• Home
  • Blog
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Shop
  • Donate
  • Subscribe
  • Contests
  • About
    • Contact
    • Submit
    • Media Kit
    • Resources
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

DappledThings.org

A quarterly journal of ideas, art, and faith

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Books that become movies

Michael Rennier

I recently put up a piece over at Aleteia on some books that are going to become movies soon. I’m particularly intrigued by the effort to put Dante to the screen. It might be amazing or it might be a huge, glorious disaster. Either way, it’ll be fun to find out. I’m most excited, though, for that Catch-22 mini-series. Catch-22, in my opinion, is somehow an underrated novel. I know we’re all familiar with it and it does tend to be in the canon of high school lit, so in that sense, sure, it’s rated pretty highly, but as far as high school lit goes, it rises above many of the other options. For instance, it ages far better than Catcher in the Rye. Catch-22 manages to be both laugh-out-loud hilarious and intensely, seriously dark. If a film can capture both the hilarity and the pathos of Heller’s genius, it’ll be a show well worth watching.

There’s always some trepidation when a book is turned into a movie because there’s a good chance the movie will ruin it. That puts all us readers in an awkward position because we have to be the truth-speaking snobs and speak truth to power, like, “It wasn’t as good as the book.” and, “For the love of God can we stop with all the Little Women adaptations already because Winona Ryder already embodied the perfect Jo and at this point it’s overkill.” And then there is the inevitable Anne With An E situation in which the resulting interpretation of the novel is so messed up you seriously consider canceling your Netflix account as a protest and the only reason you don’t is because they just debuted Orson Welles’ final, insane movie that you want to see really bad.

Sometimes, book-to-film works very well:

Doctor Zhivago – glorious pacing and cinematography

The Leopard – everything about this film is perfection

The 39 Steps – Hitchcock can do no wrong

Apocalypse Now – A good example of breathing new life into a classic

Clueless – I’m not ashamed to admit that this adaptation of Emma is flawless

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory – Gene Wilder version, obviously

 

Sometimes it doesn’t:

The Remains of the Day – It tries so hard but really struggles with the subtlety and control of the novel. The ending in particular is not quite right.

Lord of the Rings – all the CG and attempts at expressing the huge imagination of Tolkien fall short. The length of the battle scenes is really tedious.

Dune – Multiple attempts are all bad but fascinating, especially David Lynch’s

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory – Johnny Depp version

 

What do you think? Should film-makers leave well enough alone, or is there a legitimate contribution that film can make in bringing the written word to life?

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
DT Subscribe

Filed Under: Deep Down Things

Michael Rennier

About Michael Rennier

The Rev. Michael Rennier lives in St. Louis with his wife and children. He has an MDiv from Yale Divinity School and is a Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of St. Louis. He is also a regular contributor at Aleteia.

Comments

  1. AvatarJohn Carswell says

    November 15, 2018 at 9:52 am

    I would love to see more novels done not as 2-3 hour films but as multi-season, high quality TV shows. The Man in the High Castle is a good current example (thought it greatly departs from the book). I think the immersive nature of most novels is better represented by the format. Few people read a novel in one sitting, just like a long-form TV show.

    I’m more of an optimist about Jackson’s LOTR, but it’s certainly flawed, and comes up short in a many ways. Personally, I’d love to see an eventual animated TV adaptation spanning a few seasons and including Tom Bombadil, Scouring of the Shire, and a interpretation that is more faithful to the underlying philosophy of that was so peculiar to Tolkien.

    To your question: I had forgotten that The Godfather was originally a book (which I have not read). Seems like that alone makes the case that books can be adapted into great films. But I believe it’s crucial that the production team work to respect the source material and the intent of the author. Though maybe even that’s not always necessary? After all, Kubrick’s The Shining is revered by everyone…except Stephen King.

    Or The Princess Bride! The film is so different from Goldman’s book, but I’ll take the film over the book any day.

    • Michael RennierMichael Rennier says

      November 15, 2018 at 10:11 am

      Yes, agreed on Godfather and Princess Bride. Both are better than the source material

      • AvatarKaren Ullo says

        November 16, 2018 at 7:18 am

        Films that far surpass the novels they were based on: The Wizard of Oz and Forrest Gump.

        • AvatarDena says

          November 16, 2018 at 12:54 pm

          Agree on Gump, but not on Oz. An adult reader wouldn’t understand, maybe, but nothing is like the experience of a nine-year-old encountering that book.

          • AvatarKaren Ullo says

            November 16, 2018 at 2:26 pm

            I read it at about that age. I don’t know why, but I didn’t care for it at all.

          • AvatarDena says

            November 16, 2018 at 2:56 pm

            Different circumstances probably the reason. It was the fifties, we were extremely poor (read hungry), and every day after lunch (subsidized), fourth grade teacher Mrs. Mullins read that aloud to us.

  2. AvatarElise says

    November 15, 2018 at 3:02 pm

    The list of great book to film adaptations should have also included Alfred Hitchcock’s Rebecca. Buy you already mentioned Hitchcock can do no wrong so maybe that would have been redundant.

    • AvatarElise says

      November 15, 2018 at 3:03 pm

      Oops. Should say “but,” not “buy.”

  3. AvatarDena says

    November 15, 2018 at 3:47 pm

    I so agree with you, Michael. But, frankly, the idea of Dante in film makes me shudder. Not even intense curiosity can console. Also agree with all your judgments–particularly LOTR. The one thing about the films I believe Tolkien would have been happy about is the score. Howard Shore got it, though Peter Jackson remained clueless. LOTR is really grand mythology, not a comic book.

    What interests me is the whole re-make phenomenon. Why? Can’t a good thing be left alone to be a good thing? Or is originality a casualty of our age? The same is true in fiction–seems every new writer now is a “re-make”. Just how many Flannery O’Conner’s can we handle? Or–equally ubiquitous, Marquez–just everywhere. That is likely the fault of publishers, though. Most new writers just want to get published and are perhaps willing to don an O’Conner wig or a Marquez mustache if it gets them in print.

  4. AvatarTom Hanson says

    November 15, 2018 at 6:32 pm

    I say yes in all ways, Lots of bad books have been turned into good movies, legendarily The Lady From Shanghai. directed by Orson Welles. My own favorite example being Straw Dogs directed by Sam Peckinpah, who called the book it came from (The Siege of Trenchers Farm by ?) something like “Trash with one good action scene.” He turned it into a searing look at a mismatched marriage breaking up while turning a good action scene into a great one.
    As for great books, made into good movies, fewer by far. My favorite being The Name of the Rose, a medieval murder mystery starring Sean Connery. Fine film which sent me to the book which is so much better. In fact the film itself, in the titles, says straight out that it can’t begin to reach any more than a few of the novel’s thematic delights. That sent me to a dictionary for the word palempsest and thence to Umberto Eco and his wonderful book.

  5. AvatarHenry Fleischacker says

    November 22, 2018 at 11:07 am

    My opinion is that the Harry Potter movies are able to stay faithful to the essence of the books despite the exclusion of scenes for the sake of the Unity of Time. I think that a movie that sticks to the essence of the book but, yet, may have changes of its own invention is a good ideal to strive for in movie-making. The LOTR’s are a failure in this sense because they sacrifice large parts of the essence of the books for the sake of action and appealing to a primary American audience.

  6. AvatarHunter says

    November 28, 2018 at 12:29 pm

    It might take a whole ‘nother article to explain how “Clueless” is a “flawless” adaptation of “Emma.” You actually do need to be ashamed to hold that opinion. You can’t genuinely love the character of Emma and consider the vulgar-mouthed, materialistic Cher any kind of adaptation, or even an accurate parody, of her.

    • AvatarThomas R Hanson says

      November 28, 2018 at 6:46 pm

      What makes you think that Miss Austen wants you to “genuinely love” Emma, rather than just genuinely enjoy her as a character while also thinking about what she is doing and the damage she wreaks?

      • AvatarHunter says

        November 28, 2018 at 9:55 pm

        Emma and I happen to be dating, that’s why. We’re in a transfictional relationship and I do genuinely love her, without the quotation marks. That libelous burlesque by Alicia Silverstone is a continuing source of pain for both of us. For one thing, Emma would never say “pubes.” She has far loftier putdowns. She wouldn’t smoke pot, wear revealing outfits, or answers phones at the table. Your love for Emma, or lack of, is immaterial. Reverend Rennier’s mistake in Emma’s regard is the regretful misfortune.

        • Michael RennierMichael Rennier says

          November 29, 2018 at 9:25 am

          I remain unashamed and unchastened. Perhaps I need to take this up with my spiritual director.
          Rumor has it that a Clueless remake is in the works. I’m sure we can unite in hating it.

Mary, Queen of Angels 2020

Purchase Featuring nonfiction from Joshua Hren, fiction from Jennifer Marie Donahue and Rob Davidson and the winners and honorees of the Bakhita Prize in Visual Arts.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)

Newsletter

Sign up to receive the latest news from Dappled Things.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Have you enjoyed our content online or in print during the past year?

Dappled Things needs the support of its readers over and above the cost of subscriptions in order to continue its work.

Help us share the riches of Catholic art and literature with our impoverished culture by donating to Dappled Things.

Archives

Home
Blog
Current
Shop
Subscribe
About

Copyright © 2021 Dappled Things · Staff Forum · Log in

Graphics by Dominic Heisdorf · Website by Up to Speed

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.