Adaptation always stands out in the world of cinema. Often there is already a fan base to draw in. That means the filmmakers are likely to be able to recoup the money they spent adapting it, and if it’s a franchise, they’ll likely make even more money from subsequent films. One is that it doesn’t live up to the existing fanbase’s love for the book.
Trying to rework the story to fit the movie is a fine line that must be walked to appease the majority of the audience.There’s always someone who isn’t happy with something — maybe the character isn’t what they envisioned and they don’t like this change. good omen The TV adaptation experienced this with Crowley’s design, even though it simply gave him red hair instead of being “dark” like the mentioned book. necessary, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Accurate adaptation will never survive
Definitely too faithful to the original. There are a few different reasons, but probably one of the biggest — if the book and the movie are exactly the same, why choose both? What is the meaning of translating?
If everyone wants to sit down and watch a movie, the book may not sell any more and vice versa. Adaptation is about changing something to suit your environment, and the book cannot be reproduced word for word on the screen. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad adaptation. It’s great to see the story come to life in a new way, if not exactly the same, and see the characters overcome these difficulties.
Perhaps directors and producers will not be willing to adapt if they are not given creative freedom. All they do is translate to the screen whatever is written in the book, how something looks better in the medium of film, or simply looks better with their eyes. It focuses more on how the book portrays something than it does. Not all books are meant to be movies, and the movie industry is going to suffer from this.
Different media have different functions
have you read Lord of the Ring? It’s about 1,200 pages long, depending on the edition you buy and the scale it’s printed on.?If you’ve seen the movie, you’ve experienced many dangerous adventures as the journey continues through various dangerous scenarios. Lot R What the books can’t tell the mainstream film is how long this trip really is. It’s the journey that’s at the center of the entire plot, so of course there’s a lot of travel, but the book spells it out…all as it builds the world around it.
This slow pace is terrible for most movies, and even condensing it to keep the action going took three movies to tell the story. , and there is no way to keep the adaptations perfectly faithful, as the requirements to be met are different, but the book can be as long or as short as it needs to be. As descriptive as the author wishes.
A typical movie tends to take an hour and a half to two hours, not enough time to read through a typical novel. This means that the book mentions some details that might have to be cut in the film to make them irrelevant to the story. Full of stories.
look ahead percy jackson TV Series: After the film failed and the rest were canceled due to negative audience reaction, they revived it as a TV series to give them more time to go into the details the film had to cut. It means that these books exist better as books or as a TV series that devotes more time to the details. Determining which medium is best, including whether it is better, is a real problem.
Books were never meant to be movies
Ultimately, it comes down to the idea that no author writes a book with adaptation in mind. Otherwise they just write the script. That’s why it’s important to always keep in mind the fact that not everything translates perfectly. The author can have lengthy dialogues that help set the scene or convey important parts of the plot.
Films often cannot afford long conversations unless something else happens to keep the audience entertained and prevent the conversation from getting too long. there are a lot of elements. That is, there will never be a “perfect” adaptation to the book. It’s definitely getting closer, but it’s never going to be exact. Ironically, some of the best literary adaptations (naked lunch, adaptation) deliberately alters the structure of the book to suit the nature of the film.
the medium is the message
The opposite is also true. Some movies are better than books. An intense action scene is one of the most difficult things to convey well in writing, but it’s easy to achieve on the big screen. It can also be very repetitive in a book when action sequences dominate the exposition, characters, and dialogue.
You don’t have to explain how your character feels or thinks in the movie. As in some movies, actors can show it in their facial expressions and reactions. In fact, the old adage about movies is “Don’t show, don’t tell”, which is the exact opposite of advice given to novelists.
Sometimes comedies contain gags that rely entirely on visuals, and sometimes plots are too short to make a full book. Some scripts may have been written with a specific actor in mind to play the role, but this doesn’t translate well into the book. I understand that there is a need and that a book cannot be perfectly replicated to make a good movie. Fans of these books will be much happier if they respect that.
