I enjoyed the imagery, I appreciated the attempt, but in all, I'm disappointed. I am unimpressed by the characters, and by the approach the director chose to take. I'm not sure if the majority of the people who have read the book or even heard Neal Cassady speak in footage remember him being an eccentric maniac who tweaked while speaking, never slowing until sleep forced him to shut down. When I see the laid back, reserved performance of Garret Hedlund, that is what really makes me sad (instead of being saddened by what the performance is supposed to show). I don't feel the magic that Cassady was known for giving off, nor do I feel any sort of insight or connection to Sal Paradise. I would say that the movie serves more as a visual aid to the book if it contained more content from the actual book.
I understand Salles was taking a biographical approach to capturing the essence of On the Road, as well as the beat scene of the time, rather than an attempt to transform the book into a film (which is what I was kind of expecting), but because of this, the movie wound up with too much content in too little time.
I understand Salles was taking a biographical approach to capturing the essence of On the Road, as well as the beat scene of the time, rather than an attempt to transform the book into a film (which is what I was kind of expecting), but because of this, the movie wound up with too much content in too little time.