Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Adaptation


About a month or so ago I did an interview which I discussed how I went about adapting William Gillette's play Sherlock Holmes into a graphic novel.

Many of his questions made me stop and think about the whole approach. Especially since now I am hoping to embark on a new adaptation. This time with The Loved One. In the case of Sherlock Holmes, so many people have their own opinions and ideas how the character should look and be approached.

Is it really THAT important to please the reader and remain true to the original character and the original story?

Is a modern retelling of a classic tale blasphemy?

Yes and no. Actually, the last question I probably would have answered in a resounding "YES!! about a couple years ago. But the Benedict Cumberbatch Sherlock series has made me rethink my outlook on the whole idea of a modern retelling.

But in the case of any adaptation of classic literature, I feel the only way a writer or artist will have a successful adaptation is if they have a love or appreciation for the character and story they are adapting.

To put it simply, if you do not appreciate Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, then you really should not be doing an adaptation of it. Your lack of enthusiasm will show in the finished project.

And on a personal note, no more fetishist adaptations of Alice in Wonderland. Please?? It's somewhat creepy.

It also helps to know the character well. Especially in the case of a modern retelling. A good example of this is my buddy Andy Fish's Dracula series. What helps is series to be successful is his appreciation for not only the original tale but also the classic Dracula movies as well as movies from the 1930's, adventure serials and film noir. He has taken all those elements and put them together in his own adaptation. The result is probably the most dynamic and truly frightening Dracula to date while still remaining true to the original story itself.

This is also the reason why people like the series Sherlock. Even though the production team has made an effort to make it a more modern and action-packed version of Sherlock Holmes, their understanding of the character and keeping that spirit intact is what has made the series a success. They have also kept that element of mystery and suspense intact as well.

And made people wait impatiently for it to return.

That's something that the recent Robert Downey Jr. movie has lacked. There's too much excitement and no mystery.

But just remember you can only do so much as far as getting it spot on. Even in the case of my own Sherlock Holmes adaptation while some people thought it was "The best Holmesian graphic novel I've come across in a long time" there were a few that thought "The art looks freakish, all right, and not in a good way".

So you're not going to please everyone with your approach. But whatever approach you wish to take as long as you remain true to the character you can't lose...

...or at least you run less of a risk to lose.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Some great thoughts here-- I'm with you on the enthusiasm angle, but that doesn't account for Peter Jackson's KING KONG debacle.

Bret M. Herholz said...

This is very true!! I hadn't considered it. But for me I always consider remakes to be an entirely different beast than an adaptation.

Movies like Peter Jackson's King Kong or even to a much lesser extent Russell Brand in Arthur is a remake of a film. Whereas either Hammer Film or Kenneth Branagh's Frankenstein I consider adaptations since they were based on a novel.

I would even go as far to call Charlie and the Chocolate Factory an adaptation since both the Gene Wilder and Johnny Depp movies were based on a novel.

You realize this is where my lack of knowledge on King Kong comes in and if it was actually based on a novel this throws this whole theory of mine out the window ;-)

While I am not opposed to an adaptation I am never really a fan of a remake of an earlier film. If you got it right the first time, why remake it?

Evelyn Stice said...

Why remake it? To introduce it to a new group who wouldn't otherwise have seen it in any form.