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

Popular posts from this blog

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 ...

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

The Legacy of Technicolor

This blog entry is intended for the film buffs, film historians, and cinematographers in my audience. I'd like to revisit Technicolor , or more specifically the Technicolor film process—while I'll start with a quick historical recap, I really want to talk about the visual legacy and inspiration that it has left us with and how even while rarely in actual use today, Technicolor is still very much alive, in spirit if not in fact. All of you will of course will be familiar at least to some extent with the Imbibition (or sometimes referred to as Dye Transfer ) Technicolor Process which was used on hundreds of films pretty much non-stop from the mid-1930s until the mid-70s. You'll probably also recall that the Technicolor process can be divided into three distinct "periods." The initial period, from the early 1930s until about 1953 or so, involved using a specially designed camera containing three separate film emulsions all layered and synchronized to...