Skip to main content

The Most "Filmable" Books


It is well-known that since the earliest days of the motion picture industry most films have been based on novels or short stories. Still true more than ever in recent decades. However, despite this practice, it is also true that many books DO NOT adapt well into films.

As someone who has worked in video production and studied film history and criticism for many years, I can say without question that there is no way to actually "film" a book. The motion picture medium and the written word are two entirely separate creative mechanisms and the best we can ever hope for is a rough translation.

This is not to say that some books are not more adaptable than others though. Below, I have listed some of the most common traits that make a book (or short story) "filmable." 
Let's take a look:

Typically any novels or short stories that employ third person omniscient narration and that spend a lot of time "in the head" of the character (internal emphasis) DON'T WORK.

Rather, what does work is a novel or short story that employs scenes with dialogue as well as a lot of physical description and multiple locations. It is not surprising that detective fiction works quite well (John Huston shot Dashell Hammet's The Maltese Falcon almost right off the book itself—he didn't even worry about a shooting script most of the time).

Basically, the general rule is, books and stories that "show" ,i.e., describe in external terms are far preferable to, works that "tell" (narrator giving you what the character is thinking and focusing only on the internal). 

Cheers

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Film: The Unspoken Contract

I recently went to see a 70mm screening of Spartacus --for two reasons--I’d never seen it shown in a theater--in any film format--and since it was also photographed in 70mm, I couldn’t pass up the chance. The version they showed was in fact a 1991 print--the Robert Harris restoration. At this point, I could tell you that seeing this movie projected filmically vs. digitally made all the difference, made it the best experience I could have had. I would be lying, though. The fact is that I would have had no problem seeing Spartacus in a digital venue--in fact, I only just missed a chance to see a Fathom Events presentation of it at a chain cinema, a month earlier. So seeing Spartacus on film as opposed to off of a hard drive and through a Sony 4K DLP system was more a matter of convenience than choice. I have no problem with digital projection. Mainly because, as most spectators, whether they grew up with film, as I did, or not, would probably agree, digital cinema is perfect--no
Post a Comment
Read more

Blade Runners: The 1982 Version Revisited

I have seen Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner in a theater of some kind either on 70mm, 35mm, or digitally projected twenty times altogether over the past twenty-seven years, starting with its first release in 1982. This is NOT because I am a fanatic about the film, or any film really. In fact it is rare for me to see any movie that many times. I know part of the reason is, as for most viewers, Blade Runner’s uniqueness as a movie on almost every level. But also I feel that for me it is the fact that this film, perhaps like no other, has undergone revisions by its director that impact the picture’s tone and focus and yet leave its original creative core untouched.   While the phenomenon of a popular film, or in the case of Blade Runner also a cult film, finding an afterlife in theaters is not at all unusual, especially in the last twenty years or so when so many films from the recent and distant past have been “restored” and “preserved," what makes Blade Runner unique is t
Post a Comment
Read more

Initial Posting

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen--I am a HAL 9000 Computer....oops--only kidding! I'm Don Berry of Don Berry, LLC, a video and multimedia producer out of Hartford, CT. My goal is to offer a number of postings on the film and video industries, as well as related topics. Cheers
Post a Comment
Read more