The intention of this paper is to focus on the inevitability of change during adaptation, from fiction to film, which is essential and unavoidable, mandated both by the constraints of time and medium, with the example of Triveni’s Sharapanjara. Some film theorists have argued that a director should be nonchalant with the source, given that novel and film are entirely dissimilar entities, two singular art forms, and should be seen as such. Another line of argument is that though the director is invested with a certain freedom to change, ‘to adapt’, the original fiction; the film must be accurate / truthful to either the effect or the theme or the message of the novel. In other words the adaptation must faithfully incorporate the aesthetics of the original work, and the changes should be incorporated along one of these axes. “Perhaps the search for an ‘original’ or a single author is no longer relevant in a postmodern world where a belief in a single meaning is seen to be a fruitless quest. Instead of worrying about whether a film is ‘faithful’ to the original literary text (founded in a logocentric belief that there is a single meaning), we read adaptations for their plurality of meanings. Thus the intertextuality of adaptation is our primary concern” (Cartmell: 28).Since the transcription of a novel into a film is impossible; it seems absurd to be obsessed with ‘accuracy’. Terry Eagleton’s explanation of the Derridian notion of text is that “ there is nothing in the world that is not ‘textual’, in the sense of being made up of a complex weave of elements which prevents it from being clearly demarcated from something else. ‘Textual’ means, that nothing stands gloriously alone (Albrecht: 26).Adaptation is recreating, translating th...
... middle of paper ...
...oaches, Rosemont Publishing &Printing Corp, 2010.
2. Cartmell, Deborah et al (Eds), Adaptations: from text to screen, screen to text, Routledge, 1999.
3. Engelstad,Arne;Literary Film Adaptations as Educational Texts (Engelstadadaptation-pdf doc)
4. Richardson, Michael, Surrealism and Cinema, Berg, 2006.
5. Stam, Roberts et al (Eds), Literature and film: a guide to the theory and practice of film adaptation, Blackwell Publishing, 2005.
6. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Film adaptation
7. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puttanna_Kanagal
8. www.ourkarnataka.com/kannada/movie/review_sharapanjara.htm
9. www2.fiu.edu/~weitzb/WHAT-IS-FILM-ADAPTATION.htm
10. www.indianetzone.com,women writers in Kannada Literature.
Secondary sources:
• Harrington, John. Film And/As Literature. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1977
• Paz Octavio, The Bow and the Lyre,(1956; tr. The Bow and the Lyre, 1973)
Braudy, Leo and Marshall Cohen, eds. Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford UP, 1999.
During the course of this essay it is my intention to discuss the differences between Classical Hollywood and post-Classical Hollywood. Although these terms refer to theoretical movements of which they are not definitive it is my goal to show that they are applicable in a broad way to a cinema tradition that dominated Hollywood production between 1916 and 1960 and which also pervaded Western Mainstream Cinema (Classical Hollywood or Classic Narrative Cinema) and to the movement and changes that came about following this time period (Post-Classical or New Hollywood). I intend to do this by first analysing and defining aspects of Classical Hollywood and having done that, examining post classical at which time the relationship between them will become evident. It is my intention to reference films from both movements and also published texts relative to the subject matter. In order to illustrate the structures involved I will be writing about the subjects of genre and genre transformation, the representation of gender, postmodernism and the relationship between style, form and content.
Many time in our lives, we have seen the transformation of novels into movies. Some of them are equal to the novel, few are superior, and most are inferior. Why is this? Why is it that a story that was surely to be one of the best written stories ever, could turn out to be Hollywood flops? One reason is that in many transformations, the main characters are changed, some the way they look, others the way they act. On top of this, scenes are cut out and plot is even changed. In this essay, I will discuss some of the changes made to the characters of the Maltese Falcon as they make their transformation to the ?big screen.?
One notable difference between William Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Julie Taymor’s film version of the play is the altered scenes that made quite a difference between the play and the movie version. This difference has the effects of creating a different point of view by altering the scenes affected the movie and how Taymor felt was necessary by either by keeping or deleting certain parts from the play. I use “Altered Scene” in the way of how Julia Taymor recreates her own point of view for the movie and the direction she took in order to make the audience can relate to the modern day film. I am analyzing the way that the altered scenes changes to make a strong impression on the audiences different from the play. This paper will demonstrate
Filmmaking and cinematography are art forms completely open to interpretation in a myriad ways: frame composition, lighting, casting, camera angles, shot length, etc. The truly talented filmmaker employs every tool available to make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels, including social and emotional. When a filmmaker chooses to undertake an adaptation of a literary classic, the choices become somewhat more limited. In order to be true to the integrity of the piece of literature, the artistic team making the adaptation must be careful to communicate what is believed was intended by the writer. When the literature being adapted is a play originally intended for the stage, the task is perhaps simplified. Playwrights, unlike novelists, include some stage direction and other instructions regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has a strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen.
Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter is one of the most respected and admired novels of all time. Often criticized for lacking substance and using more elaborate camera work, freely adapted films usually do not follow the original plot line. Following this cliché, Roland Joffe’s version of The Scarlet Letter received an overwhelmingly negative reception. Unrealistic plots and actions are added to the films for added drama; for example, Hester is about to be killed up on the scaffold, when Algonquin members arrive and rescue her. After close analysis, it becomes evident of the amount of work that is put into each, but one must ask, why has the director adapted their own style of depicting the story? How has the story of Hester Prynne been modified? Regarding works, major differences and similarities between the characterization, visual imagery, symbolism, narration and plot, shows how free adaptation is the correct term used.
Kirszner, Laurie G., and Stephen R. Mandell. Literature: Reading & Reacting & Writing. 4th ed. Boston: Earl McPeek, 2000. 388-423.
Kennedy, X. J., & Gioia, D. (2010). Literature an introduction to fiction, poetry, drama and
Barsam, R. M., Monahan, D., & Gocsik, K. M. (2012). Looking at movies: an introduction to film (4th ed.). New York: W.W. Norton & Co..
Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
John Gibbs and Douglas Pye (2005) Style and meaning : studies in the detailed analysis of film. Engalnd: Manchester University Press, pp 42-52.
When adapting a novel, there are three different ways directors can translate that into a film. They may take on the literal, traditional or radical interpretation of their adaptation of the novel; in Joe Wright’s 2005 Pride and Prejudice, he takes on the traditional interpretation. This translation demonstrates the same ideas, central conflicts, and characters as those of Austen’s novel 1813 novel, Pride and Prejudice. Linda Costanzo Cahir, the author of Literature into Film, gives sufficient evidence to prove that this adaptation is in fact a traditional one.
The Webster's New World College dictionary (2005) defines novels as relatively long fictional prose narrative and films as a sequence of photographs projected on a screen in such a rapid succession that they create an optical illusion of movement (p.529 & p.988) . These two genres have been the main topic of an age old debate. The debate revolves around the question, which are better novels or films. People tend to have different opinions on whether books or movies tell a better story.The debate continues to grow due to Hollywood making more and more movies based on books. To illustrate my views on this debate, I will be comparing and contrasting the novel and film versions of William Golding's The Lord of the Flies and Toni Morrison's Beloved. While both novels and films provide their audience with a great form of entertainment, each genre has it’s pros and cons and deciding whether a novel or film tells a better story is dependent on the audiences particular preferences. Novels allow the reader to create the images, voices, and background of the story using their imagination to visualize the story for themselves. On the other hand ,a good director can take a great piece of literature and turn it into an amazing visual experience. However, the film is dependent on the directors vision and audience has little say on how the story is portrayed. I would rather read novels than watch films because novels provide better story experiences for their audiences through its increased creative freedom through imagination, lack of time limits, increased exposure, and the social experience it provides.
Adaptation of any kind has been a debate for many years. The debate on cinematic adaptations of literary works was for many years dominated by the questions of fidelity to the source and by the tendencies to prioritize the literary originals over their film versions (Whelehan, 2006). In the transference of a story from one form to another, there is the basic question of adherence to the source, of what can be lost (Stibetiu, 2001). There is also the question of what the filmmakers are being faithful to or is it the novel’s plot in every detail or the spirit of the original (Smith, 2016). These are only few query on the issue of fidelity in the film adaptation.
It is common in today's media-driven society to reach into the past for inspiration and ideas. A trend has developed where original works are transformed into other mediums. For example: books are turned into movies and/or plays, movies are turned into weekly sitcoms, and cartoons will spawn empires (Disney). These things happen so often that an audience rarely stops to question the level of authenticity that remains after these conversions. Perhaps it is only when a project is not well received that people begin to think of the difficulties involved with changing a work's genre. Using Gulliver's Travels as an example, discrepancies and additions in the movie can be contrasted with Jonathan Swift's original text.