books | the m0vie blog

They’re Adapting: Why is “Unfilmable” Such a Dirty Word?

Posted on May 25, 2010 by Darren

The word “unfilmable” is thrown around a lot these days. Mostly quite unfairly, but sometimes somewhat justly. It’s typically used as a go to word when somebody is genuinely terrified of what an adaptation of a certain work may look like, but don’t want to concede that the thought of what Hollywood will do to a clever and insightful idea chills them to the very bone (this is the system which turned down a chance to make Fahrenheit 451 because they couldn’t sell it to thirteen year olds). However, the word itself simply suggests that there are some ideas, stories, narratives, presentations, whatever that simply can’t be transitioned from one format to another – here, of course, the other is always cinema or television. So, is it ever fair to describe something is “unfilmable” and is there any shame in the idea?

Lost in Adaptation...

Continue reading →

Filed under: Movies | Tagged: adaptations, book to film adaptations, books, books to film, catcher in the rye, films, Movies, the naked lunch, the road, unfilmable | 8 Comments »

What Happened Happened: Mainstream Alternative Histories?

Posted on April 16, 2010 by Darren

Alternative histories have long been a staple of science fiction. The basic idea is simple enough: take a key moment in history and play it out just a little bit differently (or a lot differently). The Man in the High Castle, the story of how America lost the Second World War, may be the most famous example, but there’s literally a whole subgenre of literary science-fiction based around the idea of playing things out in a way different from how they did. However, this fascination with alternative history never really spilled over into cinema. However, there are slowly emerging signs that audiences may be gradually adjusting to the genre and the potential it offers.

Twenty more years!

Note: This is not to be confused with the historical school of alternative histories, which are all based on perfectly reasonable assumptions, like if a courier who really existed was late or if a wound to a historical figure had been fatal. It seems in mainstream sci-fi these are more likely to involve pepperpot-shaped aliens or glowing blue supermen. So, some historians out there may object to the term – maybe I should use ‘speculative history’ instead. But it’s all semantics.

Continue reading →

Filed under: Movies | Tagged: alternate histories, alternate history, alternative histories, books, Movies, possible history, science fiction, speculative history, Television, the man in the high castle, watchmen, what could have been | 6 Comments »

To Read or Not To Read?

Posted on October 6, 2009 by Darren

Every year hundreds of books are adapted into movies. The adaptation process is (if Spike Jonze and Charlie Kaufman are to be believed) hell for the writer – but it’s also somewhat of a complex question for the film reviewer. Unlike the few films these days that have started their life as a script and have never before been offered to the public, the ideas, themes, characters and contents of the work now being produced as a blockbuster have all been let loose years ago. If reviewers should aspire to be educated in what they review, should they read the books before they see the films in order to properly judge them, or should the film itself stand on its own two feet to be judged as a success or failure on its own merits? On a more superficial level, is a reviewer better able to access what the audience expects from the film if they’ve read the book or should they act on the presumption that few moviegoers read the original work? Should they even care – is an attitude towards literary adaptations necessary for consistency in a film reviewer?

Book him, Leo...

Continue reading →

Filed under: Movies | Tagged: adaptations, books, books to screen, cinema, films, revolutionary road, Shutter Island, watchmen | 1 Comment »

King of the World: Thoughts on Stephen King and Popular Culture

Posted on May 26, 2009 by Darren

How does Stephen King do it? He manages to churn out an astonishingly prolific back catalogue, but maintains a reasonably high quality. As with all authors, he soars above and he dips below, but – taken on average – he is a very strong writer than manages to churn out up to four books a year. How does the man do it?