A good question, as always, Child.
I strongly think that a good book can be transformed to a good movie.
Quote:
|
Can a book become so rich and complex that it can never be successfully adapted to the format of a movie, which must necessarily simplify?
|
Yes, when filming a movie about a book, some things a bound to be lost. You can never have that kind of depth in charcters as you can in books, or complexity of storyline, or even the poetical language. But remeber that books and movies are two different kinds of artforms, not meant to be copying each other. I think that losing all those things while making a book-based movie doesn't make the movie bad or unfilmable one. For me the most important thing is to capture the essence of the books, the thing that the author wanted to say, and display it with the best cinematographic means. And while movies may not have the same strongnesses as books, they sertainly have their own ones.
What I'm trying to say, is: a movie can be as good as the book it is based on, just in a different kind of way.
Quote:
|
My problem is that producers, directors, and screenwriters (or whoever) unnecessarily change concepts, characters (ahem, Faramir), etc. That's why they will never make 'the perfect film.
|
But what is the perfect film? Does staying compleately true to a book make the film excellent? Hardly. Just look at Harry Potter 1. And why should the perfect LotR-movies be meant for only die-hard fans?
I totally agree with you, lindil, about the "feel" of ME, the most important thing in my humble opinion. Yes, there are things I don't like, but thank god the feel is there.