Book Adaptations (a media ISU)

So with the release of The Giver trailer and the movie set to come out later this year, I decided to focus my ISU for this class on book adaptations into movies. In particular, bad book adaptations because they should not exist. I’m not saying that all book adaptations are bad, but with the genre becoming more popular in today’s movies, most of then turn away potential readers away from the original book. It also deters the readers of said books away from the movie because they are so bad and completely rip off the book.

According to every high school student’s best friend, Wikipedia, a book or literary adaptation is adapting of a literary source (e.g. a novel, short story, poem) to another genre or medium such as film, a stage play, or even a video game. For the purposes of this assignment, I’m going to focus on the literary part. For nearly as long as there has been a developed language, there has been literature. The first documented writing can date back to the earliest in the Genus Homo (which we, as humans are also in). However, this would now be considered chicken scratch to us as it mainly consisted of a few lines. The earliest formal writing appears about 4100-3800 BCE with symbols. Over time, our written language has evolved to what it is today. And yet, it continues to evolve. (Learn more here)

With the fantastic invention that is the Internet and cell phones, language is arguably taking a turn for the worst as teens now use cool texting lingo to communicate instead of writing out the full word. I was guilty of this when I got my first phone in the eighth grade like the cool kid that I was, but since then I have changed the error of my ways. While some say that language is in a state of regression, some can argue that it is continually evolving and this is only the next step. Personally, I think that we are slowly slipping into a second Dark Age and by slowly, I mean really slowly! But all things must have a beginning, and this could be it.

History rant over…

Getting back on the topic train, stories have been around longer then any recorded text. I’m sure you can imagine an early human huddling around the best invention ever, fire, and telling stories. Or am I the only on…? Guess I am…

Moving right along. After the whole writing thing came around, story tellers were like, “Hey, I’m going to take this story of our great king and write It down using this modern technology.” And thus, written stories were created! More and more story tellers and clergymen (when Christianity became a thing) began writing and eventually enough people wanted to spread their stories and messages, and BOOM, the printing press was invented! I think we all know what happens from here.

So a little while afterwards, this hip thing called a motion picture was invented and the people were like, “Whoa! It is a train. And it is moving. It is coming towards me. Oh. My. God!” So this is when the two mediums of film and literature came together. Soon, Hollywood was pumping out more films then ever and the people were soaking it up, like the Sham Wow guy. But as many ideas that they had, this would not suffice. The people wanted to see outlandish stories come to life right before their eyes. So the directors turned to books!

One of the earliest films to include mind blowing special effects, A Trip to the Moon (1902) directed by the legendary Georges Melies, is said to be loosely based off of Jules Verne’s classic sci-fi novel, From the Earth to the Moon and H.G Well’s The First Men in the Moon. However, this was never confirmed. Some of the most famous literary adaptations are some of the first Disney movies. If you are to look at this list so kindly provided by Wikipedia, you can see that the majority of Disney movies are based off of the works of other authors, i.e. it is not an original idea. This is certainly true for the most popular movies like all of the Princess movies, for example. So if movie companies have been doing this forever, why is there a rise in popularity in literary adaptations in today’s movies?

You could say that one of these reasons is that Hollywood is not willing to take risks with films anymore. There are countless movies that have had these big budgets, an all-star cast, tons of hype, but little success in the box office. Originally, films were meant to replicate everyday life because that is what the people knew and that is what they wanted to see. But then as talkies became popular in the 30’s, which just so happened to be the time of the Great Depression, films became big and extravagant and made the viewer want to live in the lavish world that is constructed for them. Films were meant as an escape for the poor who could not imagine a glamorous life style. One of the best films to demonstrate this is The Wizard of Oz,

which is conveniently an adaptation of the popular The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum. Our protagonist, Dorothy, is from a poor family and could never imagine herself in a lavish land like Oz before the twister magically transported her to Oz. How convenient. She then goes on a series of adventures in order to get back home, teaching the viewer that “there is no place like home.” Like Dorothy, the viewer always had to go home afterwards. And if anything, films taught viewer that yes, it is okay to escape to a fantastic world, but you will always have to go back to reality. 

However, lately, it seems that we have reverted back to the old ways of films by creating movies about everyday life that are somehow twisted. We want to see a version of our reality, but still have that fantasy element to it. So how does this tie back to my point of Hollywood not taking chances and be original, you ask. Well kind reader, books create a new reality for anyone who reads them, but like Dorothy, we always go back to our version of reality. And due to the success that books have had recently, with authors like John Green and my queen, J.K. Rowling, construct that precious reality for us. Why would a production company pay someone to come up with this reality, when there is already one written for them! Hollywood has become lazy with story lines, whether they are original or not. And this had leaded them to not take chances with movies that have spectacular plot lines.

What happened to those movies where you could sit and escape your world? I think this is what film and books have in common; they allow us that escape. Ask any author from the Romantic period and they would tell you that they would like to live in the life of their characters, but they don’t. Books and films allow the reader or viewer to go into the world of the characters, if only for a little bit and live their life. They make us feel comfortable and happy. We relate ourselves to the characters and eventually, they become us. We are the characters. It does not matter if they are on screen or written on pages, we will always personally relate ourselves to characters. And in doing so, we are very protective over our characters. This can been seen in fandoms.

Fandoms are groups of people that share a deep interest a certain medium of media, like Harry Potter or Minecraft, if that is your thing. These groups share their passion for said medium over the Internet and voice what characters they most identify with. Recently, fandoms have taken on characteristics of a cult and often turn away people from joining said fandom. But what we do, we do out of love. Fangirls/boys are incredibly protective over their characters. Books and films share this level of intensity of passion because so many beloved books are being adapted into movies so people who are too lazy to read the book, still know the plot line.

The fan base of both books and films increases almost daily as people discover books and films at there own pace. An example of on of these fan bases is The Avengers.

Originally set in the comic book world, The Avengers was successfully adapted into a blockbuster movie franchise. People who went to see the movie and soon to be sequel, and really enjoyed it, may turn to the comic books to ties them over until the next movie comes out. People who enjoy the comic, then in turn go see the movie. It is a cycle of nerdy epicenes. But the separate movie fandom is protective over the franchise to the point were they are turning away people from seeing to movie and enjoying it. Fandoms are supposed to be a place on the Internet where you can find people who share your interests and relate to them. But instead of this happy place, Fandoms can become verbally abusive towards people who are not “true fans” or “fangirls.” One of the most notorious series for doing this is the Harry Potter franchise. They have crossed the line of “don’t hurt my baby” protective, to “I will kill you in your sleep if you do so much as look at my fandom in the wrong way!” Crazy! This is not what fandoms, whether movie or book related are meant for. Jeez people, calm down!

Despite all of the similarities between books and their film counter parts, there are just as many differences. One of these differences is that the books are a narrative. While this works for books, it does not for film. Lets looks at the box office smash hit and New York Times bestseller, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins. The book is narrated by Katniss Everdeen and her adventures while trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world (that thinks it is okay to kill 23 children yearly). Despite popular belief, the book itself has some depth because it talks about the dangers of certain political systems and what happens if they gain too much control. It also sends the message that rebellion is bad but essential if you want to make a change. The movie however, does not tell any of this. In fact, once you get past the shaky camera, the movie makes little sense if you are not sitting beside someone who has read the book. To the non-book reader, your first though is “OMG Gale is soooo hot!” They do not catch the political commentary because they are too distracted by the shaky camera and the overly attractive actors! Without reading the book with many popular YA novels that are adapted into movies, the viewer is utterly lost about the plot.

And with that point, I come to the whole reason why I am doing this project, bad book adaptations! Recently, there have been a lot of good book adaptations, but there have also been a lot of bad ones. All of the bad ones have been adaptations of YA or young adult novels and the plots typically are about a love triangle with some supernatural element to this ideal world. The book characters, especially the males, are overly attractive and mysterious, while the females are overly sexualized and really weak. When it comes to casting these movies, they get bad actors that are overly attractive and any hint of a plot, is covered up by that dreamy teenage angst filled smirk. The following movies fall victim to this tragedy.

Eragon:

The Trailer: 

So Eragon is the first book in the Inheritance Cycle by Christopher Paolini. The book (and the film) is about a boy named Eragon and his adventures trying to survive in an extremely suppressive world all the while being the last Rider (someone who rides dragons) known to man. I know the plot is not the most complicated thing in the world, but the book itself is well over 500 pages and takes a good month of dedication to read. When I think of bad book adaptations, I automatically think of Eragon because none of the rich details that are in the book is not in the film. Plus trying to fit every detail of a 500-page book into a one and a half hour script is crazy! To me, the Inheritance Cycle is about rebellion (a common theme among YA novels) and overpowering the government. Yes, the book/movie may take place in a medevil-esk period, but the King of the country is still a dictator and mass murderer. Who doesn’t love a good genocide of a whole entire race?! The book is also about finding yourself and the struggles that come along with it. Eragon is a farm boy at the start and when he is given this massive destiny in the form of a dragons egg, he is launched into the world of adulthood and all of the lovely things that come along with it, like killing the most powerful person in the country.

I think this really reflect us teenagers as we are making the transition from our junior years of high school to our senior years. Maybe I’m only making these connections because I’m going though this transition right now, but the stress is still there. When we are making this transition, we are suddenly faced with all of these things that we didn’t have to deal with last year, like social stress and school stress and gahh! Like Eragon, we struggle with it. I think this is one of the biggest themes in the first book of the series because my main man Christopher was only 15 when the book was first published. And I’m 16 and sitting here writing about his books.

So any ways! The movie sucked. It doesn’t matter if you read the book or just watched the movie because it sucked in general. Besides missing major plot points (read this very passionate review here) any hint of depth is thrown out of the window because the guy who plays Eragon is attractive. Not that I am complaining. At all.







Here is a very detailed video review: 

I see this happening to a lot of book adaptations and I get that it to attract audiences and people that didn’t read the book, but seriously, the dude can hardly act! As I said earlier, this happens to the majority of YA adaptations. But what about the books that are considered to be not only coming of age stories, but YA and adult.

I am of course talking about The Giver by Lois Lowry.

The Giver:

Originally published in ’93 as a children’s book, The Giver is one of those books that it does not matter your age you will love this book. For 20 years, this book has been taught to 12 year olds as a novel study because the book deals with intense themes of individuality and standing up for what you believe in. Every time I read this book, I learn something new, whether it was a rule about the Community or a character trait. Granted, because this book is used as a novel study and for that many hate it, but they always come back to it later on in life.

The plot line of the story follows Jonas in his 12^th year of life. Jonas lives in a Community that regulates everything and this is called Sameness within the story. At the age of 12, the children are assigned their jobs that they will have until they can no longer function in society. While most people get normal jobs like transportation or scientist, Jonas gets the rare job of the Receiver of Memory. Because the world was sucked of its’ problems and past life (and colour), the Receiver of Memory has to hold all of those memories as a burden and occasionally offer guidance to the elders. With what Jonas discovers, he ultimately rebels and tries to change to Community.

There is so much depth and existential thinking with this book that you have to read it more then once to get it all. But this is all thrown away in the up and coming film. Although the film hasn’t come out yet, the trailer has been released and readers of the books aren’t happy. By the looks of the trailer, which is in full colour, the plot and its corresponding depth has been thrown away to make it a summer sci-fi blockbuster. Jonas doesn’t even look 12 and since when does he have a love interest? And baby Gabriel? Where is he? He is kind of the whole motivation for Jonas’ actions. And Taylor Swift? Really?!

Here are some reviews and a list of some of the trailers sins: "A Highly Scientific Analysis of THE GIVER Trailer" and "10 Things That Are Horrible About the New Trailer for 'The Giver'"

Ultimately, I wont be able to judge the movie until it comes out and even though I will probably hate it, I will love it for the purpose of my favourite piece of literature on screen. I don’t know. I can’t really say too much right now and anything that I do say sound extremely book bias. Yes, the book will always be better then the movie, but that is really up to you to decide.

Giver Trailer: