Bernd Eichinger and Oskar Roehler messed it up. Completely. How that was even possible considering Houellebecqs brilliant novel is unbelievable. They just made completely shallow, awful melodramatic crap out of what can be considered probably the single most important and greatest novel that world literature has seen at the turn from the 20th to the 21st century. This film is unbearable for all who have read and understood the book that undoubtedly is as deeply philosophical as it is scandalous, provoking and moralizing.
Eichinger and Roehler stated at the 2006 Berlinale, where the movie premiered: "YOU CANNOT FILM SOCIAL CRITICISM, YOU CAN ONLY FILM MELODRAMS." (Eichinger) "THE UTTERLY FATALISTIC RESUMEE OF THE BOOK COULD NOT BE USED. WE DID NOT WANT TO ADOPT HOELLEBECQ'S MORALE." (Roehler) Besides that, they claimed the novel to be too pornographic to be filmed without major changes. They also frankly admitted not to have had any contact with Houellebecq.
These statements and the attitude behind them are shocking, disgusting and can only serve as a negative example for all film-makers. They can only be adequately qualified with the facit: FILMING A NOVEL - HOW YOU MUST NOT DO IT.
Luckily, there are some brilliant films, which prove all the points claimed by Eichinger and Roehler completely wrong: You can film social criticism and not produce shallow melodramas, as proved for example by Harron's wonderful "American Psycho" (from the Bret Easton Ellis Novel). You can translate the pornographic of a novel into a film without censoring it as proves Despentes' magnificent "Baise-moi!" (from Despentes' identically titled novel). You can adopt a completely fatalistic resumee of a novel in a film as proved by Radford's adorable "1984" (from the famous George Orwell Novel).
It is exactly when this happens, that excellent novels are translated into excellent films. Eichinger and Roehler never had the intention to do so, nor would their abilities have been sufficient to do so, even if they had wanted. So, they had to produce this catastrophe now unjustifiedly bearing the name "Elementarteilchen". They failed as drastically as it is possible.
Eichinger and Roehler stated at the 2006 Berlinale, where the movie premiered: "YOU CANNOT FILM SOCIAL CRITICISM, YOU CAN ONLY FILM MELODRAMS." (Eichinger) "THE UTTERLY FATALISTIC RESUMEE OF THE BOOK COULD NOT BE USED. WE DID NOT WANT TO ADOPT HOELLEBECQ'S MORALE." (Roehler) Besides that, they claimed the novel to be too pornographic to be filmed without major changes. They also frankly admitted not to have had any contact with Houellebecq.
These statements and the attitude behind them are shocking, disgusting and can only serve as a negative example for all film-makers. They can only be adequately qualified with the facit: FILMING A NOVEL - HOW YOU MUST NOT DO IT.
Luckily, there are some brilliant films, which prove all the points claimed by Eichinger and Roehler completely wrong: You can film social criticism and not produce shallow melodramas, as proved for example by Harron's wonderful "American Psycho" (from the Bret Easton Ellis Novel). You can translate the pornographic of a novel into a film without censoring it as proves Despentes' magnificent "Baise-moi!" (from Despentes' identically titled novel). You can adopt a completely fatalistic resumee of a novel in a film as proved by Radford's adorable "1984" (from the famous George Orwell Novel).
It is exactly when this happens, that excellent novels are translated into excellent films. Eichinger and Roehler never had the intention to do so, nor would their abilities have been sufficient to do so, even if they had wanted. So, they had to produce this catastrophe now unjustifiedly bearing the name "Elementarteilchen". They failed as drastically as it is possible.