This week at RLM, I thought I would indulge in something every book lover enjoys intensely...complaining about film adaptations of books.
Don't deny it: You have, at some point in your life, enjoyed the smug sensation of sneering at a movie because "the book was so much better.
As I have mentioned before, I love movies. Even terrible ones. Due to this love I have adapted my sensibilities until I am able to enjoy film adaptations even when they are obviously inferior. Recently, however, I have become enthralled with a television series that I simply can not claim is inferior to its source material. I have to, of course, give credit where it's due and praise the book as the original...and as a classic. However, the television series stands on its own as a highly satisfying and entertaining series that I can not claim is in any way "less" than the book's capacity for satisfaction and entertainment.
This inability to firmly assert the superiority of the books has led me to question: is there a right way and a wrong way to adapt literature into visual media?
After some soul searching...and wracking my brain for countless examples of "good" and "bad" adaptations...I have come to the conclusion that there are four methods one can employ when making a film or television adaptation. If used in the right circumstances, each can turn out a truly excellent adaptation which absorbs the audience without alienating the readers. However, of the four, one method has a much higher capacity for failure while another has a much higher chance of success.
Over the course of the next week, I intend to devote a day to each of my four methods. They will have the following layout.
"Quirky title naming the method."
Explanation of title with definition.
Estimated chance of successful film.
Best circumstances in which to use this method.
Review of "good" adaptation using this method, and why it works.
Review of "bad" adaptation using this method, and why it doesn't work.
Further examples of my twisted sense of humor, with a pithy end comment.
Hollywood, take note. I'm going to give you a fool-proof guide to making blockbuster hits.
As an attempt to make up for this sad introduction that stands in lieu of a proper, insightful post, I invite you all to leave a comment telling me what you consider the best and worst book-to-film adaptations.
I will likely bring these up again in my later posts, but will let you know that I consider "The Shawshank Redemption" to be the best adaptation. "The Time Traveller's Wife" and "The Golden Compass" are tied for worst.
What do you think?
Obviously the worst of the worst had to be Eragon. Even my 12 year old son (at the time) agrees with me on this. Yes for once the child agreed with his old man. I had to check the Calendar. Maybe the Myans were off by 6 years and the world was coming to an end but alas no all it took was the next topic and dad was back to being wrong. :-)
ReplyDeleteStardust as kind of an in-between one. The book and movie do differ from each other. However, if you look at them separately,they're pretty good.
ReplyDeleteAnd Harry Potter 3, only because I have a vendetta against that movie. Where are my marauders?!?
Eragon was in fact the worst movie ever made. Even if you knew nothing about the book, it was terrible. But if you did know and love the book the movie had you standing in front of the screen yelling at every scene how stupid the decisions were. The ONLY redeeming thing in that movie was the fact that they killed all the story lines that could possibly lead to a sequel.
ReplyDeleteAll-time favorite adaptation for me remains Gone with the Wind. But I'm a sucker for any movie, too, so I like even bad adaptations, like Gwyneth Paltrow's Emma.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can make an adaptation of Pride and Prejudice that is bad, even if you count the whole host of movies that aren't adaptations of it per se, but are inspired by it.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the Harry Potter movies have become better and better adaptations as the series progresses (and the books become worse).
I will second Time Traveler's Wife as being godawful.
Robert - Eragon has merit as an entertaining "I Spy" style game. I spy, with my little eye, a rip off of (insert any one of a billion movies and video games here.) Person who spots the most wins!
ReplyDeleteAmy - I take more exception to the unnecessary "I cast the Patronus, not my dad" scene which could have been replaced by actually explaining how Remus knew what the map was and revealing that James was an animagus. Also, the fact that Remus looked like a pedophile and I was scared for Harry the whole time.
Grandma Jill - :)
Steph - Agreed on P&P...even the awful ones are awesome. As long as Mr. Darcy appears, all is well. Also agreed on HP...the 7th book was my least fave and movie 7 part 1 of the films was my favorite.