Another type of unfilmability is rights disputes - mostly with comic book related works. Miracle Man can’t get straightened out enough for reprints, so a movie is right out. DC split the movie rights for each of their characters off. I’m not sure when/if they’re due to be consolidated but until that happens Justice League or Crisis couldn’t be made. Marvel’s done a better job with that, which is why they’re able to talk about an Avengers movie.
Please for the love of god, no one ever allow this, not that Mark would. Danielewski would spin in his grave (if he were dead.)
Switch rapidly between different characters’ POV. This isn’t that unusual, and I have seen it done before (although I can’t offhand recall where … ooh, wait, Spiderwick)
Sandman could only be done as a series of miniseries-type episodes. There’s about 7 films’ worth of material, at the very least. And yes the cost would probably prove prohibitive unless someone like Tom Hanks bankrolls/sponsors it or something, a la Band of Brothers. The serial miniseries approach would allow a number of different actors to play Dream, paralleling the different looks he had in the graphic novels when drawn by different artists.
Never seen the BBC mini-series then? That was pretty well spot-on to the books, in as much as anything in the HHGTTG universe can be said to agree with anything else therein.
Ooooo, good one.
I was really surprised when I found out that Slaughterhouse 5 had been made into a movie. I thought the best part of Vonnegut’s books was the humorous narration, so I have a hard time believing that the movie (which I feel no interest in watching) could create a near-level of comedy that the book had. Really, without the narration, it would seem like an extremely sad movie: being a P.O.W., an old man who has clearly lost his mind, and the firebombing of Dresden.
Tom Robbins’ “Another Roadside Attraction”.
Weaveworld is awesome! I lent the hardcover to a “friend”, And, well you can guess the rest…
I actually think there is no such thing as an unfilmable book. Really. Does the book rely on the elegance of its prose for its impact? Use dialogue or voiceovers. Does it have fantastic imagery? If you can imagine it, Hollywood can create it nowadays. Is the lead character an unlikeable douchebag? There are antiheroes aplenty at your local multiplex even now.
Some movies are more difficult to adapt than others, and of course there’s no guarantee of quality. Tinseltown has screwed up plenty of adaptations, but it doesn’t have to be so. A visionary and skillful director with a good budget, script, cast and production crew can make all the difference in the world. Sometimes things have to be left out that you, as a fan, would consider absolutely vital. But I think that anything - anything - found between the covers of a story-telling book can, today, be put up on the silver screen. Whether or not you’d want to watch it is something else again.
Some books I’d love to see made into movies, and that I think could be:
Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein, in a way that’s, at long last, true to the author’s vision (and that includes powered armor). Likewise Time for the Stars and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
The Silmarillion by J.R.R. Tolkien, in whole or in part.
Childhood’s End by Arthur C. Clarke, which is long overdue.
Tuf Voyaging by George R.R. Martin, a wonderful, semi-satirical, episodic sf book with a doozy of an antihero. Martin’s Fevre Dream, a vampire story set on the Mississippi River before the Civil War, could also be an awesome movie.
Founding Brothers by Joseph Ellis, which could be a wonderful character study of the Framers and how they related to each other.
See you at the movies…
That briefly popped into my head but for some reason I didn’t put it down. Good Catch.
A Good, serious adaptation of a Lovecraft Novel. I’ve seen many low budget adaptations of “The Shadow over Innsmouth” which you’d think would be perfect for hollywood, but they seem afraid to touch it. I heard a story once where it was pitched and the studio execs wanted to change the fishmen to werewolves.
Del Toro’s been trying to a get “At the Mountains of Madness” made for a while now, but since he won’t budge on not shoehorning a love story into it and trying to make it very faithful(or so I’ve heard), it’s been slow going.
It would seem to me that most here don’t have much faith in adaptions, instead expecting films to merely be a visual retelling of the story from the book.
I disagree. “About a Boy” for example was very filmable in its original form, but the adapted story, with a complete changed final third or so, worked better as a film.
“Trainspotting” was considered to be unfilmable, however the adaption is a perfect example of how to go about it. The film instead centered in on a specific character (Renton) and in doing so created a more coherent narrative and left out a lot not to do with him.
With all due respect, you completely miss the point that a well-written book allows me to imagine it in ways Hollywood can never manage to capture on film.
Of course. But then, a gifted director might capture it on film in a way that surprises and delights you even more than you had imagined possible.
I saw it. It certainly is not as good as the book, but it didn’t try to get stuck in time (not unstuck?) and it handled Dresden fairly well. More of a literal rendering of the book, but not a disaster by any means. Given a few hours I’d much rather reread the book than see the movie again, though.
I think they kind of proved that it was unfilmable. Actually, Tristram Shandy might be a good candidate to be made into an animated film, where they might be able to pull back and do the meta-humor which Sterne excelled at.
(The best part of the movie for me was the tour of Sterne’s house included in the DVD extras.)
Granted. But I can count on one hand the number of reliably gifted directors capable of bringing to the screen something better than I can imagine.
Nights at the Circus by Angela Carter would be very, very difficult.
However, it could be a stunning film. I’d love to see a genius director who got what was so brilliant about the book give it a shot.
Actually, another novel that I’m very surprised got filmed was John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. If you read the book with no knowledge of the movie (as I did), you end up wondering how they can tell such an all-over-the-map story as a single coherent narrative. They did it by suppressing other story lines, concentrating on the Joads, and condensing characters, as with the other cases I cite.