One thing we love about films is their ability to transport us into faraway lands, with a gripping story line, visual effects and the unique way in which they tell their story. Books do the same thing; yes. The novel was the original film, before technology boomed. However, while books are to be revered and cherished, films should also be held in high esteem for their contribution to the arts.
When a film chooses to stick too closely to the novel’s every turn, the film loses its ability to attain any magic that may have been created if they were given free terrain. The liberation that comes with the art of film-making is squandered away by the fear that fans may be disappointed, or their own anxieties of ruining a story may get in the way of their creating something truly fabulous. The real injustice is not using the medium of film to communicate the story in the best way it knows.
Books are books, films are films. There is nothing more to it. Yes, they both have the same function of telling a story and capturing the audiences’/readers’ imagination, but they are both different mediums of which both should be celebrated an encouraged in their own right.
What does this mean? Films should not be looked at as adaptations, but rather as translations, in order to cement their own grounding for a successful story to be told.
What Do You Think?
Should we separate the medium?
Are films better?
Let us know in the comments!