...I'll keep this brief.

Bradbury would not be happy with this film. Bradbury appreciators are not and never will be happy with this film. Where is Mildred? Where is Faber? Where is the Hound? Who tore the beating heart out of a fine parable and crushed it? What possessed them? When did they sell their souls to the devil? How did they manage to get Bradbury's or his estate's blessing for this cartoon? Why, oh, why was that blessing given?

This film embodies everything Bradbury warned us about.

"Lecture's over."

Ray Bradbury stated in a lecture (at UCLA) that his novel 'Fahrenheit 451' wasn't about censorship. He made it clear that the theme of his book IS about the role of mass media and its effect on the populace. Basically he believed the old "idiot box" makes people less capable of assimilating complex information. Popular opinion dictated that 'Fahrenheit 451' is about censorship, because Bradbury wrote the book during an era of actual book burnings. For example: During a college lecture on his novel, when he presented the truth of the book's theme to an auditorium full of students, he was stopped in his tracks by someone loudly exclaiming "No! It's about censorship!". After regaining his composure, Bradbury then tried to correct the student by holding up his novel and pointing to his name on the cover. Others chimed in quickly and consensous agreed that the novel was about censorship. Bradbury was so angered by the students that he stormed out and vowed he'd never give another lecture on it again.

The update in this film replaces mainstream media television with the appeal of the internet. The dystopian outcome, the broken free will of the populace, and the depressive tone of Bradbury's story was altered to focus on fireman (police) brutality and the surveillance state. Bahrani's film ignores so much of what the novel outlines, to preach a politically correct message, that it becomes superficial. So slick and verbally facile to the point of becoming the horror Ray Bradbury illustrated so elequently in print - Media is a blunt form of distraction compared to the thought-provoking nature of books.

Another TV movie that didn't have to me made.

The brain trust at HBO decided: "Hey you know that great book by Ray Bradbury?", "And you know the 1996 version was pretty successful right?" "Lets make a jazzed up modern version!" Executive #2: "Sounds like a plan!"

Nope, this was horrible. It was so bad it's as if they tried to make it so.

Ray Bradbury was an artistic genius (whom I was lucky to meet in the early 80's); his written words flow like poetry. This mess is a a complete disservice to Ray, other than maybe, hopefully, it will get a few more people to actually the real book, or watch the superior 1966 out of disgust for this thing.

Ironically, this was sort of the dumbed-down social justice warrior revisioning of the book. The irony is so thick it's palpable..