Original or Adapted? Watch

DLJ
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Not sure whether this should go into Literature, so Mods please move if I'm in the wrong!


Okay, I've just watched Harry Potter 7 part one. I got thinking, these films really bring the characters to life so well and really gives the books greater understanding.

I mean, would you prefer an original or adapted film? And do you think that writers get more pedigree or reputation for adapting a book into a screenplay or writing a new idea?

I personally think it depends on the film itself, but would rather watch an Original concept like Star Wars or Alien rather than a regurgitated idea such as Avatar or Stardust.

What do you think?
1
reply
Phalanges
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
If you look at the highest grossing film each year from the last 12 years Avatar is the only original title, amongst 3 sequels, 4 book adaptations, 2 theme park ride adaptations, 1 prequel and 1 comic book adaptation.

Using it as a whipping boy when discussing original vs adapted is not just incorrect, it's stupid.
0
reply
DLJ
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#3
(Original post by Phalanges)
If you look at the highest grossing film each year from the last 12 years Avatar is the only original title, amongst 3 sequels, 4 book adaptations, 2 theme park ride adaptations, 1 prequel and 1 comic book adaptation.

Using it as a whipping boy when discussing original vs adapted is not just incorrect, it's stupid.
Haha, so you've never seen the comparisons with Pocahontas? Now that's stupid.
1
reply
Ape Gone Insane
Badges: 15
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
I have no preference.

I'm not sure that films do give the books greater understanding, it's the other way around. When you've watched a film which has been adapted from a book, you can then read a book for greater depth and understanding. The film can only portray so much and is in some respects, limited in scope. As for pedigree or reputation, I'd say it was the same based on how well the film is. We've had numerous recent examples of critically acclaimed adaptations like The Social Network and Lord of the Rings. But equally, writing a new idea has invited the same level of acclaim with films like The Matrix, Inception and Toy Story. The general consensus certainly is with adaptations that certain parts from the book are comprised and changed a lot, but this reflects the medium in which they are working. So the consensus is usually negative going in, at least from the viewpoint of people who have read the material from which it was adapted. And a lot of times, they do not translate well drawing criticism (The Golden Compass). But equally, there are many examples of 'new ideas' which are badly implemented and hence slated. I wouldn't mind either. An original idea is brilliant for opening up the genre and inviting further ideas, whilst an adaptation is excellent for taking rich material and bringing it to life on screen. Though arguably both innovate within their respective genres. Blade Runner was adapted, and is one of (if not the) greatest science fiction films of all time and Lord of the Rings set the bar (which has yet to be surpassed) for high fantasy films. Inception and Matrix were unique ideas which showed that 'new ideas and concepts' are appreciated and can be successfully both critically and commercially. Both adapted and original have their strengths and weaknesses. And you have to bear in mind as well, adaptations do not only stem from books.

(Original post by DLJ)
Haha, so you've never seen the comparisons with Pocahontas? Now that's stupid.
It's not fair to use it in this context. Avatar may be derivative of stories like Pocahontas, but it's not a direct adaptation nor is it unoriginal. The story within Avatar may be weak, but to be honest, you can find the same story in a lot of films, not just Avatar. Avatar's strength comes from it's technological innovation. It took 3D to an insurmountable height and set the bar for other films, one which as yet to be surpassed. For that alone, it is original.
reply
Phalanges
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
(Original post by DLJ)
Haha, so you've never seen the comparisons with Pocahontas? Now that's stupid.
Yes I have, and by the reductive logic that the moronic meme implies there are almost no original stories throughout any storytelling medium. Pocahontas is certainly not the first to use the primitive story. But just because the story is a well known one this doesn't stop it being an original piece of intellectual property, just like the hundreds of different versions of the hero's journey that exist. These are just storytelling arcs.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (432)
37.47%
No - but I will (88)
7.63%
No - I don't want to (79)
6.85%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (554)
48.05%

Watched Threads

View All