I want to be a hickey on the neck of life.
Well, I thought Corrigan’s essay was pretty good at basically connecting a good deal of what we’ve discussed in class. I think out of all the theories we’ve read Bluestone sticks out the most to me. I guess part of that has to do with he fact that I liked how he made a point of showing their logistically being a divide between a film and a novel. I remember being at a point where I despised movies that were not exactly faithful to the book they were adapting. I’ve gotten pas that though, partly because my knowledge of film grew to a point where I became more a ware of what went on in making films, but also because I’ve gotten to a point where I just like watching movies even if it isn’t necessarily a ‘great work of art’. If it’s able to hold my attention than that’s great.
I guess the thing with adaptation, which I don’t feel we’ve really discussed, is what Corrigan brings up in regards to there being different kinds of influence. Books and comic books seem to have gained popularity, but there are a number of films influenced by some very small things. Apocalypse Now. Is that considered an adaptation of Heart of Darkness(among other things) or just influenced by it? It’s defiantly influenced by the Vietnam War. I guess that’s where my thoughts on adaptation fall apart. Chaplin is ‘adapted’ from two biographies on Charlie Chaplin. The books aren’t ‘adaptations’ of his life though are they? Platoon isn’t an adaptation of the Vietnam War, but it’s certainly has a good deal of truth to a degree as Stone drew from his experience with the war. So I guess for me an adaptation is strict. It’s Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet. There are a lot of words that I always see in the credits of films and that’s what I judge them by. Influenced. Inspired by. Based on the Novel Push By Sapphire. Those kind of lines that seem to clear up what kind of ‘adaptation’ the film is.
As far as our group goes, I wouldn’t call it an adaptation, but rather a short that was ‘inspired by’ Alice in Wonderland, Wuthering Heights, and Pride and Prejudice among other things.
On another note Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is considered an ‘adaptation’ of the original novel.
Nanu Nanu!
Posted on May 9, 2011, in Old Nic At The Movies Posts. Bookmark the permalink. 3 Comments.
The LAMB
Nic
Film Daze 
First of all, I could not pass up this blog because this title is quite the attention grabber. I also like your main point about adaptation and our different views or definitions of the term. I honestly had no examined the fact that you may consider something an adaptation that was merely influenced by a novel, and I would think historical event would count in that respect also. I think I would consider those things adaptations because they built of an existing idea. This would mean the majority of film as we know it is some form of adaptation, but I think that is true. It would be hard to pick a film that is completely original, not sayin that there is not any, when many of them have been influenced by already existing ideas, stories, or events. This is a great post !
Hmmm…I really like the point you made about “adaptation” versus “inspired by…”. Where is that line? I think that using the latter line gives filmmakers a lot more artistic license while simultaneously quieting that group of angry-and-absolutely-dedicated-to-the-original-book fans.
Ususally, it seems that films that are “inspired by” a written work are also modernizations. For example, Bridget Jones’s Diary modernizes Pride and Prejudice, 10 Things I Hate About You modernizes The Taming of the Shrew, and Clueless Modernizes Emma. The biggest influence the original texts have on these films seems to be taking the personalities and essences of the original characters, but putting them in a new setting. The plots are also very loosely similar. They also change the names of the story, instead of keeping the original title or using something similar.
As I was saying in class I too have moved away from criticizing movies for not being exactly like the novel and have instead began to appreciate directors for their creativity. In the end what really matters is how captivating a film is. I also find that I accept deviations more if the film is “inspired by” rather than “based on” just because I feel like there is a bit more leg room for the director to kick-up his feet.