Can someone please
explain to me the logic behind film adaptations of books? Because I really don’t get it.
Film 4 was showing
something called The Seeker After a
swift perusal of the blurb I jumped up and down with excitement and switched
channels. It appeared that The Seeker was in fact the film
adaptation of one of my all-time favourite children’s books, The Dark is Rising, by Susan Cooper.
After watching for
about five seconds I was angry. Very
angry. The kind of angry that involves
bouncing up and down on the sofa and shouting at the screen. The film bore absolutely no resemblance to
the book.
Well, perhaps a teeny-tiny resemblance. The kind of resemblance you get between sixth
cousins three times removed. Actually, perhaps
make that half-sixth cousins. And possibly four times removed. Certainly not any close relation anyway.

If I had heard that
someone was making this book into a film I would have expected something along
the lines of the TV adaptation of The Box
of Delights. Something understated
and quintessentially British.
But clearly something happened
between the idea and the finished project.
Something which always seems to happen with books I love. I think it must be something along the lines
of what happened in those Orange Wednesday adverts, where the panel from the
film company made all sorts of daft suggestions for changes to the ideas
pitched by famous actors.
Presumably the whole
process begins when someone reads a book and thinks “What a great story! I think I will make it into a film.” And it ends when that film is released. However, there seem to be a number of
intermediate steps. In the case of The Dark is Rising, these steps seem to
be something like this:
1 What a
great book! I think I’ll make it into a
film.
2 Right. So the main character of this book is young
Master English of Englishtown in England, son of Mr and Mrs Johnny English, protégée
of a legendary English wizard who served the most famous mythical English king
in English history.
We’d better cast an American actor
and tell him to make no attempt to sound English. If we surround him by an English supporting
cast, all doing very bad impressions of assorted regional accents, no-one will
notice he isn’t, in fact, English.
3 One of the points of the story is
that the forces of darkness can’t actually do any harm to mortals – they can
only make men do harm to themselves by playing on their hopes and fears. It’s all psychological,
you know.
This is clearly pants. Let’s make the leader of the forces of
darkness really, really handy with a sword.
And let’s give the main good guy one of those spiky mace things. And then let’s make them fight. A lot. And maybe blow some shit up.
4 So
the main character has to collect six hidden signs. He achieves this and saves the day. But you know what would be even better? How about the main character only collects
five signs and then reveals that he himself
is the sixth sign. After all, it worked
a treat in The Fifth Element.

5 The
forces of good win the day by enlisting the help of some ancient mythical
characters.
Or perhaps the main character could
repel some evil smoke stuff with the light rays emanating from his hands. That would be so much better.
6 This
book is part of a series. One of the
later books won an award. But let’s kill
off the main bad guy at the end of this film, thus scuppering any possibility
of making a sequel. Unless we change the
story entirely. Oh hang on a minute….
7 The
characters all have names. But they are
rubbish names. Let’s change them. The lead character’s brother is called
James. But let’s call him Tommy. Just because we can. And let’s give him the role played by his
sister, Mary, in the book. Because when
you insert an entirely non-existent character into a story you don’t want them
to be bored after all – you need to give them stuff to do. Maybe they can even feature in an emotional
reunion scene at the end. But better
make sure this is all a bit soft-focus and vague. Just in case the main character starts saying
‘Hang on a second, who the bloody hell are you and what have you done with
James and Mary?’
8 There
you go. We’ve made things much
better. Books are rubbish.
I think these steps, or
something very like them, are followed for the majority of film adaptations. Take Prince
Caspian from The Chronicles of Narnia. It was clearly a bit dull, so two of the main
characters had a bit of a snog. And then
there was The Time-Traveller’s Wife
where the most poignant bit of the book, the fact that Henry’s widow has to
wait until she is an old lady to see him again, was clearly too poignant. So they let her see him again about five
minutes after he died. And what about
the biggest re-write in recent film history?
In My Sister’s Keeper, the
main character, the healthy sister, dies and her sick sister survives. In the film adaptation, the sick sister who
is expected to die, does in fact die.
Thus destroying the entire plot twist in one fell swoop.
Why do they do it? Is there some kind of long-running Hollywood
behind-the-scenes competition as to who can make the adaptation that bears the
least resemblance to the original story?
Or is it just a massive, irresistible urge to meddle?
Oh well, there are other channels to choose
from. Look - GI Joe and the Rise of Cobra.
Lucky me!
Hollywood arrogance. It never occurs to them that the author may have thought about the plot in the first place. Grrrrrrrrr.
ReplyDelete