film adaptations

purple_801999 <purple_801999@yahoo.com> purple_801999 at yahoo.com
Mon Feb 24 01:07:43 UTC 2003


--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, Tyler Hewitt <tahewitt at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
 Tyler wrote:
 
> ME:
> I don't think there's EVER been a film adaptation of a
> book that 1. is completely loyal to the source and 2.
> didn't frustrate fans of the book.
> 
> I think that part of this is that written and visual
> art mediums are just too different from each other as
> to ensure a smooth transition. There's too much nuance
> in a book, too much left open topersonal
> interpretation, and too much left to the reader's
> imagination (when I read I get visual images of what
> locations and charecters look like) to ever allow for
> a seamless adaptation.
> 
> After being frustrated myself on several occasions,
> I've learned to accept this. As long as a film is
> allowed to explore it's own creative space, related to
> but not necessarily completely loyal to the source
> book, I can live with it (even in extreme cases like
> 'A Clockwork Orange', a breathtaking, brilliant novel
> and a hideous waste of celluloid as a film. I give
> credit to Stanley Kubrick for pursuing his vision, but
> he ruined a good story.). I think of films from
> adapted novels as interpretations, like someone doing
> a cover version of another's song. There's SUPPOSED to
> be an interpretation occuring, not just an aping of
> the original.  

It is hard to capture the essence of a book like Harry Potter,what I 
miss in the films is the dry humor of the books, the language is the 
key, IMO. But there are five films to go, so we can still hope for 
improvemnet. Personally I sometimes doubt the wisdom of trying for 
all seven films and I sometimes doubt they will all get made, but if 
the studios are any indication they will make all seven if they have 
a forty year old Dan Radcliffe in the lead.




> Which brings me to the Potter films. I liked the first
> one ok, it wasn't earth shattering, but it told the
> story reasonably well and proved entertaining to fans
> and newbies alike. The casting was inspired at times
> (I love Alan Rickman as Snape, and can't imagine
> anyone coming closer to how I imagine Ron than Rupert
> Grint).

Speaking of Rickman and adaptations, does anyone agree with me that 
he would make a terrific Mr.Rochester for 'Jane Eyre'? They have yet 
to make a film of my favorite book that I absolutely love but the 
recent A&E version and the 1946 version with ,sigh,a young Orson 
Wells are pretty close. 



  
> I heard an interview on National Public Radio with
> Terry Gilliam a couple of weeks ago. He said that JK
> Rowling personally recruited him to be the director of
> CoS. Of course it didn't go anywhere, Gilliam is way
> too much of a rebel to be trusted by the major
> studios. But I kept thinking, "my god! what that film
> COULD HAVE been!".  Chris Columbus is like the
> McDonald's of film directing. No surprises, the same
> replicable blandness that will make the maximum amount
> of money, and alas, no magic. I'm hoping that the new
> director for PoA will break away some from what we've
> seen so far and let the movie be something new and
> original. I'm willing to sacrifice a few details from
> the book were this to occur.
> 
> And if it does work, I hope the producers at Warner
> Brothers wake up and hire Terry Gilliam to direct
> 'Goblet of Fire' (makes me drool just thinking of the
> possibilities!).
> 


Brazil and Twelve Monkeys are the best, but due to the notorious 
battles waged over creative control in the past Warner Bros. wouldn't 
touch Gilliam with a ten foot pole

 
 Olivia Grey






More information about the HPFGU-Movie archive