So your favourite book or play gets adapted into a film or TV series. You have high expectations for who should play what characters and what their appearances should be. You also imagine how your favourite scene plays out. All of a sudden once you get to see production stills of who was cast (or maybe you googled the actor/actress once they were announced) your dreams get shattered a bit and when you see the screen adaptation (if you do make it past the point of 'improper casting made this movie/tv show not worth watching') your favourite moment has been cut.
Sure you can rage about how the casting is all wrong, bad acting, and how the adaptation doesn't follow the book. First let's look at the meaning of adaptation: adaptation is a noun derived from the verb to adapt which means (taking it from the transitive verb meaning): 'to make suitable to requirements or conditions; adjust or modify fittingly'. So when adapting a book there are things to consider with the audience this will be shown to: people who have read the book, people who haven't read the book, age-appropriateness, and for international distribution (I may be missing one or two here but I'm focusing on the first two).
People who have read the book will know how the story plays out and possibly expect the adaptation to follow the book. People who haven't read the book of course will have no idea other than what is marketed of the movie and may or many not read the book after seeing the movie or TV series. Having the adaptation follow the plot and the storyline of the book to the very last detail is basically giving away the whole book. If all adaptations were made this way then why bother to read the book (or a whole series of them)? Changing up the story a bit makes it convenient for both the reader and the non-reader. From a reader perspective, the adaptation brings on surprises. The surprises can either be good, bad, or predictable and from there comparisons can be made between the book and the adaptation. (For example I just saw The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones and I read the book beforehand. Without trying to spoil it too much I found some things were rushed (minimal backstories), and characters who had smaller roles in the book were either given bigger roles or not included at all. I think some elements were borrowed from the second book City of Ashes and mentionings of the fictional country home to Shadowhunters is not mentioned at all.) From a non-reader perspective the adaptation can be something original (or slightly original if it bares any similarities to other stories and movies) and could interest people in reading the original books. It's how I was drawn to Sergei Lukyanenko's Watch Series.
So if you want your favourite book to follow canon down to the very last detail, make your own adaptation. You can't expect Hollywood or whatever movie company to follow every last detail or get your dream cast (even the authors can't get their dream cast in). Sometimes the writers themselves do contribute to the plot of the adaptation of have some involvement in production. Adaptations are meant to be viewed by anyone who is interested in viewing the TV show or the movie and it's not something to be made exclusive to the fans of the series. The adaptation in one way is the adapter's way of envisioning how the book will play out as a movie or TV series.
I can't argue with the choices of the adapter but what I think would make adaptations a bit better is to include a bit more of the lore and philosophies presented as well as having some fan input. What I feel makes some adaptations a bit dull and inferior to their book sources is getting rid elements such as lore (e.g. the main characters are magic users and in the adaptation the magic element is toned down or removed) or the cut back on the philosophical aspects (e.g. one of the main characters is openly atheist and questions the other main character's beliefs in the book while the adaptation makes no mention of the characters being atheist or religious). As for the fan input this shouldn't be restricted to fans of the book but should include people who haven't read the book but have interests in the same genre (for example fantasy, sci-fi, western) as the book being adapted. They may not speak for everyone but can at least provide some input.
And thus ends my rant/commentary. If anyone come across this post I am slowly still working on English is a Hard Language series. At the rate it's going I'm trying to run through learning Hindi script since I was unable to find someone who can write in it to make examples (but if you can, maybe you can contribute?). Know Chinese, Japanese, or Korean? I could use your help in future EIAHL posts.
People who have read the book will know how the story plays out and possibly expect the adaptation to follow the book. People who haven't read the book of course will have no idea other than what is marketed of the movie and may or many not read the book after seeing the movie or TV series. Having the adaptation follow the plot and the storyline of the book to the very last detail is basically giving away the whole book. If all adaptations were made this way then why bother to read the book (or a whole series of them)? Changing up the story a bit makes it convenient for both the reader and the non-reader. From a reader perspective, the adaptation brings on surprises. The surprises can either be good, bad, or predictable and from there comparisons can be made between the book and the adaptation. (For example I just saw The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones and I read the book beforehand. Without trying to spoil it too much I found some things were rushed (minimal backstories), and characters who had smaller roles in the book were either given bigger roles or not included at all. I think some elements were borrowed from the second book City of Ashes and mentionings of the fictional country home to Shadowhunters is not mentioned at all.) From a non-reader perspective the adaptation can be something original (or slightly original if it bares any similarities to other stories and movies) and could interest people in reading the original books. It's how I was drawn to Sergei Lukyanenko's Watch Series.
So if you want your favourite book to follow canon down to the very last detail, make your own adaptation. You can't expect Hollywood or whatever movie company to follow every last detail or get your dream cast (even the authors can't get their dream cast in). Sometimes the writers themselves do contribute to the plot of the adaptation of have some involvement in production. Adaptations are meant to be viewed by anyone who is interested in viewing the TV show or the movie and it's not something to be made exclusive to the fans of the series. The adaptation in one way is the adapter's way of envisioning how the book will play out as a movie or TV series.
I can't argue with the choices of the adapter but what I think would make adaptations a bit better is to include a bit more of the lore and philosophies presented as well as having some fan input. What I feel makes some adaptations a bit dull and inferior to their book sources is getting rid elements such as lore (e.g. the main characters are magic users and in the adaptation the magic element is toned down or removed) or the cut back on the philosophical aspects (e.g. one of the main characters is openly atheist and questions the other main character's beliefs in the book while the adaptation makes no mention of the characters being atheist or religious). As for the fan input this shouldn't be restricted to fans of the book but should include people who haven't read the book but have interests in the same genre (for example fantasy, sci-fi, western) as the book being adapted. They may not speak for everyone but can at least provide some input.
And thus ends my rant/commentary. If anyone come across this post I am slowly still working on English is a Hard Language series. At the rate it's going I'm trying to run through learning Hindi script since I was unable to find someone who can write in it to make examples (but if you can, maybe you can contribute?). Know Chinese, Japanese, or Korean? I could use your help in future EIAHL posts.
No comments:
Post a Comment