The Volokh Conspiracy

[Sasha Volokh, July 14, 2006 at 10:11pm] Trackbacks

New idea for a movie

based on Franz Kafka's The Trial: As the police come to arrest Josef K. one morning in his apartment, Josef K. is having a bowl of Special K.

(For an idea for a possible sequel to The Trial, see here. Former posts of mine related to Kafka are available here and here, and see especially here for a post on one of his best short stories. Going out on a tangent a bit, here's a post on Capek.)

(link)

the real Eric:

Nice article. It is too bad you didn't consider the case de novo.

7.14.2006 11:26pm

(link)

aces:

I hope they make Josef K a corrupt K Street lobbyist...

7.14.2006 11:33pm

(link)

Sasha Volokh (mail) (www):

... with a lot of potassium!

7.14.2006 11:41pm

(link)

Dave Hardy (mail) (www):

But didn't his execution moot the appeal?

Well, I guess if he's still alive after it, there is the damage to reputation to be considered.

7.15.2006 12:44am

(link)

SP:

Hopefully the steamy love scene will be measured in Kelvins. That's the best I've got - sorry, no equilibrium constant jokes - you might say I "struck out."

7.15.2006 2:14am

(link)

^_^ (www):

And he works as a clerk as K-Mart . . .

7.15.2006 4:34am

(link)

David Chesler (mail) (www):

K-PAX is being shown right now on USA network.

7.15.2006 12:22pm

(link)

Sasha Volokh (mail) (www):

Dave Hardy: If you read the article, 103 Mich. L. Rev. 1391 (2005), you'll find our answer to mootness:

1. The government claims the case was mooted by appellant's death. But appellant casts aspersions on the legitimacy of the legal proceedings against him, and his calumny cannot be left unrebutted. Not contra Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 16 n.8 (1998) (damage to reputation of mere parties does not defeat mootness).

7.15.2006 12:36pm

(link)

Peter Wimsey:

He should eat lunch at KFC.

7.15.2006 1:32pm

(link)

Dave Hardy (mail) (www):

"his calumny cannot be left unrebutted."

Note to self: make use of this in brief, at least once in lifetime.

During my DC stint, the Justice lawyers could not write a brief without using the word "quintessential." Something, somewhere, just had to be that.

They also had an informal rule that every conclusion, in brief or motion, had to be: "CONCLUSION. For reasons set forth above, the (state relief desired)." No summary allowed.

I once wrote them a draft brief that ended:

CONCLUSION

And darkness, and decay, and the Red Death reigned supreme over all.

Respectfully submitted this __ day of __, ____

7.15.2006 2:13pm

(link)

Hoosier:

Problem with the slogan: "The Prize is Inside." Because he never gets "inside." Which is the point of the novel. To the extent that there is one; it's one of his more disjointed books.

My suggestion: If you are going to make a movie based on a Kafka book, have it directed in a Frank "K"apra-mode. You know, with a ridiculously improbable happy ending. Just to throw the audience off. (E.g., In the end, everyone pours into Gregor's appartment, begging him not to leave the neighborhood, and recalling all the joy and wonder he has brought them since transforming into vermin.)

7.15.2006 11:19pm

(link)

Richard Gould-Saltman (mail):

Possibly the silliest Kafka reference I've seen in the last 16 hours, since that point yesterday evening when my brilliant wife/partner and I were trying a local Uzbekistan restaurant (called, not surprisingly, "Uzbekistan") (hey, they had air conditioning!) noted an appetizer on the menu listed as "samsa", and she remaked "Great, a meat dumpling that turns you into a big bug!".

7.17.2006 2:49pm