Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Literature to movie adaptation proces
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Literature to movie adaptation proces
Although the novel The Secret in Their Eyes and the film of the same name have stylistic changes and changes in how events happen with the addition of a scene or two, the stories stay true to each other, to a point. The changes include making Irene more involved within the story and changing Chaparro’s character less outwardly faint-hearted, and most of the changes relate to different characters. All the changes and differences between the two serve a purpose within the narrative, usually to make scenes more dramatic for the viewer or to fit scenes within a certain time frame. When we are comparing the novel and its film adaptation, we are addressing whether “an adaptation arrives first at a comparison between a novel and film, and second at …show more content…
However, perceptions between the two differ from even each other. As Lupack says:
In asserting an adaptation we are not really comparing book with film but rather interpretation with interpretation - the novel that we ourselves have recreated in our imaginations, out of which we have constructed our own individualized “movie,” and the novel on which the filmmaker has worked a parallel transformation. (10)
Although we do have our different perceptions about the novel and the story within it, these perceptions are, more or less, similar to each other. As these only vary so much from each other, they can still be a considerably veritable basis of comparison for the two versions of this story, the versions focused on being the novel and the the film. When comparing between our variations, we can compare the changes to see “how much of written work’s plot and characterization has been translated into the new medium, how comprehensive and intelligent an understanding of the original (its strengths, its weaknesses) underlies the translation” (Hunter 159). But when comparing the two we have to remember that “To understand adaptation, for example, we must begin by understanding books and movies are separate and never should be confused with each other,” (Crane 15) so even though the story is similar and the film pulls many elements from the novel, they are still two separate
…show more content…
While he still “anchors the narrative development in El secreto, … he is portrayed as both in control and powerless,” (Rocha 5) within both narrations, in the film he is depicted as less ineffectual towards Irene, being wittier towards her in the present time, possibly more confident in his novel. He is also portrayed as less faint-hearted in the film, as he does not seem to shy away as much from Lillianna 's body as the novel’s narrative tells us. Another facet of Chaparro being less timid in the film is that when he tells Romano that he is going to file a complaint and Romano goes at him, Chaparro fought back. If Romano had attacked Chaparro like that in the novel, it is more likely that Chaparro would not know what to do and either just stand there startled and not fight back or run away as fast as he could. A minor change between variations is that his name is changed, for the reason that Chaparro has the connotation of ‘short and squat,’ and most likely the director did not want to have an immediate negative association to the main character based on the meaning of his
Second there is more detail in the book than the movie. Well, I think that more detail is better because the more you know the better you understand the movie or
...d coloring of certain images. The novel, however, puts much greater emphasis on the imagination and creativity, and on the main character Tita. The novel really makes the reader feel Titas pain and grow with her as she discovers her freedom, whereas the movie failed to achieve this. Moreover, the movie tends to ignore the significant of 3 integral motifs, cooking, tears and sensuality.
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.
Though the events and a lot of the dialogue are the same in both the book and the movie the crux of the two are completely different. The book focuses a lot more on sexual tension and sexual exploration. The...
Many time in our lives, we have seen the transformation of novels into movies. Some of them are equal to the novel, few are superior, and most are inferior. Why is this? Why is it that a story that was surely to be one of the best written stories ever, could turn out to be Hollywood flops? One reason is that in many transformations, the main characters are changed, some the way they look, others the way they act. On top of this, scenes are cut out and plot is even changed. In this essay, I will discuss some of the changes made to the characters of the Maltese Falcon as they make their transformation to the ?big screen.?
Filmmaking and cinematography are art forms completely open to interpretation in a myriad ways: frame composition, lighting, casting, camera angles, shot length, etc. The truly talented filmmaker employs every tool available to make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels, including social and emotional. When a filmmaker chooses to undertake an adaptation of a literary classic, the choices become somewhat more limited. In order to be true to the integrity of the piece of literature, the artistic team making the adaptation must be careful to communicate what is believed was intended by the writer. When the literature being adapted is a play originally intended for the stage, the task is perhaps simplified. Playwrights, unlike novelists, include some stage direction and other instructions regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has a strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen.
Overall, the movie and book have many differences and similarities, some more important than others. The story still is clear without many scenes from the book, but the movie would have more thought in it.
When novels are adapted for the cinema, directors and writers frequently make changes in the plot, setting, characterization and themes of the novel. Sometimes the changes are made in adaptations due to the distinctive interpretations of the novel, which involve personal views of the book and choices of elements to retain, reproduce, change or leave out. On the contrary, a film is not just an illustrated version of the novel; it is a totally different medium. When adapting the novel, the director has to leave out a number of things for the simple reason of time difference. Furthermore, other structures and techniques must be added to the film to enhance the beauty and impressions of it. Like a translator, the director wants to do some sort of fidelity to the original work and also create a new work of art in a different medium. Regardless of the differences in the two media, they also share a number of elements: they each tell stories about characters.
Why do directors choose to stay faithful to or depart from a text when they are producing a film? Many directors choose to either alter or maintain literary elements such as characters, plot, and resolution from a text. The presence or lack of these specific features affects the audience. For instance, in the story “The Monkey’s Paw”, a classic short horror story written by W.W. Jacobs, and its accompanying film, the similarities and differences in the characters, plot, and resolution have an effect on the readers and viewers.
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.
Whenever books are adapted for film, changes inevitably have to be made. The medium of film offers several advantages and disadvantages over the book: it is not as adept at exploring the inner workings of people - it cannot explore their minds so easily; however, the added visual and audio capabilities of film open whole new areas of the imagination which, in the hands of a competent writer-director, can more than compensate.
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.
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.
	Books, more often than not, are better than the movies that are made from them. This is due to the immense power of our imaginations. Readers use their imaginations to fill the space that exists between him/herself and the book with such things as dreams, past experiences, and hopes. For this reason, there is much more depth and symbolic depictions in the novella, The Awakening, by Kate Chopin, compared with the movie version, Grand Isle. Due to this, the effect on the reader is much more potent than the effect on the viewer.
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.