On movies and adaptations
Generally speaking, the book will always (always) be better than any film based off it. Mostly, this is because one has to fit a (generally speaking) long novel into a roughly 2 hour visual media, that is to say, the movie. There are also some other factors, of course, like different points of view from what you as a reader gather from what you're reading and what the director (and script writers) gather from their own personal reading. In a novel, of course, the writer has the freedom of being able to delve into the minds of the characters and thoroughly explore what they're thinking, what might have happened before the events of the novel (i.e. character's past, etc), talk about trivial events, describe a scene with great detail, and many more things.
But what the hell is my point in all this? Well, as usual, there isn't one, but that's not really important, is it? So, whenever I read a book and then watch the movie adaptation, I tend to be disappointed. Generally speaking, it'll be because the film somehow clashes with my "version" of the novel. Either characters are nothing like I imagined them, important scenes are cut from the movie, things are unnecessarily changed, things are added, scenery doesn't work for me, and I could go on, but really, you get my point. This has happened to me with the Harry Potter films, with Twilight (I'm not saying the books are great, but the movie sucked big time. Seriously, women, just think a little and see how bad the whole thing is!), with Angels and Demons, with the English Patient, with Dracula... And yet, if I watch the film first and then read the book it was based on, then I do enjoy the movie (if it's good, of course) and I enjoy the book even more. My teacher and I were discussing once whether it was better to watch then read or vice versa (we never actually reached an agreement, but did say it'd be better just to read the book haha) and she did say that the bad thing about watching the movie first was that she wouldn't be able to make up her own image of the characters after having seen the actors. This doesn't happen to me, and best example I can think of right now is Tristran from Neil Gaiman's Stardust. Totally different images (though I did picture Yvaine quite similar to Claire Danes *cough*). Or Robert Langdon, character from Dan Brown's novels.
Sometimes, of course, the bad thing about watching the movie first is that when reading the novel, you actually already know what happens in the end (unless of course, they change the storyline). This happened to me with Atonement. I watched the movie last year or so and bought the book not a month ago. Finished it today (I took quite a while, I'd say, but it was a fantastic read). Unfortunately, since I already knew um... well, everything, it was not such a gripping read as it would have been had I not watched the film first. Still, I decided to rewatch the movie after reading it (almost as soon as I put the book down I was turning the DVD player on), which tends to be a terrible idea. This time though, I have to say, I have never seen a better adaptation of a novel. Of course, a lot of things were cut out, of course we don't get the character insight as we do in the novel, and Briony's motives for doing what she did are not as clear in the movie as they are in the book (and I still don't get why she's blonde in the movie if she was dark haired in the book, but hey, the girl is a tremendously good actress; she portrayed Briony's character really really well), but I actually found myself going back to the dialogue in my mind and saying "Hey, it's the same here as in the book!" or remembering some things from the background being described or mentioned (like the little animals on Briony's room; the amount of small details astounded me), or actually remembering the same clothes being described in the book (the green dress Cecilia is wearing, for instance). Overall, I think the director did a fantastic job on the adaptation. And the soundtrack is beautiful; powerful, even. And this was the main point for this entry.
Yeah...
Now, I should really get some sleep...
But what the hell is my point in all this? Well, as usual, there isn't one, but that's not really important, is it? So, whenever I read a book and then watch the movie adaptation, I tend to be disappointed. Generally speaking, it'll be because the film somehow clashes with my "version" of the novel. Either characters are nothing like I imagined them, important scenes are cut from the movie, things are unnecessarily changed, things are added, scenery doesn't work for me, and I could go on, but really, you get my point. This has happened to me with the Harry Potter films, with Twilight (I'm not saying the books are great, but the movie sucked big time. Seriously, women, just think a little and see how bad the whole thing is!), with Angels and Demons, with the English Patient, with Dracula... And yet, if I watch the film first and then read the book it was based on, then I do enjoy the movie (if it's good, of course) and I enjoy the book even more. My teacher and I were discussing once whether it was better to watch then read or vice versa (we never actually reached an agreement, but did say it'd be better just to read the book haha) and she did say that the bad thing about watching the movie first was that she wouldn't be able to make up her own image of the characters after having seen the actors. This doesn't happen to me, and best example I can think of right now is Tristran from Neil Gaiman's Stardust. Totally different images (though I did picture Yvaine quite similar to Claire Danes *cough*). Or Robert Langdon, character from Dan Brown's novels.
Sometimes, of course, the bad thing about watching the movie first is that when reading the novel, you actually already know what happens in the end (unless of course, they change the storyline). This happened to me with Atonement. I watched the movie last year or so and bought the book not a month ago. Finished it today (I took quite a while, I'd say, but it was a fantastic read). Unfortunately, since I already knew um... well, everything, it was not such a gripping read as it would have been had I not watched the film first. Still, I decided to rewatch the movie after reading it (almost as soon as I put the book down I was turning the DVD player on), which tends to be a terrible idea. This time though, I have to say, I have never seen a better adaptation of a novel. Of course, a lot of things were cut out, of course we don't get the character insight as we do in the novel, and Briony's motives for doing what she did are not as clear in the movie as they are in the book (and I still don't get why she's blonde in the movie if she was dark haired in the book, but hey, the girl is a tremendously good actress; she portrayed Briony's character really really well), but I actually found myself going back to the dialogue in my mind and saying "Hey, it's the same here as in the book!" or remembering some things from the background being described or mentioned (like the little animals on Briony's room; the amount of small details astounded me), or actually remembering the same clothes being described in the book (the green dress Cecilia is wearing, for instance). Overall, I think the director did a fantastic job on the adaptation. And the soundtrack is beautiful; powerful, even. And this was the main point for this entry.
Yeah...
Now, I should really get some sleep...