Talk:The Magnificent Ambersons

Novels High‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has an incomplete infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern.

Untitled[edit]

I'd dispute the statement that minimizes Tarkington's work (and makes it seem like Welles' accomplishment). While it's indisputable that Welles was among the best at adapting works to the screen, he sticks very closely to the book. The book is brilliant. The film's brilliance is severely impacted by the butchering edits, especially in the second half.

Buddenbrooks[edit]

I've always thought that this story (which of course I know through the Orson Welles film, not the long-forgotten source novel) contains more than a few echoes of Thomas Mann's Buddenbrooks (1901), also the story of how a family (haute bourgeois in their case) goes from dominance to near destitution, including loss of the family mansion, over the course of a generation or two.

Is there any evidence that Tarkington was influenced by the older story? Surely worth mentioning if there is, or if published critics have made such a comparison.Paulturtle (talk) 00:56, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]