Mysteries of the Mysteries of Pittsburgh

As noted by Bookslut and Largehearted Boy, Friday there's an open casting call for the movie version of The Mysteries of Pittsburgh. Here, in, of all places, Pittsburgh, where they will be shooting the film.

So I promptly read the book, because I plan to show up at the open call. We're supposed to dress early/mid 1980s. Which is a little funny, because while the book was written then, it isn't really set then, except perhaps for its cavalier, pre-AIDS sexual mores. So I've been thinking about 1980s style. And, well, Adam Ant.

While Adam Ant does make an appearance in the book (via lyrics), I admit I watched more than one of his old videos, entranced by the true original Jack Sparrow. Actually, I meant to be getting to some questions about the movie-i-zation of TMOP. Those questions -- including spoiler elements -- after the jump.

I'd say The Mysteries of Pittsburgh has 4 main characters and 2 secondary characters. We have

Art Bechstein, our narrator
Arthur Lemcomte, Art's best friend, sometime pursuer & Gatsby-slash-Allen Ginsberg figure to Art
Cleveland, Arthur's longtime friend & Neal Cassady figure to Art
Phlox, Art (not Arthur's) girlfriend

Art (not Arthur's) dad
Jane, Cleveland's girlfriend

The story goes something like: Art meets Arthur, then Phlox and Cleveland and Jane, 20-something adventures ensue. Phlox and Art have a love affair, Arthur may have designs on Art, Art has problems with his dad, Cleveland has problems with the law, Art gets hot for Arthur, things fall apart.

So what do we know about the casting? The film stars Peter Sarsgaard (love!) and  Sienna Miller (pretty). Do they play Art, the narrator, and his lover Phlox? Nope. imdb says:

Peter Sarsgaard - Cleveland
Sienna Miller - Jane

A peek at wikipedia, which is probably on track, says...

Jon Foster - Art Bechstein
Mena Suvari - Phlox

If you're wondering, Where's Arthur? I've found the answer. Director/adapter Rawson Marshall Thurber tells Pajiba:

I suppose the most glaring change is the removal, whole cloth, of Arthur Lecomte from the story. In the novel, there’s this sort of a four-pointed love rhombus — for lack of a better term — between Art, Arthur, Phlox and Cleveland. I felt strongly that in order for the film to function properly, it needed a more efficient and more cinematic engine — in short, a love triangle. So I eliminated Arthur from the narrative and folded in important elements of his character into Cleveland’s and moved from there. I think the result really gives the story the momentum needed in the medium.

Hmmm. I imagine the "important elements" of Arthur's character that remain are the ones that get Art hot and bothered, so at least the sexuality across boundaries makes the cut. But having just finished the book, I thought the story needed Arthur, that he was kind of Virgil to Art's Dante -- for a post-college summer, instead of hell. Oh well. I suppose I shouldn't miss him if Chabon doesn't.

And if anyone can play a character that is Cassady-ish and Ginsberg-ian all at once, it's probably Peter Sarsgaard.

Comments

[Dan Wickett]

I'd say if you show up with that sweet strip AA has underneath his eyes, you'll be golden for the punk scenes. Just try to not to appear nearly as masculine as he does in this video.

If they pass on you, maybe hire the indie promoter from a few posts earlier - Clegg?

[franQ]

First of all, welcome to Pittsburgh-- where I've just spent the last 2 years. Enjoy! Now on to my rant... Thanks for listening.

I consider myself THE #1 "Mysteries of Pittsburgh" fan, and somehow I only JUST learned about this film adaptation... which I've been waiting for since 1993 when I first read the book. And I am SO angry about it, I want to cry.

Who does this director/writer think he is, CHANGING the story? I read in article that he got into filmmaking so he could one day make this movie (because of his love for the book) and then he combines Arthur and Cleveland into ONE character! What the f***!? (And why is Peter Saarsgard playing the role when he's clearly 10 years too old?)

I checked out the official website and watched the behind the scenes footage. The director's wearing a Tigers cap and tossing a football around like some Total Jock. Doesn't look like a true “Mysteries” fan to me! (And his comment about "the gay sex comes later" slightly offended me. Not to mention the thought of Art Bechstein having sex with Cleveland...Dude, it would NEVER happen!)

All I can say is, I got my MFA in Dramatic Writing at Carnegie Mellon (right behind the REAL "Cloud Factory," where it doesn't look like they're actually shooting) just so I could one day adapt this wonderful novel into a film...Which is EXACTLY what I will do, once this so-called version miserably fails.

[Polina]

What the hell is this director talking about? There is a love triangle in the book: between Art, Arthur and Plox. How did he factor Cleveland into it? I cant believe this!!! Removing Arthur changes the whole book. It is an entirely different story without him. How could Michael Chabon stand for this? And after such a good adoptation of Wonder Boys.
The truth is they did not want a bisexual character. So they completely cut out anything gay out of the story. This is outrageous!
I wont even bother seeing the movie now.

[Wrongshore]

Actually, as long as there's a love affair between Art and the new Cleveland, I could be sold. Especially after seeing Saarsgaard in Kinsey. It's a different story, for sure, but as long as it hasn't just become a hetero triangle I think it could remain adequately true to the book. Arthur Lecomte is a great, great character -- maybe he'll turn up somewhere else.