While a certain lack of originality exists nowadays in media transfers, there is much to consider regarding the art of adaptations. Many good stories exist, and many do well when presented to a new audience. However, more often than not, some flounder. So, I’ve compiled a list of things to look out for in good (and bad) adaptations.
DO: Make Changes That Evolve The Characters
Most issues with adaptations stem from changes from the source material, mostly with either plot or characters. However, it’s a benefit to have a large project that allows for some wiggle room to evolve the characters or add fun scenarios that would happen between characters. Elizabeth Zott and Calvin Evans’ relationship in Lessons in Chemistry is a perfect example as they get an entire episode dedicated to them, which adds more moments of them doing mundane things that weren’t in the book. This ultimately nailed how perfect they were before everything went awry.
DON’T: Sacrifice Being Good To Be Accurate
Changes are necessary to make an adaptation good; it is very rare to see a well-made project that is also accurate. Twilight, for example, is strangely very accurate to the original Stephanie Meyer book. However, because the source material wasn’t all that spectacular to begin with, the film comes off as dull (yet still entertaining) as the book was to begin with.
DO: Make Changes That Make Sense
Sometimes, a hated character needs to get what’s coming to them, even if that means death. It can be frustrating if a character who committed evil deeds gets away scratch-free, like what happens at the end of Shirley Jackson’s novel We Have Always Lived in the Castle. The movie, however, takes a different, more violent approach to giving this character their comeuppance, which serves for a much more satisfying viewing experience.
DON’T: Make Big Changes From The Start
With adaptations, you want to hook your audience immediately and give them a sense of familiarity with the source material. In the case of Station Eleven, an HBO miniseries based on the Emily St. John Mandel book, there were major changes in the very first episode. It featured an altered location and implied that two characters, who only interacted once in the book, had a past together. It was enough to separate it as its own show and not a faithful adaptation of a beloved novel.
DO: Involve The Author/Original Creator
The best thing to do when adapting a source is to involve the original authors or creators of the source that’s being adapted. Jon Cho does an excellent job with both in In the Heights and Wicked, because even though they are being adapted from Broadway shows with large fanbases, he’s able to collaborate with Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stephen Schwartz to create end products that honor the original musical while also improving them visually for the screen.
DON’T: Adapt Something Too Ambitious
Sometimes, stories can’t be adapted, especially if they are too complex or too long. Alan Moore’s comics, such as Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, are of strange lengths and full of complex themes and characters, which have been proven hard to convey in a single movie or season of a show. Moore himself is also one to hate on adaptations of his own work (due to financial and legal control, as well as not wanting adaptations made), further emphasizing the importance of working closely with the original creator.
DO: Cast Based On Acting Ability First
How often do we hear about complaints about casting choices for adaptations? The instinctive reaction is to disagree any time a cast doesn’t match whatever we have in our heads. However, oftentimes we are proven wrong, mainly with various superhero castings. From Heath Ledger as the Joker to Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, and even Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man, these performers exceeded any previous expectations and have gone down in history as some of the best superhero performances of all time.
DON’T: Split One Thing Into Multiple Seasons/Movies
One trend among adaptations that has proven unsuccessful time and time again is the need to split one property into several parts. This often fails because there’s slightly too much content to put in one adaptation, but not enough to fit two full-length projects. The worst of this was J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, which was one book split into three movies that were not nearly as well-received as the beloved The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
DO: Find A Good Mix To Please Moviegoers And Fans
As I said before, a good adaptation is achieved via finding the important elements to include while shaving off anything that could be seen as irrelevant by audiences. To Kill a Mockingbird is a movie covering only 50% of the original book by Harper Lee, and yet it doesn’t feel like it’s missing anything, in my opinion. It allows for greater focus on the characters and the weight of the story being told.
DON’T: Put Everything In Just To Be Accurate
Revisiting the issue with runtime, sometimes you end up with one long product for the sake of being incredibly accurate. While aspects were still cut, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (and Chamber of Secrets as well) are two of the more accurate films in the series. However, both run over 2 hours and 30 minutes, making them a chore to get through. Other movies in the series are often around the same length, but due to pacing and the focus on the important and exciting elements of the story, that time goes by much faster, making them more enjoyable to watch.
Be on the lookout for these traits in adaptations!
Want to keep up with HCBU? Make sure to like us on Facebook, follow us on Instagram, check out our Pinterest board, watch us on TikTok, and read our latest Tweets!