July 15th, 2009
Your Turn: Books on Film
It’s 4 in the morning, and my husband and I just got home from the midnight show of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. I’m not going to review it here at ATG because, while I’m a great fan of the books, I am generally disappointed by the movies - not that they’re not enjoyable films, because they are -but because they are marketed and written for children. It drives me crazy that Warner Brothers has watered down books that have universal appeal, in order to make them appeal to the average ten-to-twelve-year-old.
I read somewhere, in someone’s LiveJournal, I think, that one must treat the Harry Potter films as if they were what the story would be if Harry had sold his biography to the tabloids. I find that this applies to most books - novels, especially - that have been adapted for film (with the possible exception being the Granada Television productions of the Sherlock Holmes canon, starring the late Jeremy Brett, which aired in the US on PBS in the mid-to-late 1980s and early 1990s).
Your Turn: This, then, is my question for you: What are your thoughts on book-to-film translations in general, and the Harry Potter films specifically? We’re not asking for film reviews (and PLEASE don’t post “plot spoilers” just in case there are people who don’t know what happens in Book 6), just your opinion.
If you’re shy about commenting, why not send us a brief note on Twitter? The account for this magazine is @AllThingsGirl, and my personal account is @Melysse. We’d love to hear from you!
July 15th, 2009 at 9:18 am
[…] provoked this question, which I’ve asked over at All Things Girl: What are your thoughts on book-to-film […]
July 15th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I’m just now studying Script Adaptation as part of my postgrad program. After reading the theory of adaptations, it’s clearer to me why the films are never as good as the original novels. I think the time limit is the biggest issue; you have to cut down from between 300 to 600 pages of a book to a 150-page script. I think screen writers simply concentrate on one main theme or topic and structure the film around it.
The WB probably (unfortunately) focused on the children’s perspective as kids are the ones the films are marketed for, and left out the more universal issues. Narrowing the focus is something that has to be done, however, it’s difficult to do it properly, and mostly results in the films feeling ‘watered down’. I have never seen a film that would be better than the novel it was adapted from. But I’m still looking forward to seeing the new HP movie.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
I think that 90% of the time, books are so much better and richer than movies. You can just do more without time constraints and studio constraints, etc. Therefore, I always try to read the book first and almost consider the movies to be “highlights.” One exception that comes to mind almost immediately: The Notebook. That movie was beautiful, the book: meh.
As for the Harry Potter series, I think they’ve done a pretty good job of turning the books into movies. Sure, stuff gets left out, but those books are LONG. I saw the new one last night and thought it was awesome! It was a lot funnier than I remember any of the others being. Of course, it’s been about 3 years since I read the book, so I can’t speak too well to how they captured it on the screen.