushes, incest, lust, and it's quite entertaining on this level. However, the casting choices were poor. Joanne Woodward has a lovely Southern accent but she was pushing thirty when she played seventeen-year-old Quentin, making her look more like an idiotic woman rather than a schoolgirl (although this family are a bunch of misfits). Yul Brynner does not exactly come to mind when you think of a Southern brute but he is suitably brutish and sensual. Jason in the book was hardly sensual but the film-makers need their romance.Margaret Leighton isn't that bad as Caddy. It's not clear why her brothers would be so infatuated with her but she fills the role of decadent mother quite well.Whoever is playing the travelling circus man is risible, as is the person who wrote the dialogue. We get a bunch of clichés, pseudo-meaningful lines and illogical flirtation. It all looks like somebody filmed a dud Tennessee Williams play.If you're looking to punish a student too lazy to read the novel, please show them this film. Unless you desperately need your fix of steamy Southern melodrama, I would return to Tennessee Williams. Poor William Faulkner must have got a bit of a shock when he saw this.

Modemom007 I came across this movie one afternoon on the FOX channel. There seemed to be well known and respected actors and actresses in it, so I decided to watch it. I was a bit disappointed in the development of the plot. There were times when I was confused as the movie went from one scene to another; from one character to another. I was left scurrying to figure out who was who and what their part was in the overall plot. I also felt that the movie moved a bit slow. A few times I actually became a little bit bored. Yul Brenner played his deep dark part to a "T". Joanne Woodward's character was a little bit ditsy for me, and I was surprised to find on this website that she was 29 years old when she made this movie. Kind of old to be playing a "school girl" who had to go to summer school. That part was not believable to me at all. She did look much younger than her 29 years but not that much. I wished that they had developed Quentin's (Joanne Woodward) relationship with her mother a bit earlier, since the character she played in the movie was affected by the absence of her mother while she was growing up. The ending was good, and I am glad that Quentin learned a very important life lesson about men and love at an early age. A lot of woman do not learn that lesson until it is too, too late. I was also glad to see in the last moments of the movie that Jason (Yul Brenner) was more softhearted than I had thought when he gave Quentin what was due her.

rshuma1 OK...this is one of the WORST adaptations of all time. For those who say "it's BETTER than the original novel"...are you MAD!!! Faulkner's "The Sound and the Fury" is one the the greatest American novels ever written (just because it can't be read by someone with a 5th grade education doesn't mean it isn't any good). The only thing this film has in common with the novel is the title and the names of the characters. Overall...it it dreadful, and fans of the novel are encouraged to stay away from it.Oh...and who's brilliant idea was it to cast Yul Brenner as Jason. UGH!