Skip to main content

Adaptations

I recently re-read Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons and it made me think about adaptations and how important it may or may not be to remain faithful to the source material. Along with V for Vendetta, the two comic book works written by Moore have been adapted into feature films which are poles apart on this issue. For myself, I think it a moot point because I mostly prefer innovation to re-creation.

Watchmen and V for Vendetta are great examples of different approaches to adaptation. In the case of the former, slavish devotion to re-creating the source material is the course and, while satisfying the urge to see the characters faithfully brought to life may be nice, the film as a whole feels curiously flat. I do think it’s the best adaptation they could have made, but of something that probably doesn’t translate well into film because it was so specifically designed for and about the subject matter of super-hero comic books. I happen to like the 2009 film adaptation, but I also realize it falls well short of the heights and depths reached by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons.

The 2006 film version of V for Vendetta, on the other hand, hardly resembles the comic book beyond the look of the character V in his Guy Fawkes disguise and the totalitarian-future setting. His behavior and motivations are modified to make him a more palatable hero for mainstream Hollywood audiences and very few of the events in the comic make it to the screen in the same shape. However, I feel that the movie V for Vendetta is a superior film to Watchmen because it has a voice and a soul all its own which I believe is a result of using the source material as an inspiration rather than a roadmap.

There is always the question of how far an adaptation has to stray before it no longer resembles its source material and can no longer claim identification with it. World War Z is a great example of a film adaptation that really only has its premise (zombie apocalypse) and title in common with the book on which it is based. In truth, adaptation is probably not the best word for taking a book or a comic or a tv show and translating it into another medium, such as film. Re-invention would probably be more accurate.


Adaptation in general is tricky, and you can never fully satisfy the demands and desires of fans. I think it’s better to invent something new because it frees you as an artist from having to obey the forms already established. I understand that George Lucas, in putting together the first Star Wars movie, initially tried to get the rights to adapt Flash Gordon, but, when faced with the costs and the creative restrictions, he decided to make something from scratch. I believe our culture has benefitted much more from that decision, as has Mr. Lucas himself. It’s riskier than catering to an established audience, but then the rewards are greater as well.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Film Review - Annihilation

Alex Garland, writer/director of Ex Machina , delivers another mature sci-fi film, this time about a platoon of scientist-soldiers sent in to investigate an area surrounding some kind of meteorite that is impenetrable to all scans and observations. Natalie Portman leads the all-female cast on a journey into surreal landscapes as they search for whatever lies at the heart of this zone called “the shimmer” and things take weirder and darker turns as the film progresses. I found a lot to like in the writing and the visual design of the film and I would have to say it’s good, but not great. First of all, I really do love the esthetics of the movie, very colourful and pretty but also very creepy and unsettling sometimes. The film has a nicely strange tone, approximating the constant disorientation the characters are subject to while inside the shimmer, with everything taking on a quasi-hallucinogenic prismatic aura. There is a lot of gory violence but I thought it appropriate to the s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Film Review - Tully

Writer Diablo Cody and director Jason Reitman team up once again for what amounts to a really great and unusual depiction of motherhood and how it can consume one’s identity. I found it to be honest, direct and heartfelt while also deftly avoiding cliché. It’s not a perfect film, but its flaws are tiny compared to its achievements and I would definitely see it again. Charlize Theron plays Marlo, an exhausted mother of three who is losing her mind trying to keep up with a newborn baby and a son labelled “quirky” by school staff, while her eldest daughter seems to be fairly capable of looking after herself (nice, given the challenges of the other two, but not entirely true). Her husband, Drew (Ron Livingston), struggles to make his career work and spends a lot of time on the road. Seeing her stressed out all the time, Marlo’s brother Craig (the always fun Mark Duplass) hires a “night nanny” for her so she can at least get a good night’s sleep while someone else monitors the kids. M...
Post a Comment
Read more

Film Review - A Quiet Place

John Krasinski directs and stars with his wife Emily Blunt in this exceptional horror movie about a family trying to survive against predatory monsters who hunt by sound. The film is a terrific example of visual storytelling as the dialogue is suppressed to a minimum by the danger it represents to the survivors. It is also one of the most effective and high-tension suspense movies I’ve ever seen, with more intelligence and emotional power than are typical of the genre. The story begins several months after some sort of invasion by ill-defined, poorly understood but immensely superior predators which have effectively wiped out the human race. Those who have managed to survive have had to adapt to a virtually silent mode of living, walking barefoot everywhere, for example, or communicating by sign language. The eldest daughter, played by Millicent Simmonds, is indeed deaf herself, and the film uses its sound design very effectively to convey point of view of characters according to...
Post a Comment
Read more