Adaptation

Adaptation is a film I wish I hadn't seen. I wish it didn't have such a powerful hold on me. Writing this film I didn't want it to turn into Birdman or Adaptation and I feel like I made a horrible amalgam of them both.

Adaptation is written by Charlie Kaufman and directed by Spike Jonze, who has made another one of my all-time favorite films Her. The film focuses on the character of Charlie Kauffman, as played by Nicholas Cage at one of his best, and his struggles adapting a real-life book called The Orchid Thief by real-life person, Susan Orlean. 

Orlean is played by the wonderful Meryl Streep, who brings a strong sense of authority to the character. Orlean's book is about John Laroche, played by Chris Cooper, who is a man obsessed with hunting ghost orchids which is an illegal practice in Florida. However these characters are never stagnate. They constantly shift and contort in personality as Charlie Kauffman, the person and the character, attempt to define them in their work.

The plot of the movie was supposed to be about Laroche. But the movie is about Charlie Kauffman the writer struggling with writers block. He is trying to create the perfect story out of a book about an orchid thief. Where the movie succeeds is how Kauffman manages to manipulate expectations. Kauffman's character has a twin brother, also played by Cage. Donnie Kauffman acts as an outside world. A world only concerned with plot and action and making money. But it is Donnie who is succesful, Donnie who gets the girl, Donnie who finishes and sells his screenplay. 


And this is what the movie becomes. It becomes driven by plot and by unrealistic romance and conflict. But it is the preceding hour, of personal conflict and creative frustration, that makes this result appealing. Kauffman creates a complex story of his own inabilities that is both frustrating and rewarding. He's made the movie after all.

I tried not making Adaptation. But revision after revision as my movie about anxiety started making me more anxious the film became a sort of knock off of this unstructured but emotionally appealing movie. I'd encourage people to watch Adaptation, a movie about how Charlie Kauffman doesn't like his own work. 

Movie adaptations of books: What works and what doesn't?

It seems like almost all movies these days are based on something else. In an earlier post I talked about comic book movies, but they aren't the only source material for Hollywood these days. Lots of Hollywood blockbusters are based on popular novels, especially those of the children and young adult genres. But undoubtedly some of these adaptations are better than others. So what works and what doesn't?

Let's start by looking at perhaps the most famous book series adaptation of all time, and what one could argue was the kickstart of the now extremely popular childrens/young adult book adaptation genre.

Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling

Over 400 Million Copies Sold (7 Books)

 $7,723,431,572 Box Office Gross (8 Films)

Harry Potter is without a doubt a cultural phenomena. Harry Potter is one of the most successful book series of all time, has been sold in over 200 countries, translated in 68 languages and sold over 400 copies. The film adaptations are the highest grossing film series of all time. There are few people who haven't seen a Harry Potter film, and even fewer who have never heard of the character at all. There is even a Harry Potter theme park in Universal Studios, Orlando.   

The films are mostly well reviewed, especially the final installment, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2, which has a 96% positive review rating on Rotten Tomatoes. (And is personally one of my favorite films of all time, but that's besides the point)

So what works about the Harry Potter films? Well for starters there is an extreme respect and seriousness for the source material. It would be easy to make these movies all flash, or even hokey, but there is a great respect for the characters and the world of the books. Yet Harry Potter is easy to respect. It may be a children's series about a boy wizard, but the core of the story is about the casualties of war and dealing with death and loss. 

Not all books are as profound as Harry Potter. When you don't have good source material, it's hard to make a good adaptation. Which brings me unfortunately to my next example. 

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer

Over 100 Million Copies Sold (4 Books)

 $3,345,177,904 Box Office Gross (5 Films) 

Oh god, oh god why. Why did this franchise make so much money? Okay. Alright. I have a confession to make. I have read the Twilight books. Oh god, there I said it. (I was in 7th grade don't judge me.) However, and don't shoot me here, while they are in no way good books they are still 1,000 times better than their movie counterparts. 

The first Twilight movie is literally awful, it's honestly painful to sit through. The script is awful, the acting is awful, the special effects are awful, EVERYTHING about it is awful. To give the filmmakers some credit here, they didn't have much to work with. Unlike Harry Potter, the themes of Twilight involve enteral love on a scarily codependent psychological level. 

Yet still these films were extremely successful. So if quality doesn't matter, what is it that makes people flock to see novel based films? Well, what is it that the Harry Potter and Twilight films have in common?  Not much, but one of the few things both films do is closely follow their source material. Which brings me to my next point.

Percy Jackson and the Olympians by Rick Riordan

Over 20 Million Copies Sold (5 Books)

$430 million Box Office Gross (2 Movies)

Now I personally have not read the Percy Jackson and Olympians series, nor seen the films. I do know however, that fans of the series were widely disappointed with the film adaptations of the novels. The reason for the largely negative reaction from fans being that so much of the plot and events of the books are changed in the films. As a result, while the movies weren't box office disasters they also weren't nearly as successful as the Harry Potter or Twilight films, as they might have had the potential to be.

However, one must note that critics gave the films largely negative reviews as well. The first film currently holds a 49% positivity rating on Rotten Tomatoes, while the second an even lower 41%. So perhaps there is more going on here than simply disappointed fans. 

To continue this point, there are other films that differ from their books source material that still manage to be successful. 

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

Over 65 Million Copies Sold in US (3 Books)

$832,678,739 million Box Office Gross (2 Movies)

The Hunger Games is one of the most successful ongoing film franchises. The series was well received by fans and critics alike, especially the second film Catching Fire which currently holds a 89% positivity rating on Rotten Tomatoes. 

There are certain things about the books that were altered for the films. Yet, unlike Percy Jackson, the fans of the Hunger Games don't seem to mind the changes. Perhaps that is because the elements of the story that were changed were changed because they simply could not work in a two hour film version, and not because of laziness or lack of respect for the source material. 

The Hunger Games films are honestly well made films, and can stand alone from their source material as just good films in general. It remains to be seen if the last two films of the franchise will be as successful as the first two, seeing as they will be based on the final book of the series which was largely the most negatively reviewed of the trilogy. 

So what do you think? What is it that makes a film adaptation of a book successful? Is it more important for the film to be good on it's own, or should it follow it's source material as closely as possible? Or does none of this matter, as there will already be a built in audience who will go to see the film regardless of quality? 

Les Miserables: Remixed

After watching the first two editions of Everything is a Remix in class, I went home and watched the two following episodes. It got me to thinking about a new film coming out that is definitely a remix. Les Miserables is a film coming out on Christmas day that chronicles the life of ex-convict and refugee Jean Valjean, Javert (the man trying to catch him), and the love triangle between orphaned Cosette, young soldier Marius, and peasant Eponine. It is set amongst the backdrop of the 19th century French Rebellion.

Les Miserables started out as a novel written by the French author Victor Hugo in the year 1862. Since then, the novel has been remade a multitude of times through a variety of different media (ex: comic books, films, animations), most notably the 1980's musical of the same name.

The new film is based off of the stage musical, as it will follow the same plot arrangement and musical numbers. I'm particularly excited by this remake as it is directed by Academy Award winning director Tom Hopper (The King's Speech). It also stars some big names such as Russell Crowe, Hugh Jackman, Amanda Seyfried, and Anne Hathaway. All of the singing is done live on set, which is different than most musicals which are pre-recorded. After watching some featurette footage on the making of the film as well as the trailer, it looks really well done!

- Melanie Saitta

Musical Adaptations

As a drummer, I find myself listening and tapping along to music on a constant basis. There is never a time when a there is a song (or multiple songs) stuck in my head. I like a wide range of music, but mainly stuff I can drum along to. I was a band geek in high school, and lead drummer when I was a junior and senior; this meant that I had to help out with our biannual musicals. At first I was very bitter and disinclined to participate, but I quickly found a soft spot for musical theater, and medleys from musicals and movies that we played in concert.  My favorite was the percussive score from the Pirates of the Caribbean films.

Because of this, I began watching film adaptations of famous musicals, as well as attending many shows. I am very interested in taking part in film adaptations in the future, as well as possibly producing, directing and/or editing music videos.

Here's a short list of my favorite musical films:
Grease (only the first one, the sequel was garbage)
Most Disney animated musicals (Lion King, Aristocats, Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast, etc.)
Little Shop of Horrors (I recommend this to anyone who has not yet seen it)
Sweeney Todd (a great Johnny Depp/Tim Burton film, yet a little graphic for the weak stomached)
Wizard of Oz (such a classic)
Rocky Horror Picture Show (it's even weirder than the title would suggest)

I could go on, but I'll keep my list for now to the ones more people have probably heard of.
More to come in later posts if others share my strange infatuation :)

Telenovelas

Hope everyone's not going too crazy with finals and papers and such this week. If you are, I recommend chocolate and a Disney movie. But anyway.

So for my Spanish class presentation, my group is doing a presentation on telenovelas (Spanish soap operas). While researching for the presentation, we came across an interesting fact for anyone who watched Ugly Betty: the story of Ugly Betty actually started out as a Colombian telenovela. Even though it was only on for a few years, it become megapopular and was adapted by lots of other countries, like Spain and oh hey, the United States. So the storyline of "Ugly Betty" is definitely not an original U.S. creation. Since I wrote my Spanish paper comparing the Colombian, Spanish, and U.S. versions of the show, I can't tell you how many times I've had to write "ugly economist working for a fashion magazine" in Spanish. Seriously though, it was actually pretty interesting looking at what each country did with each plot and what kind of themes and characters they focused on in order to appeal to their own audiences.