Introduction Adaptation of any kind has been a debate for many years. The debate on cinematic adaptations of literary works was for many years dominated by the questions of fidelity to the source and by the tendencies to prioritize the literary originals over their film versions (Whelehan, 2006). In the transference of a story from one form to another, there is the basic question of adherence to the source, of what can be lost (Stibetiu, 2001). There is also the question of what the filmmakers are being faithful to or is it the novel’s plot in every detail or the spirit of the original (Smith, 2016). These are only few query on the issue of fidelity in the film adaptation. Films based on written texts were assessed according to their faithfulness …show more content…
This is the hot issue of all cinematic adaptation when trying to decide whether or not a piece was a successful adaptation. Fidelity will be critical when examining how critics and audience members justify their complaints or praises. According to Blumenfeld (1995) in his essay “Fidelity as a criterion for practicing and evaluating narrative inquiry”, fidelity is contrasted with truth and characterized as moral in character. Fidelity is further characterized as a betweenness construed as both intersubjective (obligations between teller and receiver) and as a resonance between the story told and the social and cultural context of a story. Fidelity abandons any techniques of simple matching through media for a creative transformation. Andrew (1984) added that it might be better to examine the overall adaptations in terms of being true to the spirit than to look deeper and seeing something as being faithful. Fidelity has also been seen throughout the ages as having a single correct meaning and it is up to the filmmaker to capture this meaning or fail entirely (McFarlane, 1996). The examination of two sets version of Alan Paton’s novel Cry, The Beloved Country will show that the elusive single meaning is an impossibility in
The most obvious problem encountered when translating this tale that has been described as a Drama/Thriller/Romance/War all in one is the fact that the book has been written in first person, and the movie being presented in third. This meant that there were extra scenes added into the film that were actually not part of the novel itself, though this being said they filled in gaps and made certain aspects of the film much more obvious and easy for the audience to understand. Films are of course made in accordance to what type of audience they are aiming for, and Noyce decided naturally to aim for a more main stream audience. In order to meet the demands of the main stream audiences he had to adapt the story to third person, so as to be able to give a more balanced or better rounded representation of the events, and to allow us more obviously to find out what the other characters were doing and thinking. It also allowed for what turned out to be a slightly different interpretations of the main characters.
From the start, the movie is adapted from the novel and therefore it could not cover everything, some actions or acts in the novel are too dense such that it is not of any importance to angle them in the movie. It is very realistic to everyone that the movie cannot cover every single paragraph in the novel even the memorable ones. Some materials are left out in the film, and others were changed.
Some individuals make drastic changes, but with a story as iconic as The Great Gatsby, it is key to remain faithful to the original. Small changes are unavoidable and welcome, as long as they do not change the meaning of the text. When it comes to approaching film adaptation John Harrington elaborates on this idea and argues that,
Phillips, Gene D. Conrad and Cinema: The Art of Adaptation. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., 1995.
Although the film was quite different from the book, I think it was a successful adaptation. Through the many changes made to the book, the movie was still able to capture the main idea of the text: you can’t have living without dying. In my paper, I will discuss the changes to Winnie Foster and Miles Tuck, why I believe the director rearranged the sequence of events, and how the director used different film techniques to set the tone during different scenes.
The film’s story does not simply shines forth, but is also the foundation of the plot. The film’s plot makes the traditional guidelines applicable...
At this point, the readers create their own movie in a way. They will determine important aspects of how the character speaks, looks like, and reacts. Whereas, in the movie, the reader has no choice but to follow the plot laid out in front of them. No longer can they picture the characters in their own way or come up with their different portrayals. The fate of the story, while still unpredictable, was highly influenced by the way the characters looked, spoke, and presented themselves on screen.
As the case with most “Novel to Movie” adaptations, screenwriters for films will make minor, and sometimes drastic, adjustments to the original text in order to increase drama and to reach modern audiences. Baz Luhrmann’s 2013 film interpretation of The Great Gatsby followed the 1925 classic great plot quite accurately, with minor deviations. However, Luhrmann made some notable differences to the characters and settings of The Great Gatsby in order for the story to relate to the current generation and to intensity the plot
...said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Another striking difference between the movie and the book is that both are developed by different sexes. This obviously could effect the compare and contrast views of this paper. For example, being male, I found that the two images that left the greatest impression were of sexual nature, Gertrudis making love with the soldier, and Tita being intimate with Pedro. The different views of the sexes may also be the answer to some of the contrasts between the movie and novel. For instance, the death of Mama Elena. Esquirel’s version fits the emotional death, suicide, geared toward the female audience, while Arau’s shows a more sexual and violent death, extinguishing the male desire for action. In conclusion, I found the novel more entertaining than the movie. The reason the movie fell short in expectations is because Esquirel does a great job in allowing the reader to draw on their imaginations. However, Arau is able to capture this imagery occasionally throughout the movie. Furthermore, most of the changes added to the movie were grand, which added to the thrill and plot of the story. Overall, both are memorable and deserve their legacy.
In conclusion, details involving the characters and symbolic meanings to objects are the factors that make the novel better than the movie. Leaving out aspects of the novel limits the viewer’s appreciation for the story. One may favor the film over the novel or vice versa, but that person will not overlook the intense work that went into the making of both. The film and novel have their similarities and differences, but both effectively communicate their meaning to the public.
Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter is one of the most respected and admired novels of all time. Often criticized for lacking substance and using more elaborate camera work, freely adapted films usually do not follow the original plot line. Following this cliché, Roland Joffe’s version of The Scarlet Letter received an overwhelmingly negative reception. Unrealistic plots and actions are added to the films for added drama; for example, Hester is about to be killed up on the scaffold, when Algonquin members arrive and rescue her. After close analysis, it becomes evident of the amount of work that is put into each, but one must ask, why has the director adapted their own style of depicting the story? How has the story of Hester Prynne been modified? Regarding works, major differences and similarities between the characterization, visual imagery, symbolism, narration and plot, shows how free adaptation is the correct term used.
Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
The first chapter of George Bluestone’s book Novels into Film starts to point out the basic differences that exist between the written word and the visual picture. It is in the chapter "Limits of the Novel and Limits of the Film," that Bluestone attempts to theorize on the things that shape the movie/film from a work of literature. Film and literature appear to share so much, but in the process of changing a work into film, he states important changes are unavoidable. It is the reasoning behind these changes that Bluestone directs his focus, which is the basis behind the change. He starts to look at the nature of film and literature, as a crucial part in the breakdown of this problem. It is only through a discussion into nature of each of these, that Bluestone can discover where film and literature seperate, and also develop a close to accurate theory on the laws that direct the course of change from novel to film.
It is common in today's media-driven society to reach into the past for inspiration and ideas. A trend has developed where original works are transformed into other mediums. For example: books are turned into movies and/or plays, movies are turned into weekly sitcoms, and cartoons will spawn empires (Disney). These things happen so often that an audience rarely stops to question the level of authenticity that remains after these conversions. Perhaps it is only when a project is not well received that people begin to think of the difficulties involved with changing a work's genre. Using Gulliver's Travels as an example, discrepancies and additions in the movie can be contrasted with Jonathan Swift's original text.
Film editing by definition is part of the creative postproduction process of filmmaking. In today’s modern world, film has made use of advanced digital technology to help with the editing. The editor or editors are usually given a complete compilation of all the footage. These various separate shots that can be regarded as ‘ raw’ footage. Their task is to create a finished motion picture through combining and selecting shots and putting them into a coherent sequence of events. Whenever we are viewing a film it is extremely difficult to consciously perceive all the editing that has been undertaken. Every single time there is a change from one image to another, this is an edit. For editors, it could be a possible annoyance or perhaps a blessing that critics and the audience never specifically point out the editor’s contribution. However it must be noted that film editors aren’t the only ones that will contribute to a films editing.