Yahoo Image Search
“The book is always better than the movie.”
“I won’t read anything unless it has a movie or TV show.”
“I’ll wait until it’s turned into a movie or TV show.”
I’ve heard all of these things from real, living, breathing people and it’s had me thinking about books to film/television for a while. I won’t jump up and scream that I always prefer the book over a movie. Many times I’ve enjoyed both even though they didn’t perfectly match up and other times I’ve picked one over the other. Yet there’s a really big ‘battle’ between book-lovers and movie-lovers when it comes to adaptations.
Funny thing is that it is ALWAYS about books to film/TV and never the other way around. I remember seeing several movies and then finding the novel adaptation when I was younger. ‘Blade’ and ‘The Mask’ are two that ring out to me because I remember reading them and going ‘that wasn’t in the movie’. There were entire scenes that were added to the books much like you chop and condense stuff in a movie, but there was no rage about such a thing. I never heard of any rage about this, which is probably because people really don’t really read books adapted from films. So starting off one can see that this isn’t a two way street. Screw with movies when turning them into a book, but god forbid you change the look of a cat in ‘Hunger Games’.
How could it go wrong with a tagline like that?
I’ve never really thought much on why people get furious about changes to books. Many are justified like the atrocity of ‘The Vampire’s Assistant’, which is the movie I use to threaten my wife with since she loves the book series. Still you have people crying over missing scenes in Harry Potter and those movies are already long. ‘The Hobbit’ trilogy comes under fire a lot for additions and drawing stuff out. You see huge articles about all of these . . . wait . . . you really don’t see many ranting about ‘The Vampire’s Assistant’. I know people who hated it, but you don’t see the same mob levels.
The reason is the size and scope of the fandoms along with the level of respect given to the source material. I’ll get to respect in a little bit. You see the bigger and more dedicated the fandom, the more scrutiny the movie adaptation is under. This is obvious, but there is a wrinkle here. Rarely is the movie made for fans of the book. The makers tend to assume the readers will go, so they focus on drawing in non-readers. At least that’s how it seems to me. Still a large fandom needs to be factored in to some extent because they will be part of the grassroots, word-of-mouth push. You see how this balancing act works? Well it inevitably tips over because many fans want a direct translation. No hair color changes, snow at the wrong time is a killer, and any tiny move away is cause complaints. I know this because when my sister and I went to the midnight showing of ‘Fellowship of the Ring’ there was a row of guys with flashlights and the novels. They were fact-checking the book as the movie went along.
This brings me to level of respect, which is different from pure adaptation. The truth that many dedicated fans (myself at times) forget in their fervor is that not everything in a book will work in a movie. You have to cut for time, some things might be impossible to show without an insane budget, and many other factors cause changes. Some people get it right like with ‘Game of Thrones’ that I hear is totally off-script from the books, but people still love it. Others get things wrong like the lawyer in ‘Jurassic Park’ living through the book and dying in the movie. Others totally destroy the source material as if it’s simply in the way like . . . do I really have to keep naming the above movie?
The trick to the adaptation isn’t to do a word-by-word or scene-by-scene, but to retain the bulk and the essence. Something will inevitably be left out or added and I’ve come to accept that when I go to a movie that started as a book. It makes things a lot less stressful and it turns the movie into an alternate story. Kind of like how there are two ‘Fullmetal Alchemist’ series that run in different directions, but are both entertaining.
There’s no point in going into a film or book ready to tear it apart because you’re going to find everything wrong that way. At least wait for it come on TV and not waste money on admission if you’re going in expecting your book to have been bastardized. It’ll inevitably happen because you’re a fan and love the books. Yet, I’m sure if the biggest fan of a series made it into a movie there would be other fans that hate it because it doesn’t fit their own vision.
Anyway, that’s my initial rant and thoughts on the subject. Feel free to let your thoughts known. For an added challenge, try to do it without mentioning ‘Twilight’.
Legends of Windemere 
Okay, just for that, this entire comment is going to be about Twilight. In the books, Bella and Edward never–
Nah, I couldn’t do that to you, lol. That’s very interesting, and something I never really considered before — movie-to-book adaptations don’t happen very often, do they? Or, rather, I’ve never had any great urge to read them. I guess I’m okay with adapting a longer medium to a shorter one (i.e. abridging, i.e. book-to-movie), but the idea of going short to long seems a bit strange to me. I know I’ve read a few movie-to-books in my life (mainly Star Wars), and they were certainly interesting, but they didn’t really add anything to the story. And if there are movie-to-books out there that do add in crucial plot points, I guess I’d be annoyed that they weren’t in the movie also.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The day is still young for an irrational Twilight hater to appear. 😛
I don’t know if they still do movie-to-book adaptations. I stopped reading them early into high school because I wanted original books. I should dig up one or two of the old ones and read them again. (Like I have time!) Though I wonder if part of it was the create the ‘book is better than the movie’ fights that tend to be popular.
LikeLike
“Rarely is the movie made for fans of the book. The makers tend to assume the readers will go, so they focus on drawing in non-readers. ” Yep, I agree with you there, Charles. The real fans will go anyway, even will trepidation. I agree too that some things just would not work without back stories or insane special effects. The two media are entirely different in the way a story can unfold.
The adaptations of Tolkein and C.S.Lewis’ Narnian books, for example, both take some stick by fans (and I admit to the odd ‘why?’ on occasion!) but they are trying to translate a magical alchemy of love and imagination that is personal to each of us. The stories are old friends, perhaps childhood companions and we get very protective of them. The trick, I think, is to accept that my Middle Earth will look different rom yours…or the directors… and, as you say, judge by the way they manage to capture the essence of the books. And maybe remember that a film is made as visual entertainment, not a mirror of literature.
LikeLike
Good point with the special effects. Writing about a magic-flinging battle that lights up the world and lasts two pages is one thing. Putting it in a movie would be pricey. This is one reason I think my books would work better as animated because the magic is very flashy and high-powered.
Tolkien is a great example. Some things were cut for time and because they were extraneous for a movie. I would have loved to see the burning of The Shire, but I also know that putting it in would have seemed too much after the final battle. Then there’s the elves at Helm’s Deep, which seemed so unnecessary. Great fight scene for the big screen is all I can think of and you do have to factor in the visual a lot more with movies.
LikeLike
Yes, I think your books would work brilliantly as animations!
I can’t think of any films that have done as much to remain true to the spirit, if not the letter, as the Tolkien films. Yet, of course, I know them almost word for word and it does jar a bit with some of the departures, simply because I do know them so well. On the other hand, they are utterly brilliant films and I defy anyone to say that Gandalf could have been done better!
With something so well loved I think it would be impossible to escape criticism, no matter how hard the filmmakers might try.
I would have loved to see the Tom Bombadil story as part of it, but understand that it was unnecessary to the main storyline and that whole chunk could be cut with impunity. I’d love to see how Peter Jackson would handle the Silmarillion though…
LikeLike
Only other book-to-film that came close in my mind was ‘Sin City’, but that’s a graphic novel. There’s a closer relation due to both being more visual than a novel.
I really hope he doesn’t try for the Silmarillion. At some point, you just have to stop.
LikeLike
I don’t think there is any chance of him going for it… it would probably prove way too contentious on religious grounds for him to get the funding.
We’re pretty lucky with literary adaptations on the whole, though it is easier to translate the ‘real’ world to screen. Fantasy, magic and sci-fi are so dependant upon the visual imagination that any reader will have a preconceived idea before they even get to the cinema.
LikeLike
True. One switched hair color and the movie is doomed.
LikeLike
Yep. Pretty much.
LikeLike
I think the important thing with changes in from book to movie/TV show is that the changes make sense–for the character or the overall story or both. I’m a HUGE Game of Thrones fan (although I jumped on the bandwagon when the show started, in the interest of honesty) and most of the changes I can get behind. Those books are massive and packed with people and minor characters that no show could ever realistically afford. However, in the most recent season especially, there have been changes that completely diverge from the way the character would act. One scene in particular got a lot of flack not only because it was such a major deviation, but because it was a rape scene. There is plenty of rape and violence in GOT but this disrupted a character arc and had a major impact on how people view this character that’s vastly different from the book. Obviously, the show is still going, so perhaps there is a reason behind it, but the book deviation was only one of MANY things wrong with that scene.
LikeLike
I haven’t gotten into GoT with either medium. Some times I wonder if the rape, nudity, and violence are added to the show for shock value, but I wouldn’t really know. As for the deviations, I wonder if it’s almost a necessity for shows that are based on an unfinished work. Fullmetal Alchemist (first series) deviated a ton from the manga, but the second series was done closer to the end and stuck almost identically to the plot.
LikeLike
There is plenty of rape, sex (nudiy) and violence in the books, but it’s also HBO. There is unnecessary nudity for sure. The thing with this particular scene is that the character’s arc is advanced enough in the subsequent books that it was really jarring–and the scene it was “based” off of from the books was consensual.
LikeLike
Oh! I heard about that scene. My friends who love the book wouldn’t shut up about that for a week.
LikeLike
“And if there are movie-to-books out there that do add in crucial plot points, I guess I’d be annoyed that they weren’t in the movie also.” You rather expect some things to be left out of movies that have been based on books. But books based on movies could be disappointing if they didn’t include everything and then some.
LikeLike
I think it is strange when a book has more scenes than the movie. I guess I can understand the point that you need to reveal more for characterization. Though maybe the books are based off older scripts or the uncut version.
LikeLike
I don’t know why but movie adaptations never seem as good. Too little time maybe.
LikeLike
Probably. You can only fit so much into a 2-3 hour movie.
LikeLike
There haven’t been many, that I’ve heard anyway, fans yelling over adaptations of Sherlock Holmes or Dracula. So on to others. As much as I love Harry Potter books and movies there are still several places I cringe and have to shut my inner bibliophile down because the scenes were so important in the books and were either completely left out or moved to different portions of the story. The same goes for LOTR and Narnia…in which they left out an entire book.
The Bitten series killed off my favorite werewolf early even though he lives in the books, but kept a Were that should have died early on. I love the books and the show, but have to ignore my book knowledge to watch.
I think my ramble is really just to say that in order to enjoy the series you need to block prior knowledge. Don’t get too caught up in differences and just take the time to see your favorite characters come to life in a different way.
LikeLike
I know of a few panned Dracula movies. Sherlock tends to be the same though. He’s probably easier since his stories are more realistic.
I can see one reason for those types of changes on a show. People who read the books need to be either surprised or countered. I’ve seem many book fans jump on forums to spill the future events to the TV fans.
LikeLike
Those book fans are mean spirited…but i have had to stop myself from doing that as well!
LikeLike
I think honest slips are one thing. Doing it with the purpose of spoiling the fun is another and that’s what they worry about.
LikeLike
I agree. Btw…love the Twilight movies and despise the way the books are written. Seriously, there is more character development in the movies (despite Bella’s lack of facial expressions)
LikeLike
I always have that dilemma, whether to read the book first or wait for the movie. It seems whichever medium I choose first is the one I end up enjoying more. For instance, I read Shutter Island before seeing the film and though many people raved how great the movie was, I went through all the thrills and tricks already so that element was missing. But then again, watching masterpieces like Shawshank Redemption and Forrest Gump and then reading the stories couldn’t compare either.
I was just debating whether or not to read Gone Girl before the Fincher film is released in October, and have decided to read it beforehand. Sure, it’ll take away all the surprises, but I’m sure the movie will still be great. That’s why I don’t mind when films change up some plot points through the adaptation process. If done well, it can really transcend a novel but then again it’s risky.
Anyway, great post!
LikeLike
It’s certainly a ‘first exposure is the best’ scenario. This why I try to take both as alternate tellings.
LikeLike
Great post. I never saw The Vampire’s Assistant and will definitely avoid it.
I heard some people complain about Fellowship of the Ring and also the first two Harry Potter movies. For HP, they felt the movies were too faithful an adaptation. For Fellowship, some felt it was too violent. Others hated Two Towers because of all of the changes made to it. (Some didn’t make sense.)
I greatly disliked the Earthsea miniseries, which crammed A Wizard of Earthsea with The Tombs of Atuan. Ugh!!!!!
LikeLike
I didn’t mind Earthsea. I only read Wizard though and it was after I saw the miniseries. Strange that people would complain that the movie was too faithful.
LikeLike
I usually tend to look at books and movies as two different animals entirely and and enjoy them on their own merits. Though I do get a bit annoyed if I’m reading a book that has a film adaptation and someone asks “Why don’t you just see the movie?” Happened with Fellowship of the Ring.
LikeLike
That is definitely an aggravating question. I usually respond by saying the popcorn is better at home and less expensive.
LikeLike
What drives me crazy is when I used to LOVE a t.v. show as a kid, I get all excited about the upcoming movie, and they RUIN it. I don’t like to name names unless I have good things to say (so I won’t), but it really irks me. (But sometimes the movie is great, so you never know.)
LikeLike
I know. Makes me want to Bay at the moon like mad. 😀
LikeLike
Even on a moonless night.
LikeLike
I really don’t understand why people get so angry over this. Like you said, there are some things that just HAVE to be cut/won’t translate well. (As for hair color changes and the like, I’d rather someone BE the part rather than LOOK the part.)
I think they’re just two different mediums, and you can’t really expect them to be the exact same thing. I’m always just happy they get made in the first place.
But really . . . I think most people go looking for something to hate/be angry about, with pretty much everything.
LikeLike
Good point. Some adaptations are terrible because it twists the source material. Others aren’t that bad. I think it has to do with the overprotectiveness of fandoms. Either they want it exact or they don’t want it to be a movie. I know fans of a few tv shows who act like gatekeepers to the show. They set out to prove people aren’t ‘true fans’ and the idea of a movie makes them think of a flood of ‘fakers’.
LikeLike
I know this is from forever ago, but I still have some stuff to say about it.
I think I get equal parts amused and frustrated by people who believe that if a person doesn’t do (or like) something the way THEY think that something should be done (or liked) . . . it’s wrong.
People like what they like in the way they like it. I don’t know why that’s SO HORRIBLE.
I’m glad I don’t really have to directly deal with people like that anymore. Seeing it in passing on the internet is definitely enough to suit me.
I’m always just happy when things are made that I can enjoy. lol
LikeLike
It’s a strange mentality. That’s really all I can think of saying. Partly because I don’t know what else to say and also because I’m brain-drained. 🙂
LikeLike
Oh no, not brain-drained. D:
It definitely is a strange mentality though.
LikeLike
Books and movies are basically very different forms. When we try to adapt one for the other without appreciating the difference is when the problems happen. Sometimes those are problems for fans, and sometimes they are problems at the box office, but there will be problems!
I know there are exceptions, but the greatest movies are made from screenplays rather than adapted from books. And as you point out, the greatest books begin as books rather than adapting screenplays. Although you mention Game of Thrones, and I believe Martin spent some time as a screen writer. Certainly in all his major books there are particular images and events that seem designed with film in mind.
But for average viewers/readers, you save yourself a bit of hair-tearing if you go to movies-based-on-books understanding that the experience will simply be different.
LikeLike
Very true. Didn’t know that about Martin. I know the woman who wrote Hunger Games did tv shows at some point.
Be nice if people went in with that understanding.
LikeLike