Can A Bad Adaptation Be A Good Movie?

Way back in high school I remember a class mate of mine (who's name and appearance I have long since completely forgotten) once told me, and I believe a few others who were also in the room at the same time, about her opinion on a movie she had seen. Apparently, she originally really liked the movie, may have even loved it if I'm remembering correctly. Then she said that after she read the book, she hated the movie because of how different it was from the source material. This statement immediately bothered me, outright confused me. For the life of me, I didn't see why something being different from it's source material should mean that it is automatically bad. It didn't bother her when she didn't know what the books were like, but suddenly, knowing it differed from it's source material meant that it must be bad.

Needless to say I don't agree with this mindset. The point of this post is not to simply shake my fist in the air and proclaim that I believe adaptations are allowed to take liberties. What I would like to do instead is discuss just how common this really is, and how people don't really have as much of a problem with this as many say they do. Let's be real, we have all heard the same thing or similar to my example from a high school girl. Some of us may have even said it ourselves. I'm not going to point out your hypocrisy or try to change your opinion, I just want to talk about how many things we love are actually adaptations that differ slightly or heavily, some of them you may not even know are adaptations in the first place.

Also this is now the point where I tell you the movie she was talking about was one of the Percy Jackson movies. I don't know which one, I never saw any of them or read the books. I waited until now to mention it by name as I'm aware the movies were not well-received, my point would have been made muddy if I used a widely-considered bad movie as my starting point, so I waited until now. For the record, this is how you stretch the truth effectively. I never withheld anything from you, I just waited for the time it would be best to mention. Consider that if you ever run for political positions. It is much better than lying. It beats having the piss takin' outta you, if you get what I mean.

Now to get back on topic. Perhaps you noticed the picture I used above? The picture was taken by myself, and those are in fact all pieces of media with their adaptations above them. I did the traditional book to movie, then video game to manga, comic book to video game, and book to comic book. I thought it would be interesting to do as many fields as I could, and I really do think it's best to do adaptations not as many people are aware of. I could take all day telling you that Disney films are okay and it doesn't matter if they are too accurate or not. That doesn't help my point, as even the person with the hardest stigma against my point tends to let Disney slide by. Perhaps this is because they mostly do fairy tales, but just as a reminder they also did adaptations of full novels, such as Tarzan of the Apes, The Hunchback of Notro Dame, Pinocchio The Tale Of A Puppet, and Bambi: A Life In The Woods. 

Speaking of, if you work at a book store and you have in stock a copy of Bambi: A Life in the Woods, do not put it in the kids section. It's a young adult novel that's very dark and realistic for it's setting. If it has that subtitle, it's the original story and it's not meant for children. I've seen it in that section and it worried me about some innocent child reading it and being horrified. It's also one of my favorite books.

Let's start with the first two in the picture; the novel Nothing Lasts Forever and it's adaptation Die Hard. Nothing Lasts Forever was apparently popular enough when it was published to warrant a film, despite being obscure now. The book itself is also a sequel to the novel The Detective, which also got a movie, that is not connected to Die Hard at all. Die Hard is an action classic, and it's overshadowed the novel so much, that my copy literally tells you on the cover that it's the book Die Hard is based on. The back cover barely talks about the book, most of the positive things are about the film instead. I felt this was perfect to start out with, as this is more common than you think. Hellraiser, The Wizard of Oz, the aforementioned Bambi, many movies get so well-known that many do not realize they are an adaptation. For some, they only learn when they decide to read that fact in the credits, or when they go to a bookstore or library and find a copy like mine that proudly states the fact.

Now, as for the book, it's very similar but has some very notable differences. It is worth a read if you so feel, but I won't shed tears saying the movie is much better. There may be things that make the original book worth reading, but one is vastly superior, and I understand not bothering with the other if you don't care enough. If you feel you only have time in your life for one of them, and you've already watched Die Hard, you don't need to feel like you've lost something. They took some of the better parts of the novel, and ironed out what didn't work. This is something that some may argue is not too accurate of an adaptation, but that I would argue makes for a great adaptation. You have to truly understand your source material to be able to say "This isn't good" or "This is good for the book but it wouldn't work for a movie". We've entered an era where filmmakers try to be more faithful to the source than ever before. It's worked out for them for now, but I'm waiting for the day when film goers start asking for the adaptations to have more differences like they used to, and I'm very positive this will happen.

Now for video game to manga. The Kingdom Hearts games are beloved by fans like myself. The first game has a storyline that is still considered wonderful to this day, and even with later installments getting far too complicated, we still do our best to understand them. The manga takes the basic plot and turns it into a complete farce, and I'm not the first one to say that. I can understand this being a turn-off for many people. Taking a game series that they love so much, and basically making fun of it. Well, personally, the first game is one of my all-time favorite games, and I adore the manga adaptation. There's a very strong "so bad it's good" vibe that I get from it, and I don't think I could have it any other way. Case in point, the one I chose for the picture is the manga for Chain of Memories, which takes itself more seriously and tones down the wacky jokes and atmosphere without getting rid of them. It makes the quality better, and means I do not lose the moments that I loved from the original manga productions. It cuts out more of the plot than the last one, the only Disney world left is Agrabah from Aladdin, meaning it keeps itself self-contained arguably better than the game did.

I can still play the games until I die, and they will remain unique experiences that cannot be replicated. In a way, I think that is what the manga is going for. Doing it's own thing because it knows it would just be an inferior copy if it tried being a regular copy. What this manga series is, is a comedy to the point that it may as well be a parody of the games, and I appreciate and love it for that.

Now for the third. What I love about Sam & Max is that no matter what version you are currently enjoying, it has the same characters in completely different situations. There was an original comic strip series, many video games, and a cartoon aimed towards children. By this point, it is a franchise, and every iteration is a cult-classic. If you like one, you will like the other as well, for similar and different reasons. I think that's something to remember. When you become a franchise, many of your installments are in fact adaptations. They should be held in regard to the other installments, but they are still products that need to be judged on their own for what they are. If you don't know Sam & Max, I have no problem saying you can start anywhere. If you do try, and you like what you got, then I say you may as well keep going even if it seems like a big leap.

And the last was  Lost on a Mountain in Maine and it's very recent comic book adaptation Lost Trail. I read the original book in middle school, and a few years ago I came across the comic I did not know existed at the time. I purchased the comic, reread the book, and then read the comic. I think both are quite good, and are on equal playing field with each other. If you don't know the story, it's the real-life story of Donn Fendler, who as a boy became lost from his family on Mount Katahdin. In Maine it is considered a classic that we read in schools, so I'll forgive if you have never heard the story. For us it's a personal thing, Maine is very big on fellow Mainers. The book was written by someone who simply wrote down what Donn told him, and the comic came decades later, with Fendler still having a part in the process, although admittedly I don't know how much. The book is a great read because you are just reading a child retell a harrowing experience that had happened recently. The comic is a great read because Fendler himself admitted that he remembered more about the event when age let it stew in the back of his mind.

I don't just recommend either, I recommend both. I think they compliment each other. They are great alone, but if you read the original first and immediately follow it up with the comic, you have a winning combination.

So all in all, I have talked about adaptations that overshadow the original, adaptations that decide to just do their own thing and damn the consequences, the power of franchising, and an adaptation that fills in some of the blanks the original couldn't.

All of them, to me, are just as valid.

Maybe it is nice to know exactly what you are getting into. Honestly, I could sit here and argue the fact that sometimes a good adaptation leads to a bad product. All I ask for in an adaptation is one thing, and I think it is best we all consider following this.

The only thing I ask from an adaptation, is that it is good. I don't care if it's faithful, I don't care if it's ridiculous, I don't care if it has almost nothing in common with the original. I just want a product that I end up enjoying. I think that is all I need to ask.

So, yeah. A good movie can come out of a bad adaptation. Or a good manga, or video game, book, or comic book. It's happened before, and it will happen again. Whether it's a slight variation or a completely different take. Anything enjoyable can be taken as it's own product.