It’s one of those classic conversation starters – great books which have been tarnished by awful movies. Anyone who’s ever read a novel or two can normally reel off a lengthy list of much-loved literature that has inspired deeply despised film adaptations. But do movie remakes ever get it right? Can a movie ever really outdo its source material?
Minor novels have certainly made more substantial movies. Francis Ford Coppola’s Godfather trilogy did far more for film than Mario Puzo’s trashy pulp fiction thriller ever did for literature. Likewise short stories are sometimes rendered extra depth on screen; the 1952 adaptation of Ernest Hemingway’s The Snows of Kilimanjaro offered welcome extra autobiography.
Because an adaptation is necessarily taking something already there, and attempting to hang on to as much worth as possible while translating it into another medium, a movie written straight to the screen can never end up being less than the novel you started with. True cinematic triumph can only come when the book is merely a jumping off point for a new work with something fresh to say. It would be pointless to compare the artistic merit of Joseph Conrad’s The Heart of Darkness with Coppola’s Apocalypse Now, because the movie is inspired by rather than adapted from the novel. This concept was explored to its root in the wittily-named Adaptation, a film from the pen of supremo Charlie Kaufman about a man (himself) trying to adapt a (real) book about flowers, The Orchid Thief, into a movie script.
This week an adaptation of Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close opens in UAE cinemas, a complicated and experimental novel about a small boy searching New York for clues about the father he lost in 9/11. Directed by Stephen Daldry, who adapted Billy Elliot, The Reader and The Hours so well, it has been met with a surprisingly lukewarm reception. Stars Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock have been criticised for ramping up the emotive Hollywood clichés, while the script is left little chance of translating onto the screen the jumble of voices, images and typographical games that made Jonathan Safron Foer’s second novel such a triumph. He should be getting used to it; his first book, a semi-autobiographical hunt for his ancestors Everything is Illuminated, was the victim of an underwhelming indie-lite flick. So while we waited with baited breath for the movie to open, cinephiles on the Time Out team shared their all-time best, and worst, book adaptations.
Hfu Reisenhofer, Guides & Sups editor
Success: One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey. Who can forget Jack Nicholson’s brilliant performance as troublemaker Randle?
Fail: All the Harry Potter flicks by JK Rowling. Bar the adaptation of the final book, all the films attempted to cram far too much into a bite-sized films.
Jamie Goodwin, Online editor
Success: Silence of the Lambs by Thomas Harris. Silence of the Lambs is a great, dark book that became one of the best films of its generation.
Fail: Hannibal by Thomas Harris Hannibal was the other way round. A brilliant, creepy book (maybe even better than Silence, other than the ending) which did not transfer to an average film. And Hannibal Lecter seemed to be a good guy.
Angela Beitz, Shopping & Style editor
Success: Bridget Jones’s Diary by Helen Fielding. This awesome movie starring Renee Zellweger as the hilarious, and very single Miss Jones, was a fun read but the movie really bought the character to life. Funny, moving and real. I never get sick of watching it.
Fail: The Devil Wears Prada by Lauren Weisburger. While I really do love this movie, and how could you not with the likes of Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep, the book was much more involved and had a deeper plot beyond just talking about the importance of fashion. If you seen the movie but not yet read the book you really should, I promise you will enjoy it.
Scott Snowden, Deputy editor
Success: Watchmen by Alan Moore. Condemned by many hardcore fans of the original graphic novel, director Zack Synder was well aware of the challenge he was taking on, but despite a few changes to the climax for the film – which some say is actually an improvement, myself included – the overall result was frankly superb.
Fail: The Hunt for Red October by Tom Clancy. Putting a different slant on this discussion, I maintain that John McTiernan’s 1990 adaption is actually more enjoyable than the novel. The plot flows more smoothly and the reader isn’t burdened with pointless technical specifications of a F-14 variable-sweep wing fighter aircraft, for example.
Rob Garratt, Film editor Time Out Dubai
Success: Dr. No by Ian Fleming. I recently learnt there were more decent movie adaptations than I realised. But for capturing the gritty mood of the source material while injecting cinematic flair, and for the legacy it went on to inspire, the first Bond film gets my vote.
Failure: The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera. I find myself watching Philip Kaufman’s adaptation far too often, yet with every viewing I’m left frustrated. Such great efforts are made to make the movie episodically sound, that much of the philosophical flair becomes laughable.
