And now for something light

[rhu]

OK, let's get a good discussion going here. :-)

The other night, introverte and I were discussing film adapations of science fiction stories that originally appeared in print. We were unable to come up with a single example of a story that meets all these criteria:

• Science fiction (not fantasy) (excluding, for example, The Lord of the Rings and The Wizard of Oz)
• First appeared in print (excluding, for example, 2001: A Space Odyssey)
• Movie adaptation remains essentially faithful to the print story (excluding, for example, We Can Remember It for You Wholesale, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, I, Robot, etc.)
• Both the original print story and the movie adaptation are generally accepted as great (excluding, for example, well, most others).

The closest I could come up with was Farenheit 451 but I'm not sure the movie really qualifies as great. But I figure that if there exists a true example, you, gentle readers, will let me know.

Comments

[hahathor.livejournal.com]

Frankly, I have a difficult time thinking of cases that meet the last two criteria. But then again, I don't see much point in making a movie that's just a you-don't-have-to-read-it version of a book. I'd rather see something added by the director, screen writer, actors, etc. I feel the same way about covers of songs: I don't want to hear a band recording something that sounds just like a recording that already exists; I want an interpretation.

As always, IMHO disclaimers apply. YMMV.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

"Essentially faithful" doesn't mean "scene-for-scene identical." Even though Blade Runner was inspired by Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, for example, they are not telling the same story.

[qaqaq.livejournal.com]

Contact? There are some differences between the book and the film, but it's a fairly faithful adaptation. The book is quite good, and I love the film.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

I'll have to read it, then I'll get back to you. Thanks for the suggestion!

[bookishfellow.livejournal.com]

I'll second this. The film was good enough to pass my (fairly steep) want-to-own-it test, and its departures from the book version are mostly on the order of "we can't possibly tell this story in two hours unless we tweak it."

[clauclauclaudia]

I think big changes were made for the movie that simplified all the heart out of the book. Much as I loved some moments of the movie, all my favorite scenes from the book were missing.

That said, it possibly is more faithful than Blade Runner.

[(Anonymous)]

Almost by definition, if someone were to bother to make a movie out of a science fiction book/story, wouldn't it need to be accepted as great? As a variation on a theme, can you think of any examples which meet your first three criteria, and only the movie is considered "great?"

To your four criteria:

A Clockwork Orange? I've never read the book, so can't comment on criterion 3, but it seems to meets the others.

How faithful was Jurassic Park to the book? I've actually both read the book and seen the movie, but that doesn't mean I remember how faithful it was.

Thoughts?

[abbasegal.livejournal.com]

Oops. That was mine. I forgot to log in...

[sdavido.livejournal.com]

While I have not read Jurrasic Park, I do remember an interview with a famous personage who was appearing in the film, bemoaning how his character within the film, as opposed to the original story, lives through the piece. He responded to a request for comments with something along the lines of "I was denied a death scene, but granted a sequal.'

I would say this would impact faithfulness to the book . . .

Oh yeah, and the ending is, as a result, completely different. The book has a number of humoungous explosions that apparently were filmed, but not used . . . I remember also some complaints from ecologically minded people and groups as the unused scenes were apparently filmed for real, and a quite a bit of native flora and fauna died as a result.

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

Hm. I can think of good SF movies, and I can think of good SF books made into movies, and never the twain shall meet... at least not that I can think of at the moment. Have to consider that one for a bit.

<<---A fantasy adaptation that fits

[cramerica.livejournal.com]

But a sci-fi example? Slaughterhouse 5, maybe, though it's at the same "good?sure, great?dunno" level as F451, IMHFO.

[mabfan.livejournal.com]

Fantastic Voyage came out first in book form, but only because Asimov wrote the adaptation so quickly that the publisher could get away with releasing it before the movie.

[mabfan.livejournal.com]

What about Flowers for Algernon, which was made into the movie Charly?

[bookishfellow.livejournal.com]

Great novella/book! Lousy (imo) movie!

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

You're not including television adaptations, right? Because if you were, the 1980s Twilight Zone produced several segments that were faithful to the originals. Off the top of my head: Harlan Ellison's "Paladin of the Lost Hour," which had two different print versions, and "The Star" by Arthur C. Clarke.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

BTW< I came to your journal via mabfan, if you were curious....

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Correct. I'm testing the hypothesis "No great SF print story ever survived adaptation to the big screen."

[llennhoff.livejournal.com]

Personally I would focus my attention on short stories and novelletes. I don't think a novel can map to a 2 - 3 hour movie while remaining true to the original. The natural home of the cinematic version of a novel is a miniseries, IMHO.

[cheshyre]

I would disagree.

In a foreign language class, a professor remarked upon the (avowedly sexist) remark that "translations are like women, they are beautiful or faithful, but rarely both."

I've generally applied that to film adaptations of print works. There are certain film adaptations that manage to capture the emotional spirit of the original without being slavish to every detail. Likewise, those that are slavish (such as Kevin Costner's version of David Brin's "Postman") don't make good film.

But expecting a movie adaptation to be both beautiful and faithful -- that's tough in almost any genre. Maybe LOTR (I wasn't a fan of either book nor film to judge), though I generally point to "Princess Bride" as one of the few, and that was written by a filmmaker who also did the adapted screenplay, so had an unfair advantage.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

I like your comparison of prose-to-screenplay adaptation with (lingual) translation. That's apt. Although here we're not necessarily seeking beauty (rather "general excellence") nor slavish faithfulness (rather "essential faithfulness"), so perhaps a satisfactory compromise could be achieved.

And yet... we have but a handful of candidates. In other genres, this obstacle seems to be insurmountable only 98% of the time. Several examples of fantasy have been cited here; there are others in other genres. Is it really harder in SF, and if so, why?

The reason I worded it as "No great SF print story ever survived adaptation to the big screen" was party to be provocative but mostly because that's the kind of hypothesis that can't be proven but can easily be disproven by counterexample --- and it's the counterexamples I'm wanting! (And getting....)

[clauclauclaudia]

I know some people find the Dune movie craptastic, so it probably fails on the fourth point, but I think it's pretty awesome myself.

(Also here via mabfan

War of the Worlds (not the Cruise-fest)?

The IMDB lists Manchurian Candidate as sci-fi, but that's at least stretching a point. Solaris?

In the I have no idea how faithful they are category: The Thing? The Invisible Man?

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

War of the Worlds is a possible candidate. Perhaps The Invisible Man as well.... which would lead to the next question, What made HGW's stories more amenable to adaptation than others?

Perhaps the new Manchurian Candidate is SF (I haven't seen it, although if I recall from the reviews they went into fictional biotech) but I don't think I'd categorize the original as SF.

HGW

[chenoameg.livejournal.com]

They were short? Part of the problem as others have mentioned is that nothing longer than a novella will translate to the big screen.

Re: HGW

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Sure, but there are plenty of great short stories and novellae. Where are their great adaptations?

Re: HGW

[cheshyre]

Look at the anthology TV series, like Twilight Zone or Amazing Stories.

I believe "Cold Equations" was filmed both for one of those shows *and* as a SciFi channel TV movie.

[tablesaw]

What made HGW's stories more amenable to adaptation than others?

Presumably it links to the time that they were written, before the sf got its pulp veneer from Gernsback et al. Nobody's mentioned Verne, but I'm certain there's some combination of stories and movies that fits this category. Around the World in 80 Days probably isn't sf-y enough for you, but 20,000 Leagues under the Sea might work.

And many have hopes for A Scanner Darkly.

[kradical.livejournal.com]

Uhm, why doesn't 2001 count? It did start out as a prose story: "The Sentinel" by Arthur C. Clarke.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I was misinformed. I thought the novel was written concurrently with the shooting of the movie. Was "The Sentinel" essentially the same story as the entire movie? Amazon describes it as "The story that inspired 2001: A Space Odyssey" which would violate criterion 3.

(Hmmm... Criterion III sounds almost like it could be the name of a con.)

[chenoameg.livejournal.com]

It seems to me part of the problem is how you define faithful.

Do you mean evokes the same emotions as the written tale? In my mind Bicentennial Man does that quite well.

Do you mean contains all of the plot elements of the written tale?

Do you mean keeps the right feel; it looks the way one thinks the written tale would look?

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Good questions. I'll try to dodge answering them by saying that, at least for the purposes of this discussion, essentially the same story is told in both media --- if the movie starts or ends at a significantly different spot in the narrative, or if major plot points are significantly altered, or if the entire tone of the piece is changed, then it's not faithful.

Examples that were given above included characters that died in one medium being spared in another, or a short story (and its title) being used to tell a completely different story in the same universe.

Being unfaithful can be fun. The Frank Oz Little Shop of Horrors is a delightful romp, even if (in comparison with the Roger Corman version) it significantly changes the ending and the tone.

But for the purposes of this exercise, I think restricting ourselves to movies that tell essentially the same story as their print predecessors is a useful and instructive limitation.

[cheshyre]

Can you give some examples of faithful adaptations in other genres?
I mean, do you consider "Princess Bride" faithful, since it eliminates Buttercup's parents and skips a whole lot of delightful narration (ranking the most beautiful women or the best kisses or etiquette and clothing and geneology)

[rwl.livejournal.com]

Try these:
On the Beach by Nevil Shute
Fail Safe by Eugene Burdick and Harvey Wheeler

Good movies were made from both.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

I don't know On the Beach so I'll add that to the list of things to read and watch.

I greatly admire both the novel and film of Fail Safe but I don't see how it's SF (any more than the original Manchurian Candidate, which was discussed above). The preface to Fail Safe explicitly states, if I recall correctly, that all the elements of the story were in existence at the time the novel was written, and it was only the specific and horrific sequence of failures that was fictional.

[crackboy.livejournal.com]

another coming from mabfan...

What do you mean by 'great'? I think all of these movies are great, and I'm sure you'll find hoards who think their print sources were great, too. They're not Oscar-worthy (well, except for SFX or something), but they were enjoyable. I can't comment on whether the stories are particularly faithful to the story, though. I'm sure there's some source, somewhere.

Spider-man
Spider-man 2
X-men
X-men 2

Sin City isn't SF, but it's extremely faithful to the original stories, down to the same inner monologues by the characters, and both the graphic novels and the movie are awesome.

If anyone would get around to adapting some Neal Stephenson, those would qualify, too...

[(Anonymous)]

Barry Longyear's Enemy Mine? Or am I the only one that liked that movie?
Zamis!
2001 may have been written concurently with the movie, but it's sequel 2010 was not. I loved that movie.
And what about all of the Verne? Campy today, but then? Journey to the Center of the Earth, anyone?

[ambug666.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie, but I understand that many do not consider it "great."

A shame you aren't including fantasy or I'd respectfully submit "The Princess Bride."

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

The THHGTTG movie was not faithful to the books, if that has any meaning in the context of THHGTTG

And I'm not including fantasy because I think there are plenty of examples of fantasy stories that crossed over well. It's the relative dearth of good SF adaptations that got me started.

[cheshyre]

Then again, the books weren't where the story first appeared.
It was initially radio and print only came later...

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Good point!

[cheshyre]

That said, the original TV series was pretty damn good, even given the limited special effects of the time it was filmed.

Of course it had new elements that weren't in any previous incarnation of HHG -- every adaptation of Hitchhikers (from radio -> book -> TV --> computer game --> comic --> movie) added and removed and changed things...

[cheshyre]

Are you limiting it to movies, or are TV adaptations acceptable?

The 1980s version of The Twilight Zone did some effective adaptations of SF short stories, including "Examination Day"

[Generally speaking, given the difference between film and print, I don't advocate adapting anything longer than a novella for film and short story for TV.]

[cheshyre]

Just found an old Usenet post regarding the stories adapted for the New Twilight Zone:

NEW STORIES FROM THE TWILIGHT ZONE, ed. by Martin H. Greenberg, Avon Books
(trade paperback), 1991, 0-380-75926-8, $10.00

"Shatterday"                             Harlan Ellison
"Healer"                                 Alan Brennert
"Nightcrawlers"                          Robert R. McCammon
"Examination Day"                        Henry Slesar
"A Message from Charity"                 William M. Lee
"Paladin of the Lost Hour"               Harlan Ellison
"The Burning Man"                        Ray Bradbury
"Wong's Lost and Found Emporium"         William F. Wu
"One Life, Furnished in Early Poverty"   Harlan Ellison
"I of Newton"                            Joe Haldeman
"The Star"                               Arthur C. Clarke
"The Misfortune Cookie"                  Charles E. Fritch
"Yesterday Was Monday"                   Theodore Sturgeon
   [episode title: "A Matter of Minutes"]
"To See the Invisible Man"               Robert Silverberg
"Dead Run"                               Greg Bear
"Button, Button"                         Richard Matheson
"The Everlasting Club"                   Arthur Gray
   [episode title: "Devil's Alphabet"]
"The Last Defender of Camelot"           Roger Zelazny
"A Saucer of Loneliness"                 Theodore Sturgeon
"Lost and Found"                         Phyllis Eisenstein
"Influencing the Hell Out of Time and    Parke Godwin
                      Teresa Golowitz"
   [episode title: "Time and Teresa Golowitz"]

There were only two other stories adapted by TZ, but were not available
for the anthology:

"Gramma"                                 Stephen King
"Need to Know"                           Sidney Sheldon

Note: Alan Brennert's "Healer" was actually an original teleplay that
he after-the-fact turned into a short story (he did the same with two
others of his TZ teleplays: "Her Pilgrim Soul" and "Voices in the Earth",
both of which can be found in his collection HER PILGRIM SOUL AND OTHER
STORIES).

Even aside from the TZ connection, this anthology is a collection of
*great* stories, and is worth buying just for that reason.

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Without trying to cut off discussion or new ideas, I just wanted to add a brief note thanking all those who have contributed to this discussion so far. (And welcome to all the visitors from mabfan's journal!) I've ended up with some new titles for my "to read" and "to watch" lists, and I hope you have as well. This has been cool.

Carry on!

[justcomeinalone.livejournal.com]

Alan Kistler of Monitor Duty here (blame it on Mabfan).

You know, I've been thinking and thinking and for the life of me I can't really come up with an example that I want to point to and say "Right there! There's the one!"

My impulse is to say I,Robot, but I totally understand your reasons for excluding it. For me, it is a wonderful prequel to the book of the same title and its conclusion was a nice foreshadowing of Asimov's "Zenith Law of Robotics." Yet, of course, it is an original story and thus not an adaptation. But for me, it was great and is faithful enough in atmosphere and circumstances to act as an introduction to the Robot Novels.

The first half of "The Bicentennial Man" I thought was pretty faithful, but then they involved the love story and an ending that for me went against Asimov's laws. "Nightfall" was somewhat faithful, but added a couple of characters and went from six suns to three suns.

I want to mention "The Shining" with Steven Webber and "The Stand" with Gary Senise, but again, that's TV. DAMMIT. What about "Prisoner of Zenda"? That was a novel first, wasn't it?

And I will say right now that "Farenheit 451" was NOT great in my opinion and left out some of the coolest visuals from the book, such as the evil dogs with their hyperdermic teeth. Also, as a would-be film guy, I think darker lighting all around would've given the same feeling as the book. The movie was way too brightly lit for me to get an ominous feeling from it.

Does "Interview With the Vampire" count as fantasy rather than sci-fi? I suppose it must, though that to me would be another faithful adaptation, especially considering the changes that were made were made by the author herself.

[justcomeinalone.livejournal.com]

Oh, H.G. Wells "Invisible Man" would be a pick of mine too, though I believe someone already mentioned it.

Andromeda Strain

[admiralthrawn.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure either the book or the movie version rise to quite the level of greatness of LoTR, but they were both quite good.

Oh yeah, and

[cramerica.livejournal.com]

Watership Down for fantasy/whatever the heck it gets classified as.