"The Princess Bride" Final Thoughts *Spoilers*

[Kim]

For those who have finished what did you think?

[John]

I really enjoyed it. I somehow haven't seen the movie yet, but am planning to watch it sometime in the next week.

While this wasn't a first read for me, I apparently didn't pay close attention when it was assigned in middle school as I did not remember much beyond the first couple of chapters. Very fun.

I am a big fan of sharing stories and storytelling so I was glad it played an important part in the book.

[Aaron]

Like many of the people commenting in the first impressions thread I had mixed feelings about the framing. I started out liking it, and I enjoyed the pauses in the story to explain why things were cut out, but the additional framing in the bonus material became overbearing.

I have two things I'm interesting in discussing regarding the narrative framing. I decided to commit to reading all of the introductions and bonus material. I have the 30th anniversary edition, and in order it has a 30th anniverary introduction, 25th anniversary introduction, the original introduction, the story, Buttercup's Baby (explanation of legal problems), Buttercup's Baby (first chapter).

1. In the narrative framing in the parts that were written later (after initial release) Goldman seems to imply that the story isn't entirely fictional, and is based partly on real events (in the fictional world he has created). I get this from his references to the real locations, and his mention of the Morgenstern Museum that he mentions visiting, and seeing some of the artifacts from the story, such as the six-fingered sword and a mold of Fezzik's hand. Did everyone get the same reading from that, or are there other interpretations?

2. Goldman seems to use the narrative framing to add to the story. While I think he got a little carried away with things, I think its an interesting concept to use the material such as 25th anniversary introduction to add to the story. What did other people think of this, and what is in your edition of the book?

[Zeljka]

I loved the book, and I have 30th Anniversary edition. When I saw so many introductions, I decided to go with reading the book in publishing order, meaning I started with original introduction and the book itself, then continued with all the other introductions and materials in reverse order.

During reading it never even occurred to me that the book might not be totally made up. I mean, all these places and things he mentions in his introductions are fictitious, and introductions aren't really introductions, rather add-ons. He just smartly flavors them with his own real-life experience in film-making business. At least that is what I think :)

And I agree that he got sometimes a little carried away with things :) I liked that same as his comments in the story itself. They gave me feeling like I am listening to real storyteller, carried away with his own enthusiasm and joy like any would when he senses his readers are captivated by his storytelling.

[Joon]

Aaron wrote: "Like many of the people commenting in the first impressions thread I had mixed feelings about the framing. I started out liking it, and I enjoyed the pauses in the story to explain why things were..."

1. I tried not to dwell much on that aspect. I mean, it was all fiction anyway, so I guess it didn't bother me that he seemingly retroactively made some of that fiction into non-fiction within his fictional world. I mean, is it ever expressly stated anywhere else that the original "book" wasn't based on true events?

2. Honestly, I loved the framing, and I loved that he kept adding to it, and I even kind of hope he continues to do so, though obviously he's about run out of excuses to. There was no 35th anniversary edition, and the 40th anniversary is next year, and who knows if Goldman will live long enough to see the 50th anniversary (he's 81), so next year could very well be the last time we might really hope for any more material.

[Mawgojzeta]

I have never seen the movie. The book was very enjoyable to read! I really liked the style.

[Sandra]

The book was fun. I watched the movie again - saw it once years ago at the insistence of my kids - and found it tedious.

[Casey]

I loved the movie growing up, but just read the book for the first time in December. I gotta say, the book kinda ruined the story for me. I *hated* the framing. If I want Woody Allen, I pop in a Woody Allen movie (and this is something I RARELY do). I don't read a fantasy book to hear about NYC, psychotherapy, movie business, and cheating on your spouse. Ugh.

The one thing that was illuminating and nice was getting some deeper insight into Fezzik and Inigo's friendship. I think that was my favorite aspect of the book. I love the rhymes :)

[Cheryl]

I read the book first about 4 decades ago, as a teen. Of course then there was much less framing then now. I reread it every time material was added, so it was kind of like a game Goldman was playing with fans like me. Kind of like an inside joke. I can't imagine reading the latest edition for the first time as a well-read adult... especially if you've seen the movie....

All this to say I feel fortunate to have experienced it this way. And, yes, I do still love it and could easily read it again.

[Alec]

I was so happy to finally read this! I grew up with the movie being incredibly dear to me, and honestly it still is - but I didn't know there was a book until recently. I was a bit hesitant, wondering if it would be able to live up to the high bar that I hold for the movie.

Buuuut I was SO pleasantly surprised.

It was such a fun and delightful read - just endlessly charming with a lot of heart. It really lived up to expectations. (And honestly after coming straight out of reading Song of Achilles - which was insanely beautiful but ouch - it felt like it was just the perfect bit of fun adventure to have as a 'pallet cleanser'.)

Loved it and was so happy how both materials honour each other so well.

[Gabi]

Laf, reading your thoughts makes me want to read the book.

[Allison]

I agree that the book and the movie are great versions of their own medium. I think they're the only pairing where I like both the movie and the book very much for different reasons.

I'm surprised to hear it called charming though! Can you elaborate on that? I always found the book more cynical than the movie.

[Alec]

Oh sure, I agree it's more cynical (in particular in the way which they portrayed Buttercups solemness to her grief and vow to never love, I thought.) But I think partially that's attributed to just how it is read off the page as opposed to how it translates visually. So I don't think it takes away from it being charming (for me at least!)

I found them to be very close and it's clear which parts in the movie they emphasised for comedic effect. On the flip side of this I found that their emphasis in the books with the villains made them even more nefarious and dastardly, so that felt appropriate.

Also "read off the page." For context I read it as the audio-book, and fully recognise that the tone it was read in played a huge part in that.

There were so many little parts where I laughed out loud to (poor woman next to me in the plane, lol) and was mouthing along to the familiar dialogue - it was just a really refreshing way to revisit this story in a whole new light while remaining wholly familiar.

[Allison]

Oh yes, I love when narrators add to the story! Great, thoughtful analysis, Laf!

[Karin]

Now I know why I missed this--it was in 2012 but it's become active again. I have really enjoyed the movie the two or three times I've seen it, but this is one of those rare times where I think the movie is better than the book.

[Kaia]

The movie version of this book is one of my favorite movies, and I have seen it multiple times. This is the first time I have read the book, and, rather to my surprise, I found that this was a rare case when the movie followed the book too closely for me. The book parts that were included in the movie were almost verbatim, so I found myself just remembering the movie, which made it hard to get invested in the story in the book.

I did very much enjoy learning more about Inigo and Fezzik and the development of their friendship, though. Honestly, the humor in the framing material was mostly not my cup of tea (some of it I enjoyed). I also felt like some of the humor had not aged well, especially in the long beginning section before the main story starts, and made me kind of dislike the narrator.

[Wil]

Kaia wrote: "This is the first time I have read the book, and, rather to my surprise, I found that this was a rare case when the movie followed the book too closely for me."

I was also put off by the book's tone in the prologue compared to the movie. I think I concur with the above sentiment; it really feels like I'm just reading the script of the director's cut. In this case, the edits were justified, and I simply prefer the movie.

[Allison]

I agree. I also find the ending of this one darker. In the movie you think they've made it and will live happily ever after! In the book it's like well they made it, but he's in his mid 20s and lost 50 years of his life to body altering torture, so he could die any day now, among other more pessimistic views. The Zoo of Death was different, but agreed, I think the Pit of Despair was more effective!

[Economondos]

This is the first time I found a movie version to be better than the book. The book isn't bad, but the movie really came across better to me. Perhaps it is the amazing cast that did a better job with the material than my imagination. Maybe Goldman is better at screenplays than novels (as he bemoans in his asides).

[Aga]

Economondos wrote: "This is the first time I found a movie version to be better than the book. The book isn't bad, but the movie really came across better to me. Perhaps it is the amazing cast that did a better job wi..."

I completely agree. It was quite a shocking reread for me. I think the movie and the book were mixed in my memory.