Because You're Not Miyazaki, That's Why
So many times, we've seen movies adapted from books, in which the adaptation seems to have so little in common with the original, one wonders why the filmmaker bothered to acquire the rights. In the worse cases, they're infuriating: tarnishing the reputation of a beautiful and good work of art with a classless (or clueless) knock-off.
But I watched Hayao Miyzaki's Howl's Moving Castle the other night, and his adaptation of the Diana Wynne Jones novel is nearly as tenuous. Miazaki simply used Wynne Jone's book as an inspiration to tell one of his own stories; to create his own vision. And yet those who love her book, including the author herself, come away from the movie filled with delight; it's that good.
So there you have it: That's why so very, very many movie-to-book adaptations fall short. It's not because (as I imagined) the film-makers are simply not conversant with both the "language" of film and books--though that may indeed be part of the problem.
It's because all those film-makers imagine that they're Hayao Miyazaki.
And they're not.
But I watched Hayao Miyzaki's Howl's Moving Castle the other night, and his adaptation of the Diana Wynne Jones novel is nearly as tenuous. Miazaki simply used Wynne Jone's book as an inspiration to tell one of his own stories; to create his own vision. And yet those who love her book, including the author herself, come away from the movie filled with delight; it's that good.
So there you have it: That's why so very, very many movie-to-book adaptations fall short. It's not because (as I imagined) the film-makers are simply not conversant with both the "language" of film and books--though that may indeed be part of the problem.
It's because all those film-makers imagine that they're Hayao Miyazaki.
And they're not.