Reading 1001 discussion

Discussion leader; Amanda

Summary (From LitLovers):

The Greek island of Cephallonia—peaceful, remote, famed for its beauty, its light, its mythic history—and only just beginning to enter the twentieth century when the tide of World War II rolls onto its shores. This is the setting for Louis de Bernieres's lyrical, heartbreaking, and hilarious chronicle of the days and nights of the island's inhabitants over fifty tumultuous years.

"It was an island filled with gods," writes Dr. Iannis, Cephallonia's healer and fledgling historian. And though the people who fill the island in 1940 may be less divine than their Olympian forebears, they are nonetheless divinely human, and none more so than the doctor's daughter, Pelagia. Willful, proud, independent, and beautiful, Pelagia finds herself between two men: Mandras, a handsome young fisherman, besotted with love for her but determined to permanently secure her love (and a dowry from her father) by finding "something to get to grips with" when he joins the resistance; and Captain Corelli, a charming, mandolin-playing, exceedingly reluctant officer of the Italian garrison that establishes the Axis presence on the island.

Corelli is thought slightly mad in his passion for music and the gentleness of his troops' "occupation" of Cephallonia. Yet his madness quickly begins to make life seem more "various, rich, and strange" for everyone who encounters him—especially, and most confusingly, for Pelagia...

But with the arrival of the Germans and then of the Communists, life on the island becomes more chaotic and barbaric, more certainly a part of the process by which "history repeats itself, first as tragedy, and then again as tragedy." Pelagia's life, once rife with possibility, an idyll of time, becomes a long search for something fine and lasting amid loss and separation, deprivation and fear.

Her story of love found and changed and misplaced, and the story of the life she shares with the people of Cephallonia—a life permanently altered by the war and its brutal aftermath. (From the publisher.)

Questions:

1) Why do you think de Bernieres chose to make his romantic hero a musician? What significance does Corelli's composition "Pelagia's March" carry within the narrative?

2) Dr. Iannis writes that the island of Cephallonia is "so immense in antiquity that the very rocks themselves exhale nostalgia and the red earth lies stupefied not only by thesun, but by the impossible weight of memory" [p. 5]. How does their awareness of the island's history and prehistory color the way the Cephallonians see themselves? Does it help them to come to terms with their traditional roles in life? What attitude does it give them toward their recent conquerors

3) "Honour and common sense; in the light of the other, both of them are ridiculous" [p. 320]. What does de Bernieres mean by this? How do the novel's events confirm or illustrate this statement? Do you find that in certain of the novel's characters these two qualities are not, in fact, mutually exclusive?

4) Does the happy ending conform with the plot and spirit of the entire novel, or does it represent a shift into a more fantastic, less realistic mode? Do you find it to be an appropriate or an inappropriate conclusion to Pelagia's and Corelli's story?

5) What understanding do the main characters have of love throughout the novel: how does this change/ guide their actions?

6) Bernières is quoted as saying that "history ought to be made up of the stories of ordinary people only". How does this ideology relate to the novel? In what ways do you agree or disagree that social history is superior to political history?

7) Bernières takes an ambiguous attitude towards heroism and villainy in the novel: many of the characters, despite committing atrocities, are viewed as human victims of bad circumstances. How do you feel about this sympathetic portrayal of characters in the novel that commit/attempt acts such as rape and execution? What does it contribute to the moral character of the novel?

8) What message does this book deliver on the nature of political ideology and political passion? What is the role of political ideology in the lives of Mandras, Kokolias, Stamatis, Hector, Weber, Alexi? How do their actions support or refute their stated political creeds? What political or antipolitical ideals inspire the novel's most noble characters, Carlo and Dr. Iannis?

9) Finally: What did you think of the book? and did it earn it's place on the list for you?

* BONUS: for anyone else who has seen the movie, how did you feel about the reduction in side stories (such as Carlo's) and the change in ending? How does it fundamentally change the story?

Discuss below! :)

I'm about 2/3 of the way through Corelli's Mandolin. I think I would need to finish before trying to answer some of these questions. I am finding a lot to like in it. De Bernieres had some very interesting things to say about the situations his characters were in; he created some full characters and had them say some poignant things to one another as well.
On #5 "What understanding do the main characters have of love", I liked what Dr Iannis tries to teach his daughter of it: "Love is not breathlessness, it is not excitement...that is just being "in love", which any fool can do. Love itself is what is left over when being in love has burned away, and this is both an art and a fortunate accident."
On #6, I wouldn't say that that the history of ordinary people is superior to political history but I think it has been given too little attention and would like to have had more of it when I was studying world and American history. I think perhaps this is being done to some extent, as when I watched Ken Burns' "Civil War" they included a lot of letters written by soldiers and their families and that added a lot to understanding of that time in our (U. S.) history.
I did see the film but it was too long ago to remember it well enough to compare. I think I would like to watch it again after finishing the novel.

I just finished this - and I loved it. I'm not sure I have anything bright to say in response to the questions, but will try! Now that I have gone through the questions once - I'll say some of them are complicated and I will have to circle back. Here are initial thoughts on some of them:

1) Why do you think de Bernieres chose to make his romantic hero a musician? What significance does Corelli's composition "Pelagia's March" carry within the narrative?

Certainly to Pelagia it showed that Corelli was more than just a soldier, that he had culture, an education and sensitivity. The March is the romantic thread which enables Corelli to declare his love.


2) Dr. Iannis writes that the island of Cephallonia is "so immense in antiquity that the very rocks themselves exhale nostalgia and the red earth lies stupefied not only by thesun, but by the impossible weight of memory" [p. 5]. How does their awareness of the island's history and prehistory color the way the Cephallonians see themselves? Does it help them to come to terms with their traditional roles in life? What attitude does it give them toward their recent conquerors

This is a very interesting question to me, since I just got back from Italy (a few weeks ago) which is also a country of very ancient history and I am Canadian - so basically without that weight of memory. I am sure it affects how you view yourself and events. I would think there must be a kind of wry attitude of 'I've seen 'em come, and I've seen them go' to the successive occupiers. There probably is a feeling of timelessness and things changing at a snail's pace, so perhaps this reconciles the islanders with their traditional roles. I actually thought this was more due to geographical isolation. They are also very proud people probably due to all of that history. I think they may have had an advantage psychologically since history has shown them that the invaders will eventually leave.


4) Does the happy ending conform with the plot and spirit of the entire novel, or does it represent a shift into a more fantastic, less realistic mode? Do you find it to be an appropriate or an inappropriate conclusion to Pelagia's and Corelli's story?

Although I liked the ending, I felt it was the weakest part of the book. I do think it fit in with the rest of the book, and did not find it fantastic.


6) Bernières is quoted as saying that "history ought to be made up of the stories of ordinary people only". How does this ideology relate to the novel? In what ways do you agree or disagree that social history is superior to political history?

This novel is a imagining of the social history of that time period from start to finish. I don't think that either types of history are superior, however I do think they are each important and help flesh out a fuller story. I think for non-historians a social history of important events makes them more relatable and may lead to greater curiosity about the political machinations.


7) Bernières takes an ambiguous attitude towards heroism and villainy in the novel: many of the characters, despite committing atrocities, are viewed as human victims of bad circumstances. How do you feel about this sympathetic portrayal of characters in the novel that commit/attempt acts such as rape and execution? What does it contribute to the moral character of the novel?

I think this is the correct attitude to take. Of course wars/terrorist actions/despotic regimes attract some truly evil people - but most people are not that black and white. Some people are very susceptible to partaking in vile acts (eg. rape) if they fall in with others who encourage and condone this bad behavior. Others are forced to commit acts that we, in safety and peace, consider heinous (such as executions as described in the book - I am specifically not including genocide which is inexcusable). Personally, I am a pacifist but I don't know if my moral courage would be able to withstand the pressure cooker of war and having to carry out orders.


9) Finally: What did you think of the book? and did it earn it's place on the list for you?

I loved it, and yes.

I'm in a Sci-Fi readathon that ends on the 14th. Just dropping in here to say that I have Corelli's Mandolin ready and waiting for me for the 15th and will join in discussion. Really looking forward to it.

Valerie, I really enjoyed reading your comments, and I agree with them also. I just finished yesterday. While I also mostly enjoyed the closure of the ending I thought it lacked credibility on a point or two.

On the eighth question, on political ideology, the author showed them as being somewhat fluid in some of the characters, which I think is the reality, esp in younger people. Dr Iannis correctly predicted that Pelagia, despite her profession of socialism, would probably cry when the king died. Her semi-socialist husband became more politically conservative as time went on also.
As the questions make evident, de Bernieres put a lot of different elements into this novel, and though some might say "too many", I think that it worked well here.

George wrote: "Valerie, I really enjoyed reading your comments, and I agree with them also. I just finished yesterday. While I also mostly enjoyed the closure of the ending I thought it lacked credibility on a po..."

Thanks George!

I agree with your assessment for question #8. I think that the many complex elements that are in the novel are what push the book into the realm of being a great book.

I agree with so many of your thoughts Valerie.

1. The music in general helped the Greek characters grow to accept the Italians. It also highlights the differences between Mandras and Pelagia as it shows Corelli in a more cultured light and more suitable as a potential partner for somebody raised as unconventionally as Pelagia. Also, it draws the reader in. We care when the Italians die. Music also offers some excuse for why Corelli does not come forward to speak to Pelagia after the war; as Dr Iannis had warned, he would have had to make a choice between music and Pelagia and I think that deep down, that is one reason why he hid from her, he could not do it.
Pelagia's march is their story in music. It functions as something personal for them - it helps in the declaration of their love and helps show Pelagia that he never forgot about her. It also in some way, helps tie his years away from her into the main story.

2. The idea of being invaded is part of their cultural memory - but they also show some evidence of being willing to interact - probably based on this same inheritance. I think it is the earthquake that functions as the major disruptive force, rather than the war, for most of the Greek characters. They lose their homes (Pelagia's village is rebuilt a few miles away, so it is literally not the same place that they are living in), Corelli complains that the place is full of concrete and used to be so beautiful. And Pelagia wonders if that is a bad thing. With modern architecture and, eventually, tourists, Cephalonia seems a less cut off world. It is the children (ie Antonia) who benefit. As far as I remember the older generations never leave the island after the war.

4. I think the ending is very brave. Corelli effectively has nothing. He has no family, his friends are dead and he has finally found a potential home with Pelagia. But... there is his music. He is unlikely to have been able to have had both. And could he have stayed in Greece just after the war. Could Pelagia have gone to Italy? It seems so obvious to us that he should have spoken to her... but they had been apart for years, I think that he had just found out before they parted that she actually had a fiancé which would have been a cause of concern. I think he was both so afraid that she would say no (or that she was married) that he seized on the excuse of Antonia not to speak to her, and also so afraid of losing the beauty of his memories. I kind of wish that he was not in his 70s when he finally comes out of the woodwork though! So, I like the ending, but I wish he had revealed himself earlier. This is why I think the idea of his successful music career is so important, as he only reveals himself after he has retired. I love the last scene of them on the motorbike though!

7. Everybody is human. Everybody is flawed. And war can bring out the worst in anybody as normal moral boundaries are suspended. I agree with Valerie's comments here entirely.

9. I think that this is one of the greatest books of the twentieth century and it totally deserves it place on the list.

Karen wrote: "I agree with so many of your thoughts Valerie.

1. The music in general helped the Greek characters grow to accept the Italians. It also highlights the differences between Mandras and Pelagia as it..."

Thanks, Karen. I like you analysis for question 4. I think you are correct - there would have been so many (SO MANY!) difficulties to overcome if either of them had tried to emigrate to the other's country. It probably would have been the death of their relationship. I was thinking that same - I wish he had revealed himself earlier (even a little earlier!).

I read this book ages ago (probably in 2011/2012 ish?), and I have always considered it one of my favorite books since. I actually saw the movie first, and thought it was great, until I read the book lol.

I'm also loving your comments George, Karen, and Valerie! I think you guys have made some great points, and I agree with many of them.

I like that you brought up the series "Civil War" George- it's one of my favorites as well specifically for the reason that they integrated personal histories from so many walks of life and sides of the war. I think that's one of the reasons I enjoyed this book so much as well.

just to add some thoughts of my own:

1) I think Corelli being a musician is important because it serves as a foil to his identity as a soldier. One aspect of his identity destroys, but the other creates and connects with people (ie. Pelagia's March- which also serves to extend her life/legacy, counteracting the actions of war). I think the duality of the human spirit/existence is highlighted well this way as well.

2) I pretty much just love and agree with what Valerie already said (also Hi fellow Canadian!) I noticed that about Italy as well: we have such an apathetic national character compared to them lol.

3) I think Corelli coming back to the Island and leaving when he sees the baby with Pelagia actually may play into an example of both: he has the honour not to intercede on what he thinks her life is. As well, it does make common sense that if she has a family, him pushing in at that point would not have been sensical.

4) I found the ending somewhat fanciful but not so much that it took me out of the book. I also like that it subverted expectations by not immediately giving them a happily ever after.

5) One aspect of the book I particularly loved was Carlo's sense of love as a motivator to do right by the men you love/serve with whether it is requited or not. I think that ideal is remarkably beautiful. His sacrifice to save Corelli seemed very apt to this as well.

6 (and kind of 8 as well)) I agree with George: I think it should be given far more consideration than it is now. I think humanizing history is important to get most people to both understand it/care about it. However, there are broader systemic issues that are inherently political and cannot be addressed just through personal history, so I don't fully agree with the author there.

He's pretty absolutely critical of political idealogies themselves throughout the book and in his interviews, and while I don't think that is an entirely bad thing, I also think that does reflect the privileged position of a white man in 20th-21st century middle class Britain. Since his identity and existence is not fundamentally politicized in any way, I think it's easy for him to have that position.

7) I liked this aspect of the novel, because it is fundamentally true. However, I think it begs the question of whether we use this information to just be sympathetic to those who commit wrong, or if we use it to examine the political factors that push all kinds of "normal" people toward atrocity. One reason I think political history is still important. Weber's actions exist in the framework of the Nazi regime, Mandras' attempted rape exists in the context of patriarchal socialization.

9) Despite a fundamental disagreement I seem to have with the author to a certain extent: I love this book and what it does represent. I think it deserves it's place on the list as a testament to the power of personal histories.

and bonus: I actually like the book ending better: the movie ending was very Hollywood and substantially shortened the story. Also I was saddened that almost everything about Carlo was taken out.

Goodness, your point(s) on question 5 resonate with me. Well said - and true.

1) Why do you think de Bernieres chose to make his romantic hero a musician? What significance does Corelli's composition "Pelagia's March" carry within the narrative?

Music is a theme central to the plot and to understanding many characters in the book. Music helped unite the main characters of the book together. Here is a quote from the book that highlights the importance of music. "She realized suddenly that there was something about music that had never been revealed to her before: it was not merely the production of sweet sound; it was, to those who understood it, an emotional and intellectual odyssey." The mandolin and its music are symbolic for Corelli's sensitive and gentle nature. Music acts as a counterpoint to the horrors of war. Pelagia's anger diffused when Corelli gave her the cassette containing Pelagia's March. It showed that he didn't forget her.

2) Dr. Iannis writes that the island of Cephallonia is "so immense in antiquity that the very rocks themselves exhale nostalgia and the red earth lies stupefied not only by the sun, but by the impossible weight of memory" [p. 5]. How does their awareness of the island's history and prehistory color the way the Cephallonians see themselves? Does it help them to come to terms with their traditional roles in life? What attitude does it give them toward their recent conquerors.

Cephallonia has an ancient history steeped in folklore and mythology. In terms of prehistory, it is one of the first inhabited islands of Greece. It is also a place with a turbulent history of invasions and occupations. I think this history instills a sense of resilience, independence, and strength of character in native Cephallonians. The locals are proud of their island and their heritage. Despite the island's history of conquests, its rocks, sand, and natural elements remain as witness. They have been here since the beginning and will remain long after its residents pass.

4) Does the happy ending conform with the plot and spirit of the entire novel, or does it represent a shift into a more fantastic, less realistic mode? Do you find it to be an appropriate or an inappropriate conclusion to Pelagia's and Corelli's story?

I agree with George. While I appreciate happy endings, it maybe wasn't all that realistic.

5) What understanding do the main characters have of love throughout the novel: how does this change/ guide their actions?

Love is shown through different forms: romantic love, familial love, and friendship. I agree with all the points made previously about this question.

6) Bernières is quoted as saying that "history ought to be made up of the stories of ordinary people only". How does this ideology relate to the novel? In what ways do you agree or disagree that social history is superior to political history?

I agree that social history is superior to political history. In political history, the focus is on battlefields, conquests, and weapons. It often fails to consider the personal and human impact of world history.

7) Bernières takes an ambiguous attitude towards heroism and villainy in the novel: many of the characters, despite committing atrocities, are viewed as human victims of bad circumstances. How do you feel about this sympathetic portrayal of characters in the novel that commit/attempt acts such as rape and execution? What does it contribute to the moral character of the novel?

As we've seen in a lot of the other 1001 books about war, extreme circumstances can drive otherwise good people to commit horrible deeds. One can say that even the villains are victims in times of war. It does not justify what they do, but it helps us understand the reasons behind their actions.

9) Finally: What did you think of the book? and did it earn it's place on the list for you?

I think it is a great book and worthy of its place on the list.

I am going to start with question 9, which is what did you think about the book.

I loved being in the book and thought the characters were varied and interesting. I also felt that the nature of the historical fiction, whereby I learned about large historical events through the actions and voices of a few individuals worked really well for this book. Plus, the writing style whereby we are often hearing the main characters internal monologue is very effective. I think it should be on the list.
That said, I do feel as though the author was an unreliable historian of Greek history leading up to the Civil War. The resistance fighters were splintered and often clashed during WWII but the communists were probably not all horrible people as represented by Mandras and his superiors and evidently the ELAS were effective resistance fighters against the Germans not just "sitting it out" as represented in this book. I am not knowledgable about Greek history so I am no doubt missing the complexity of the situation but I did think that Louis de Bernières did not capture the complexity either.


1) Why do you think de Bernieres chose to make his romantic hero a musician? What significance does Corelli's composition "Pelagia's March" carry within the narrative?

As others have said, it was important the Corelli was sensitive and educated enough to be worthy of Pelagia and that his music was really the core of his existence not fighting. When you think about it, the average fighter in WWII was NOT a soldier before being trained specifically for the war. In the US, for example, the standing army was about 400,000 before the war while over 14 million people worked for the war effort. In this way Corelli represented all those whose heart was really somewhere else.
I loved the fact that so many decades later "Pelagia's March" was out in the world representing Corelli's love.

2) Dr. Iannis writes that the island of Cephallonia is "so immense in antiquity that the very rocks themselves exhale nostalgia and the red earth lies stupefied not only by the sun, but by the impossible weight of memory" [p. 5]. How does their awareness of the island's history and prehistory color the way the Cephallonians see themselves? Does it help them to come to terms with their traditional roles in life? What attitude does it give them toward their recent conquerors.

They were a proud people and they were able to resist, although not completely effectively, against the Italians. In many ways they could see that situation would not last forever. It wasn't until they were resisting the Germans, or the earth itself during the quake that they suffered from true despair.

3) "Honour and common sense; in the light of the other, both of them are ridiculous" [p. 320]. What does de Bernieres mean by this? How do the novel's events confirm or illustrate this statement? Do you find that in certain of the novel's characters these two qualities are not, in fact, mutually exclusive?

I felt that Dr. Iannis had both honour and common sense and that at times this became ridiculous when he would attempt to do something honorable and that would have been sensible in an ordinary time but because of the war became ridiculous....the collecting of snails for example was totally sensible given they were starving but the image of them climbing all the walls was a delightfully ridiculous vision.

4) Does the happy ending conform with the plot and spirit of the entire novel, or does it represent a shift into a more fantastic, less realistic mode? Do you find it to be an appropriate or an inappropriate conclusion to Pelagia's and Corelli's story?

Although I think the ending completely followed the spirit of the novel, I did think that it was a touch weak in that it depended on either a serious miscommunication or a falsehood. Either Corelli was honorable and did not press his case to Pelagia when he saw her with a baby because he didn't want to disrupt her life OR as others have said, he didn't want to disrupt his own life and did not return to Pelagia in order to continue his life as a musician. I do think that if Corelli really loved Pelagia the way he said he did that he would have made very certain that she was married and not take it at face value that a woman with a baby is married.

5) What understanding do the main characters have of love throughout the novel: how does this change/ guide their actions?

I really enjoyed Dr. Iannis' description of love being what is left over after "in love" burns away. Ultimately some of the strongest love in the book was between father and daughter but also between the two women: Pelagia and Drosoula. Theirs was a love that truly sustained them.

6) Bernières is quoted as saying that "history ought to be made up of the stories of ordinary people only". How does this ideology relate to the novel? In what ways do you agree or disagree that social history is superior to political history?

The interesting twist on Bernières quote is that his people were not ordinary people. They lived ordinary lives in many regards but they were extraordinary people which is why I enjoyed being with them. I do agree with Amanda that a disregard of social history will leave political history quite hollow.

7) Bernières takes an ambiguous attitude towards heroism and villainy in the novel: many of the characters, despite committing atrocities, are viewed as human victims of bad circumstances. How do you feel about this sympathetic portrayal of characters in the novel that commit/attempt acts such as rape and execution? What does it contribute to the moral character of the novel?

I agree you have to have context in order to understand that full nature of victimhood during a war. I understood how Mandras lost his sense of self and therefore acted out of rage that was justified. However, the way he chose to act out by attempting to rape Pelagia is still completely morally wrong regardless. Mandras as a whole was a less realistic character for me and therefore I was less sympathetic to him than the author.

It's taken me a while to get into this book. At first it felt a bit like the author was a bit too fond of his own clever turns of phrase, much like his Dr. Iannis. I also expected Corelli to turn up sooner! I'm almost 200 pages in now and it looks like he's finally making an appearance. So far the character I feel the most invested in is Carlo Guercio.

Leni wrote: "It's taken me a while to get into this book. At first it felt a bit like the author was a bit too fond of his own clever turns of phrase, much like his Dr. Iannis. I also expected Corelli to turn u..."

Yes, I was very invested in Carlo. I felt his story was very powerful.

4) Does the happy ending conform with the plot and spirit of the entire novel, or does it represent a shift into a more fantastic, less realistic mode? Do you find it to be an appropriate or an inappropriate conclusion to Pelagia's and Corelli's story?

I thought the ending very appropriate. I was so invested in the relationship of Pelagia and Corelli that I kept waiting for the reunion. It seemed liked it never would but I was glad for the outcome.

5) What understanding do the main characters have of love throughout the novel: how does this change/ guide their actions?

The atrocities of war changed everyone including how and why they loved. The earthquake was another confounding factor. But then the new generation comes along without war and it changes again.

7) Bernières takes an ambiguous attitude towards heroism and villainy in the novel: many of the characters, despite committing atrocities, are viewed as human victims of bad circumstances. How do you feel about this sympathetic portrayal of characters in the novel that commit/attempt acts such as rape and execution? What does it contribute to the moral character of the novel?

Such a powerful question. Bad things happen to good people and war changes everyone. I thought De Bernieres humanistic approach was very apropos.

8. What political or antipolitical ideals inspire the novel's most noble characters, Carlo and Dr. Iannis?

Dr. Iannis was my favorite character and he had no patience for the political. He was so practical; everyone bleeds the same. Carlo seemed almost Christ-like in that he only did good and gave the ultimate sacrifice, his life for another.

9) Finally: What did you think of the book? and did it earn it's place on the list for you?

I still need to write a review but I liked the book. I think it earns its place on the list. This is the first book I have read from the Greek point of view concerning World War II.

I look forward to answering the bonus question tomorrow after I see the movie.

Gail wrote: "I am going to start with question 9, which is what did you think about the book.

I loved being in the book and thought the characters were varied and interesting. I also felt that the nature of th..."

I agree with your sentiments on Mandras. I felt the same way.

Leni wrote: "It's taken me a while to get into this book. At first it felt a bit like the author was a bit too fond of his own clever turns of phrase, much like his Dr. Iannis. I also expected Corelli to turn u..."

Leni, it took me a while to get into this book too!

Has anyone seen the movie? Is it close to the book? Does it enhance the book or detract from it?

Kelly wrote: "Has anyone seen the movie? Is it close to the book? Does it enhance the book or detract from it?"

I am watching the movie tomorrow and will let you know:)

Kelly wrote: "Has anyone seen the movie? Is it close to the book? Does it enhance the book or detract from it?"

I haven't seen it. It isn't well rated (ie. very poorly!): 5.9/10 on IMDB and 28% on Rotten Tomatoes.

* BONUS: for anyone else who has seen the movie, how did you feel about the reduction in side stories (such as Carlo's) and the change in ending? How does it fundamentally change the story?

The movie concentrates just on the WWII aspect of the story. I thought the relationship between father and daughter was very good and true to the book. Captain Corelli and Pelagia are the main focal points of the movie and given all the complexities of the book it seems appropriate. Carlo's story is not talked about at all but the relationship between Gunter and Anthony remains. The ending is changed and Hollywoodized but it fits with the movie.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the Rotten Tomatoes rating as that website did not exist when the movie came out, the data is squed. I thought the movie was worth the watch.