From politics to feminism, the writing in absurd comedies and rom-coms depicts interesting topics as background noise or as what causes the conflict in the plot, like Corporate greed in Two Weeks Notice.
Fantasy film franchises dominated the box office with The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean, the Star Wars prequel trilogy. but in 2000s film have quality, budget, mainly technologies issues we had faced. – zahra52535 years ago
One of the biggest reasons that rom coms as a medium aren’t taken seriously - and one of the reasons I’m not a fan - is that they don’t treat the audience as an equal. It’s almost like they’re talking down, or simplifying characters or narratives for mass consumption. – HannahRose5 years ago
After the release of his latest film, In Fabric, Peter Strickland could be considered one of the most distinctive voices in British cinema today. Is there another filmmaker whose work is similar to his? Are there any signature traits which permeate his films to-date?
A well-known name by many thatis very influential on others. – devonmb07095 years ago
What exactly do fans want with an adaptation of a comic, book, anime or manga. Sometimes fans are upset because films stick too close to, or deviate too much from the source material. There have been effective adaptations on both ends of the spectrum, but what is it that fans really want to see adapted to the big screen?
I feel like "fans" will never truly 100% agree what they want out of adaptations. Some people really do want the exact same story translated perfectly into the big screen from a book. But others do want an adaptation that is only inspired by the original work, but goes it's own direction. I think there is a balance to be found between paying respect and homage to the original work, while also trying new things that only the medium you're adapting into can pull off. – Dimitri6 years ago
I think a good adaptation needs to stand on its own, apart from the source material. Whether the adaptation sticks closely to the original source material, or it deviates into something else, it needs to be able to be viewed without knowledge of the source material. I think video game movies often make the mistake of trying to stay true to the game, and end up creating a movie that is only enjoyable (or sometimes comprehensible) by those who have played the game already. – rachelfreeman6 years ago
I agree with rachelfreeman and also think a good adaptation needs to stand on its own. That thought works really well with your title ("What does a good adaptation look like?") but quite not so well with your subsequent discussion of fans. Perhaps a better title would be "What do fans want in an adaptation?" My sense is that fans would mostly want a very "faithful" (or literal) adaptation. To me, the word "fan" suggests a strong emotional attachment, not simply strong appreciation of a work. – JamesBKelley6 years ago
The biggest complaint I see from adaptations is that a season's worth of anime content gets crammed into a movie-length live-action adaptation. There's no proper way to do that without major pacing issues and lack of character development. I don't personally believe the change in format from animation to live-action is the problem, just the limitations of the story format of series to movie and so forth. – Slaidey6 years ago
I do not think that maintaining fidelity with original work earns the adaptation brownie points. These are two different worlds. You cannot just put out a verbatim original work on the screen, due to its limited time frame and content presentation. But this does reduce the artistic creativity of the screenplay writer and the director. The movie has to adapt a different narrative technique, which all runs down to how the director wishes it manifest in the screen. – Azira101phale6 years ago
In terms of the topic and its intended title, my inclination is to say that a good adaptation is grounded in the original objective, one. Two, it thrives in its current literary climate from either perspective: fan, critic, understudy or advocate. The ultimate test is, three; does it contribute fruitfully to its own category of art as well as any periphery discipline, where one would least expect it to emerge and actually pique unlikely audiences? – L:Freire5 years ago
Every time a movie is adapted from a book, people complain about it. This is understandable; I’ve seen my favorite books butchered in film and it’s never pleasant. However, I recently read the comment on a BuzzFeed article about this that a certain book’s story didn’t "translate" to film. Are there certain books that translate better than others to film, and if so, what are some? Does a book need certain elements to translate well to film, or are filmmakers simply stuck doing the best they can because, print and film being different mediums, certain things are bound to get lost in translation? Discuss.
As you have stated before, texts are analyzed ad infinitum. Yet in terms of this topic, I think you could argue slightly different, for a change of pace. All writing goes through drafting phases and all authors go through periods of productivity and delay or self-doubt. That said, how can we destroy an adaptation that is merely going through a rough phase, on its merry way to the final version? Doesn't sound fair to the artist, but then again, is life ever fair? As far as translation goes, an author that is true to his craft and steadfast to the theme will inevitably produce the elusive masterpiece. Another incumbent will fumble the narrative by second-guessing the motive and the medium, failing to strike a vital chord with the audience in the process. Nonetheless, you managed to rehash a contentious issue among art lovers. – L:Freire5 years ago
The two conversing sides of the argument perhaps both have a touch of truth. Most of the books that have failed after being adapted to films have departed so far from the themes and messages of the books that fans have been almost experiencing a different story altogether (e.g. Eragon). This departure from the known characters is such a removal for the audience that it is almost being incorrectly introduced to someone you already know.
On the other hand, writing a narrative in hundreds of pages cannot practically incorporate the waves of thoughts, senses, and minor details within a two hour film. While most including myself would gladly take a 12 hour Harry Potter film, to appeal to wider audiences, films cannot be realistically expected to cover all aspects of a book.
Certainly, some films have handled the transition better than others and remained true to the heart of the book, but unfortunately the realities of the economically driven film industry prevent the full transition that fans so ardently desire. Maybe the solution is in tv adaptation rather than film to allow for longer screen time, or maybe the magic of perspective and thought disclosure in books can never be truly replicated. – Huntforpurpose5 years ago
I'd be interested in hearing about living writers and their part in the production of the films. Should they be given authority over everything? Do they write the screenplay? if not, does the screenwriter get the say over the writer etc.
– sophiatarin5 years ago
It's a valid concern. There is a documentary on The Virgin Suicides that makes the case for inclusion of the writer within the film-making process. Of course, Sofia Coppola has the ultimate say over the characterization of the narrative. But the author of that novel, Jeffrey Eugenides, was a vital component behind the dialogue, the mood, and the setting. Also, I failed to mention earlier that the reverse can be surprisingly successful. For instance, the Star Trek episode "All the Yesterdays" made a seamless foray into a series of acclaimed novel tie-ins by A.C. Crispin. The onscreen romance between Spock and Zarabeth translated into two compelling novels of time travel and a supposed offspring between the pair. – L:Freire5 years ago
A compelling factor in this debate is circumstances. The ancient Greeks wrote dramatic recollections of events that moved audiences of the time and to this day in practically
every discipline that has emerged since then. But, there were no motion pictures to reclaim those texts. Then, Shakespeare entered the picture with an equal fervor for casting light on the matters of his day. Presently, we submit to the same appetite for literary escape with authors such as J.K. Rowling and Suzanne Collins, probably as eagerly as the Greeks and the British did in the early days of the art. In those times as it continues to be today, the stage was the medium for the written script. I venture to guess that audiences had their preferences for certain actors and theatres when reading the written play was not a viable option nor a preference. Perhaps, it may be that reading the plot in the comfort of a familiar setting with pleasant music or refreshment is the reason why some people opt for this method of entertainment. Indeed, the pace of a book or the flash of color and splash of sound in a film is what draws fans to each particular venue. So, an author's style or an actor's appeal may be the reasons why people turn to different sources of entertainment, including the online variety. I suppose radio producers had the same challenges in their respective field that could be incorporated into this topic. – L:Freire5 years ago
Adaptation theory says that a film can do anything a book can do - it just does it in different ways. For example, first-person narration in a book might be translated in film via sound editing to an internal monologue. I don't really understand this as a valid concern because books, despite what people commonly think, are also a visual medium (consider font, illustrations, formatting, inflection, quotes, etc.) – KateBowen5 years ago
Though this has been a topic on the minds of filmmakers for a few years, consider the effect an environment non-dependent upon ratings has upon visual storytelling. How did media service providers like Netflix and Hulu change the film and television industry when, in addition to distribution, they began dabbling in production?
I think services like Netflix focus on number of new subscribers, rather than ratings to evaluate their platform, so this might play into the way film has evolved for them. – Andi5 years ago
Netflix, AmazonPrime, and Hulu provide people with TV shows and movies that remind them of the good old days! Rugrats, Doug, Hey Arnold, The Sixth Sense, Casper, The Twilight Zone, Charmed, and more! Yep! Those were the days! – autenarocks5 years ago
To me, Netflix and these other online media servers have created a space where non-mainstream stories are developed and aired; some examples include international film/TV and stories with POC, LGBT, and/or disabled people as protagonists. – Paula R.5 years ago
This is such an important thing to research and stay interested in. These streaming companies are only getting more popular and continue to see revenue increases. I attended Sundance this year and Hulu swept the sales- an unprecedented move by a streaming service. This is becoming the new normal. A positive to be found is one that is perhaps best stated by Alfonso Cuarón, when speaking about his film Roma being funded by Netflix. He believes Roma would've never been able to reach the audience the film was meant to (lower-class people around the globe) were it not for the accessibility of Netflix. An interesting take I'd say! – NellGeer5 years ago
What’s interesting about these platforms is that they are both a major studio *and* indie platform rolled into one. Theoretically Netflix could air a major 100m blockbuster on one day and a 1m iPhone shot drama the next, and their model stays the same. Because they’re revolutionised by the pay model, for the fact consumers directly subscribe, they have much more freedom to both appeal to the masses & niche interests than a studio worried about the bottom line, who need bankable projects with huge returns to survive. The only thing that threatens streaming platforms now is the replication of the Netflix model in too many places, leaving consumers unable to subscribe to all of them. Their proliferation could be their eventual undoing. – A J. Black5 years ago
Why are so many of us fascinated by the though that the world could end? To some, it is an exciting possibility, and to others, it is a fearful, inevitable reality approaching sooner and sooner with each passing day. Films such as "I Am Legend", "The Book of Eli", "The Road" and the "Mad Max" franchise all depict a war-torn, destroyed and desolate landscape in a variety of forms, but with common undertones of insanity, deprivation, ruthlessness, and desperation. Why are we drawn to such themes? And on a side note, could our fascination, on a global scale, bring about that same apocalypse like some sort of self fulfilling prophecy, like the ending of the film "Tomorrowland"?
I think part of it is the curiosity and fascination with understanding the world (e.g., how it got to be so bad, how are the survivors coping on a day-to-day basis). Beyond this there's some sort of purpose or mission that is introduced. A common one is there's a child that is immune to the disease that has massacred the world and now the protagonist has to get that child from A to B so that they can be studied for a cure. This serves a glimmer of hope in an otherwise messed up world. On top of this, the barriers that get in the way set up an against-all-odds situation. Maybe they need to traverse a fast flowing river or maybe there are roaming groups of bandits out to rob and kill them. These struggles get you rooting for the characters to succeed. Lastly, there's usually a redemption arc in there. The protagonist has usually lost their family and has become jaded and cynical about life. While they are technically surviving, they have lost a lot of what makes us human. Once purpose is reintroduced into their life they start to become human again, learning to love, care, and hope once again. – CAPSlock5 years ago
Great topic! :) Is it to escape from our own reality? That people seek tragedy to begin to feel and let go of the numbness that many people feel in ther everyday life. People seek a new beginning a fresh start. – rghtin2be5 years ago
This is a very good topic. One potential reason just speaking from my peer groups fascination as young kids with the apocalyptic world was its depictions of near lawlessness, almost a return to primal instinct and its allowance of doing what you want when you want. Maybe that carries on into the modern age with watching movies depict the conversations we'd indulge in as children about "what you'd do in a ____ apocalypse" – RBoileau5 years ago
We live with many apocalyptic threats looming over our heads: resource depletion, environmental and ecological collapse, climate change, nuclear war, pollution, nanotechnology mishaps, the inevitability of a large asteroid or comet impacting the planet, and so on. It's understandable that people find some kind of catharsis in being able to visualize what an apocalypse or post-apocalypse may look like, and what to do in the event that such a thing occurs. – RyanVStewart5 years ago
So there are numerous films and tv shows out there that portray mental illness/mental distress that I think further stigmatise mental illness. The example that springs to my mind are the way that the characters with mental illness are portrayed in "The Bird Box". Not having read the book (yet) I can’t comment on the book’s portrayal but for me, the film reinforced the negative stereotype that people with mental illnesses will harm or hurt ‘sane’ people. The fact that all of the ‘insane’ characters behaved erratically, committed violent acts against the ‘normal’/’sane’ survivors and were ultimately responsible for the death of Tom worries me as a ‘mad’ person who suffers from a mental illness.
There are countless other examples of mentally ill characters being dangerous to ‘normal’/’sane’ people and I am beginning to wonder if, like the LGBTQ community, those of us with mental illnesses should be asking for more than a vague stereotype based on outdated ideas of who and what ‘crazy people’ are.
What do other people think? Can you think of any examples that counter this argument? I’d love to hear your perspectives.
I didn't put as much weight on the issue in Bird Box because of the supernatural element blamed for everything and the driving force of the story. Their madness isn't necessarily their fault, and then neither are characters' suicide, so it's an interesting line to draw about stereotypes and enforcement. I definitely agree there's a problem in media with the portrayal of mental illness, although it has improved over the years with exposure, it is still not great. I can't think of any others off the top of my head but this article would be great with several examples-- one of poor (and probably cruel) misrepresentation of illness, Bird Box as the middle ground, and a positive example we can all be encouraged to watch and support for the rights of people suffering with mental illness! :) – Slaidey5 years ago
Hey Slaidey My main issue with Birdbox is the fact that all the mentally ill people in the film (who were immune to the supernatural creates effects) were mostly portrayed as people to be feared and overly violent. This could be seen as a reinforcement of years of 'mad' (I use the term as someone who is proud of their mental illness - if such a thing is possible) oppression where the insane were misunderstood and seen as a threat to the wider 'sane/normal' population. This is certainly the impression I got from Bird Box where the insane characters were largely to be feared. The same effect could have been achieved, in my opinion, without making the characters violent. Probably the most nuanced portrayal is by Tom Hollander whose character is the closest to how I would have like to have seen the other 'mad' characters portrayed. There have been some good portrayals of mental illness in the media lately, but in a world where representation is key to understanding, I think film and TV companies, as well as content creators, would do more. That said the BBC did some brilliant documentaries on mental illness in May but surely mad people are entitled to representation in a wider range of genres? One of the ways that media companies could improve their representation is by looking at what has been on the stage recently here in London (where the performers/creators of the pieces are people with lived experience of mental illness) and maybe work with performance makers such as The Vaccum Cleaner or Milly Thomas to film the work they have recently performed on stage. I guess the lack of representation is symbolic of a larger problem of diversity and representation and the possible in build risk aversion that most big media companies have when it comes to taking a chance on upcoming projects that might be seen to have 'small/ethnic/minority' audiences. Communities larger than the insane community such as the Black and LGBTQ+ communities have been fighting for equal rights for over 50 years and even with their campaigning, lobbying and calls for more equal representations they are still struggling towards fairer and more equitable representation on screen. Hopefully, things will get better (I think Netflix is doing some amazing work representing the LGBT community) over time as long as the people making the decisions move away from stereotypes. – Dewi Evans5 years ago
There is the inevitability that mental illness is overdramatized within film and television. This is because the way that entertainment has evolved over the past several decades has trained consumers to be interested in the big, moving, exhilarating things. There are some mental illnesses that have dangerous, intense, and scary attributes and behaviours to them. However, the majority of mental illnesses are in the details. They are about the personality traits that are seen as weird, or the behaviours that make people cock their heads because they are trying to determine what is off, or the person that is slightly socially awkward. These things are not blockbuster, do not catch people's attentions unless they have been educated to look and listen, and are not going to be the first thing someone picks to watch. The desensitivity to so much in today's society has made people cruel, especially towards things that could be seen as weird or weak (i.e. mental illness). This does not help or favour the notion of making a film or making a television show that highlights mental illness in both an accurate and positive way. So many movies or television shows that have accurately portrayed illnesses have taken them to the extreme and created a monster out of the person that has the illness. Take Split for example; This movie was created based on an individual having multiple personalities, who took three young girls because several of his personalities told him to. The stigma behind multiple personalities is that it is all within the person's head, and that each personality is a coping mechanism for a specific fear or anxiousness that the person carries with them in everyday life. This overdramatization plants ideas in people's head that are triggered when they meet someone in reality with the particular disorder. Instead of seeking to understand the condition from this real person's perspective, many refer back to the information that they have acquired from an unreliable source.
– heck18605 years ago
Analyse how travel is important to the films’ plot. For instance, it helps broaden the horizons for both viewer and characters. If one travels, one’s mind is highly likely to broaden to what lifestyle someone can live in. In the case of the films’ characters, it brings more interest to their story, they see new places, have constant change.
This is an interesting propostion. I would suggest defining the genre of what movies will be taken into account. There is, I believe, a very essential difference between realism and sci-fi for example which, in relation to travel, will entail diverse approaches and methods for analysis.
– Kaya5 years ago
Thank you, Kaya, for your feedback! I was not focusing on any genre specifically when I wrote this. If I had to choose, it'd be action, drama, comedy, and/or fantasy, since it is with those films that the setting has a tendency to change. – Yvonne T.5 years ago
I agree with Kaya. Focusing on a specific genre or even a specific film would make the topic very interesting to explore. I think you're right to focus on both the character and the viewer, as both experience the journey and are affected by it. – JamesBKelley5 years ago
