Books made into films: amusing differences

[Jeffbert]

[cmoon]

[Jeffbert]

As much as I agree that some, perhaps many people may never experience the written versions because it is just too easy to settle for the film versions, I myself only knew of the titles because I had seen the films. If not for that fact, even though I had the CLASSIC BOOKS ON CD, I doubt that I would have been inspired to sort through the hundreds of titles and have found such things as 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, as that title would have very little significance to me. Moreover, it was very likely my having seen the film versions that made the CD appealing in the 1st place. The front of the CD’s case says “over 3,500 of the world’s best literary works” The flip side of the CD’s case lists several well-known authors & their best-known novels; Hans Christian Anderson, Washington Irving, and Robert Lewis Stevenson, among several others. If not for my familiarity w/ the film versions, would titles such as The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde or Treasure Island have been enticing to me?

Having said that, I took a course in HS called Novels, Plays, & Movies in the hope that I would escape any meaningful class work. I believe it was here, that I read The Hobbit, & as strange as it was, I actually read the other three by myself for my own pleasure. But after that, I had little if any interest in literature until I bought that CD some 20 to 25 years later.

[Rock's Sunglasses]

Depending on the book, and especially with the most modern films, I often feel the translation from one medium to another is awkward no matter what is done with the plot itself. A classic book, for instance, feels a bit demeaned when remade into a bombastic summer blockbuster with all the technological trimmings. That especially holds if toys are coming out in fast food restaurants or it's in 3D. Perhaps that's the modest little purist inside me talking...

In any case, I've been bothered by enough book to movie adaptations to make a very narcissistic plan in much the same manner that some work out escape routes for a zombie apocalypse for fun. If anything I ever wrote was made into a film, my fantasy is a little known art director with a trippy portfolio, actors who have only ever been on stage, and some late 1960s cameras just because it's my favorite look.

Oh yeah, and Jeffbert, I'm a she.

[Jeffbert]

I certainly do agree that an average-length novel loses much when it is condensed into a two hour movie. Rock's Sunglasses is a girl, nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah! I guess I might have used 'he' or 'him' in reference to you on some other thread, but I do not recall doing so. It seems that more than a few females use male IDs on these forums.

[Princess Sapphire]

[Rock's Sunglasses]

[Princess Sapphire]

[Jeffbert]

[Princess Sapphire]

[cmoon]

[Jeffbert]

I actually have MD on my classics CD, but just had no interest in it. I thought Capt. Piccard made a good Capt. Ahab, though. I did read Melville's Typee, though, & found it very compelling. I performed a word search on the CD for 'cannibal,' & that was one of few books that was on the last. Sadly, I do not recall any acts of cannibalism in that one though.

[cmoon]

I am building my way up to Moby Dick in the book thread. Moby Dick is a really, really misunderstood book, where Ahab's hunt for the whale really only makes up about a quarter of the novel and the rest of the book is doing something very different with a weird sense of the mythic, and even perhaps a bit of improvisation where Melville is taking everyday boredom and turning it into something else.

I've actually been relatively afraid to read other things by Melville because Moby Dick is so completely out-there that just about any other story would seem domestic by comparison.

That said, Moby Dick comes to you, not the other way around. I hate the idea that kids are forced to read it, or other people should be pushed into it because of its classic status. It IS the great American novel, but sadly, most people just aren't going to get it.

And no, I'm sticking by my guns here. Although movies of MD may leave a favorable impression, is does not mean they are capable of adequately doing justice to the book--they can't.

[Kevin]

Ok you guys have brought up the disappointing translations from book to film.

Which is cool, I agree with much of what you said.

HOWEVER

There are some movies which I believe made GREAT translations from book to film.

Lord of the Rings trilogy was just outstanding. I'm pretty close to a "purist" concerning Tolkien. When I screw up, I apologize profusely. I try not to get screwed up. I have that book of letters from J.R.R. Tolkien, the book put together by Chris Tolkien concerning his father's private notes, I cross reference the indexing on my computer -- you name it. I don't dress up in elf costumes (I'm not that fanatical), and I don't speak elf.

But I'm pretty solid on the books.

The books had major problems, MAJOR problems. Grammar - even for British grammar, was awkward at times to adapt for a poetic structure (which he did a good job). But, this caused for several pages to be redundant, or otherwise immaterial to the story.

The Council of Elrond is probably the worst chapter Tolkien had ever written.

In that respect, the Movie chopped off some dead weight, while then taking what was in the appendices and bulking up some of the story - Faramir and Boromir (sp?) and their relationship with their father as referenced is a good example.

There were cons and pros, but I believe the movie had enough Pros to outweigh the Cons and easily puts it on the same footing as the books. There were just parts of the books that I wanted to strip out.


My dad loves Dune, and he said the Sci Fi translation was perfect. I'm going to take his word on that, for the simple matter the Dune story pissed me off to the core.


HellBoy. While technically not a novel, I believe the Film Adaptation of the comic was amazing. The reason why I think it was amazing was because it DIDN'T follow the book. The Comic is my favorite comic right now, but Mick Mignola said that at first he wanted a straight translation - he was then convinced to write a story so different he would be allowed to do whatever he wanted with the Movie universe, while keeping it separate from the comic universe.

I think this was a great direction to go. I mean, let's face it, HellBoy isn't that heavy on plot in the comic, and a straight translation would've looked like crap.

This way mike was allowed to explore different facets of HellBoy he never could in the comic form. And this one movie opened Mike up to different Mediums - Novels, Animation, Animated Comics, etc... He's created such a varied scope of the HellBoy universe it's just improved the entire creation.

[cmoon]

Hellboy was good for not even trying to be the comic. Hellboy I & II did very different things than the comic, and hence justified their own existence. It doesn't hurt that del toro is a visually interesting director.

Edit: I thought I should add that while Hellboy certainly is an adaptation, it isn't quite the same as those we've been discussing. The hellboy movies are original stories with our familiar cast from the comic. There are definitely some major changes with the characters, but most of them are pretty amusing and ones that the fans will appreciate. This is altogether different than trying to directly adapt a book.