Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

I always struggle with the movie adaptation of a book I love. When the director makes choices about details that do not match the images I have created, I am upset. We both can’t be right, after all, and I can’t be wrong. That was my experience with this fictional account of the story of King David. This is obviously well-researched and Brooks is faithful to the elements of the story recorded in Scripture. But, it was all those pesky details that did not match the images in my head. Where does all the red-gold hair and the blue and green eyes come from in this part of the globe? Why is David’s father Jesse and his brothers depicted as drunken brutes? (Well, maybe I should have expected that since Brooks seems to have drunken, brutish patriarchs in all her novels.) Why are people sitting at tables in chairs in the courtyards; isn’t this the culture of cushions and low tables? Why does the prophet Nathan sound like a 20th century college educated American with a literary bent? If this had not been a story I knew so well, I think I would have enjoyed it much more. But just as reading a book before seeing the movie tends to ruin it for me, so did my frequent reading of this biblical account ruin this novel.