Adaptations are movies too

Hollywood loves source material. Novel, comic book, television show, stageplay; if there’s a pre-built audience they’re bound to take a peek.

After seeing “insert name of most recent novel adapted into a movie” I had a conversation with a friend that went something like this.

“What’d you think of the movie?”

“Meh. Not great. It dragged on after it the resolution. It just wouldn’t end.”

“Yeah, but you gotta understand, that’s how the book was.”

Wait, what? I have to judge the movie based on the book? I don’t think so. Movies and books are different animals. When I watch a movie I have certain expectations based on the ten million movies I’ve seen before. If I didn’t read the book I have no expectations for the story.

Adaptation means making adjustments. Adjustments that allow you to pour the source material’s story into the format of a movie. Let’s face it, you can’t cram a whole book into a movie. It’s not possible. Choices must be made. The job of the screenwriter is to make smart choices that convey the spirit of the book into movie form. Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not giving carte blanche to the screenwriter to add dinosaurs and cyborgs to a Jane Austin novel. But so much importance is placed on the source material that many times people forget it’s a movie. What I’m saying is: respect the medium.

Movies are magic. They thrill and inspire. They make us laugh and cry. They bring people together. Movies have a specific format; American movies at least. The audience knows when a movie is bad and they aren’t forgiving just because, “that’s how the book was.” The movie should retain the feel of the book (to satisfy the existing fan-base) while conforming to movie form (to satisfy those who didn’t read the book). Because at the end of the day that’s how the movie will be remembered.

I want a great movie first and foremost. Then maybe I can have a conversation like this.

“What’d you think of the movie?”

“It was awesome!”

“You think that was good you should read the book.”

FADE OUT.

My 1st movie – Misdirected

Let me tell you about my first movie, Misdirected.

I grew up idolizing the likes of Kevin Smith and Robert Rodriguez for their talent and their ability to make a career based on one well made independent film. I wanted to follow in their footsteps. Before I even had an idea for a script I knew I was going to make an independent film. I was very enthusiastic; very young; just out of college. I told my best friend–a fellow filmmaker. His advice was very clear, “You can’t do it.” He wasn’t trying to kill my dreams. He just knew well enough to know how hard it is to get a production together when you don’t have any money or resources. But I was not to be deterred.

In 2002 I wrote a script called Misdirected. A comedy about a college student who–after a night of hard parting–wakes to find himself in a hotel room with a dead body. When a mysterious woman threatens to blackmail him for murder he’s forced to retrace his steps and discover the truth before he’s arrested.

The script’s conception was simple. I knew I wanted to start with a question. So my question became: What would you do if you woke up in a hotel room with a dead body on the bed, a gun in your hand, and no memory of the night before?

Of course it would be a comedy.

Life in 3D

Apparently 3D is about to take hold, not just in our theaters, but in our televisions as well.  Every major television maker is working on a 3D set for you right now.  Many are already going into mass production.  Samsung is boasting about 3D HDTV’s that are 1/3″ thick, touch screen remotes that actually show your television images while you press the buttons, built in ethernet, and software – or should I say, Apps.  Espn has already announced a 3D channel.  Footballs games in 3D!

Avatar was great.  I admit it.  Technologically speaking.  Not so much story-wise.  I saw the entire story in the trailer.  Dude becomes an avatar, gets in good with the “bad” natives, then learns to love them, and ultimately has to fight with them against the evil people who originally sent him there.  (i.e. Pocahontas, Dances with wolves, The Last Samurai)  I’m not providing spoilers for the six people who haven’t seen this movie.  That was literally in the trailer.  But it was an event movie.  It actually got people into the theater and I applaud it for that.  In fact I only went to see it because everyone told me how pretty it was.  I didn’t need to see it for the story. 

The problem with 3D technology for me – and it is very much the case in Avatar – is that I’m not immersed into the world.  Why?  Because I’m wearing 3D glasses.  Because every damn image is punching me in the mouth.  Because I’m getting a headache.  I’m not immersed into the movie because I’ve never been more aware that I’m being manipulated.  And no, I don’t get used to it.  Not even after two hours.  You think I want that in my home?  I don’t need all programming in 3D.  It’s not really an improvement for me to saddle up to the TV with a pair of dork-glasses to watch the news with Brian Williams’ crooked-ass nose in 3D sitting in my lap like Labrador Retriever?

Don’t get me wrong.  I don’t hate 3D.  I just find it nothing more than a gimmick.  Not to the point of Smell-o-vision, but I don’t see it as a game changing device that will affect all movies.  Maybe one day it will get there.  There is at least one TV coming out that employs Lenticular 3D.  A process that does not require the use of 3D glasses.  But that too has it’s limitations.  If you’re not sitting directly in front of the TV you do not get the proper affect.

3D has yet to prove itself as valid addition to the filmmaking experience.   (e.g. color film, sound, digital projection, CGI, THX.)  Until it does it will remain a gimmick.  And gimmicks fade.