JChic

Soon to be unemployed student, that is routinely touted as being one of the most frustrating and contrary student ever to grace Aberdeen.

Junior Contributor I

  • Articles
    0
  • Featured
    0
  • Comments
    3
  • Ext. Comments
    3
  • Processed
    0
  • Revisions
    0
  • Topics
    1
  • Topics Taken
    0
  • Notes
    1
  • Topics Proc.
    0
  • Topics Rev.
    0
  • Points
    31
  • Rank
    X
  • Score
    20
    Sorry, no posts matched your criteria.

    Latest Topics

    6

    Is the constant adaptations of literature into tv and film a hindrance for tv/film writers?

    If we look at works which are both critically and financially successful we often see writers adapting previous works a la comics, books and in some cases films to tv (Fargo) Do writers hinder their own original ideas because of how an existing property is already ripe with ideas that can be changed or looked at in a different way.

    • Could you give some more examples of adaptations and specify according to type of translation to medium? For example: Sex and the City - TV to book to movie MASH - movie to TV La femme Nikita - movie to TV Wouldn't it be to a writer's advantage to get more mileage out of their ideas?The only written work I know of is SAGA, a comic book series that was specifically written so it would not be conducive to a film adaptation. Other stories like Spiderman were instances where Stan Lee chose to wait for the technology to do justice to his comics. I think it would be good to look at writers of novels or comics or movies that did not want to transcend the original medium in order to answer the question you have put forward. I hope this helps in what you are intending to answer. – Munjeera 5 years ago
      2
    • In response to Munjeera. The principle writer that has not supported adaptations of their work is Alan Moore. He has noted time and time again that the adaptions of his work are not good because of his own personal feelings on adaptation and that his work is designed for comic book (or graphic novel if you must be that guy) and with comics blowing up in terms of popularity his creation 'Constantine' is now a tv show without his consent and has no interest in exploring the class themes that the character was designed to explore. When it comes to novels to film successes there are countless, o name a few: Jaws, Blade Runner, Snowpiercer, any Kubrick. But there is a significant number of authors that do not agree with their work adapted to another medium. My question was whether this stifles writers, if a writer is constantly building off an already made work then do they limit their own imaginative works? – JChic 5 years ago
      1
    • Thanks for clarifying. I looked up Alan Moore and the topic suggested could be narrowed down to just on Alan Moore himself, a fascinating topic for an article. I would suggest writing about him and his work on this platform so that people like myself, who do not know much about him, can learn about his views. I only knew about him from "V for Vendetta." His beliefs and philosophies are definitely relevant to your topic and there is enough material to write a good article.Also Bill Watterson, of Calvin and Hobbes fame, successfully resisted all efforts to make his comic strip a movie. His dad was a patent lawyer so I am sure he was conscious of how his art could be exploited right from the beginning, an advantage that other artists may not be as aware as an "evil" they may have to guard against to retain their artistic purity. Watterson's rare interviews always touched on this topic. He is another example of an artist who eschewed financial gain for artistic integrity.If I am understanding you correctly, then perhaps the concept you are referring to could be how creative control, or lack thereof, affects the writer? When writers develop their concepts and these concepts are exploited, how does affect an artist? It would be interesting to learn about artists who do not sell out, create and protect their material in the original form. Let me know if I have understood you, at last. – Munjeera 5 years ago
      1
    • It also seems noteworthy that if a adaptation does not do well as a film, or in Tv, then then producers always look to the other one as the saviour. This seems to convolute the markets as now the original work has been adapted twice, therefore taken twice the amount of space for original Tv and film. – thomassutton94 5 years ago
      1
    • I think this idea is interesting because it's different from the typical "book vs. movie" argument. I would opt to focus on TV adaptions for sure. The first two series that come to mind are naturally "The Walking Dead" and "Game of Thrones," both of which tend to have vastly different opinions between the book/comic readers and those who watch the show. Something like that could be interesting to discuss. For example, when does "changing the material" take away from the original source? If you are looking into movie to TV adaptions, "Fargo" is an excellent example, along with "Hannibal," "Ash vs. Evil Dead," and, though the original movie was rather poorly received, the stellar TV series "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." – Filippo 5 years ago
      3

    Sorry, no tides are available. Please update the filter.

    Latest Comments

    YouTube vloggers and channels have rarely clicked with me. Mostly because of how many are very base. For example AngryJoe. Great guy, probably an incredibly nice person but when it comes to game theory or analysis, it’s just not there. He’s mostly fair and unbiased, but it’s not proper criticism but because of that success anyone else going into games criticism or reviewing will be facing a prebuilt audience that is used to surface level analysis. (That makes me sound like such a dick)

    Vlogging: The New Genre of Television Entertainment

    Part of me wishes Superboy-Prime had been handled a bit better and not been made too meta. And All Star’s brilliant but brief Solaris was a interesting type of foe for Superman.

    10 Superman Villains Who Don't Need Kryptonite

    Civil War can kinda sum up the problem that comics have with continuity and the tone of events. The animosity fostered in Civil War never really feels earned or significant because you know that they will have to make up because of a bigger bad. In the case of comics you had Osborne and in the films, thanks to the Marvel market machine we know Thanos is going to require all attention.

    Civil (Ethics) War: A Marvel Comics Event