Visconti's interpretation Mann's death in VeniceThomas Mann's "Death in Venice" is a very complex short story. To bring it to the screen, a director must select the most important (or easiest to depict) elements within the mythological, psychological and philosophical lines of the story. The plot would remain largely intact. I'm most interested in the history of Aschenbach's homosexuality, so I would be interested in strange-looking men, Aschenbach's dreams and the parallel between Venice's denial of the disease and his own denials about Tadzio. Throughout the novel, Ashenbach notices strange-looking men. The same language is used to describe the features they share. The first is the catalyst for his adventure. The traveler is clean-shaven, snub-nosed, red, with furrows between his eyebrows and bared teeth (p 4 Norton Critical). Next come a hunchbacked, scruffy sailor and the goateed theater ticket seller (13). Then, the old man in the yellow suit. He has a wiry neck, dentures, a floppy hat, and a habit of running "the tip of his tongue over the corners of his mouth in an obscenely suggestive manner" (14). Aschenbach arrives in Venice to be confronted with another incident on his gaydar, the gondolier. He is brutal in appearance, with a yellow belt, an undone straw hat, blond hair, a snub nose, bared teeth and furrows between his eyebrows. He said to Aschenbach: “You will pay” (18). The last strange individual, the guitarist, arrives much later. He is emaciated, with a shabby hat, red hair, a thin, hairless, pale neck, a turned-up nose, furrows between his eyebrows and the habit of “letting his tongue play lasciviously at the corner of his mouth”. He also smells like disinfectant (50). The guitarist, like most people in the middle of the paper, lingers on his admirer, and Aschenbach doesn't seem nearly as pathetic. The object of his affection is voluntary and we lose some of the tension of the novel. Most mythological, psychological and philosophical references have been removed. Visconti makes Aschenbach a composer, not a writer, with a strong relationship with his (deceased?) family. His character is not as fully rendered as in the novel but it is enough. Tadzio is probably the best part of the movie. The casting was perfect and you can see how a grown man could fall in love with it. Some strange men are there, notably the guitarist, but the repetition is not emphasized. The film clearly shows Venice's descent into the epidemic, with bonfires and disinfection of the streets. Overall, the film is almost watchable for an art film, but it doesn't do justice to the very complex short story..