Bookish Verbosity is a non-regular feature at AEROPAPERS where I talk about topics that are related to books, blogging and the community.
I’ve read this from somewhere before, I’m just not too sure which site it was, anyways, the commenter said that we should treat the books and movies as an entirely separate entity. Hmm, it did make me think, that in a way he/she has a point. With the influx of book to movie adaptation, particularly from young adult genre many fans of the books are looking forward to see their favorite stories come into life via the magic of film. But with excitement comes apprehension. Not all books to movies adaptation went well in the box office. I think some recent YA books to movies didn’t do great (or that’s what Box Office Mojo says). Some fans of the book said that it was poorly done, and that’s usually leads to discussion but the point and usual argument is: books are better than the movies.
I digress, I get sidetracked once again, my question is when an adaptation is made who does it cater to? Who is the prioritize audience? The fans of the books? the non-reader but movie goers (occasional or otherwise)? or both? I think it is for both, but for fans of the books (who are really have more expectations given they know the material) can we really segregate them into two different units? For me it’s hard not to compare them, hard not to separate them. Then again, movie and books are different. Created differently, released differently. I do know the consideration they need to do in order to successfully transform the original material into something else. Should I think that Catching Fire (movie) is not Catching Fire (book). Maybe and maybe not. But for me, the production should always consider both fans and non-fans into translating the material. I for one don’t expect a literal translation. A great example of it is The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. It was created that appealed to both parties, we were very satisfied.
I think when both fans of the books and movie goers are contented; I think there’s no reason to truly separate them. Or compare them anymore. Both can be enjoyed in different way. It even makes me happy when one medium helped the other. I think the important part is not removing the very essence of the story. In a way it’s also a form of respect to the original material. For me regardless of the medium as long as it effectively conveyed the very message of the story and the audience gets that and they are satisfied by it, you can say you succeeded on interpreting the story, through words or film.
How about you, what’s your opinion about this issue, should we separate them to avoid comparison? Care to share it to me. :loves: 😀