Film Adaptations: Are Books Under Threat?

With many of the recent blockbusters originating as books, regular writer Emma Pidsley asks if films are becoming substitutes for reading. Does film adaptation help the reception of novels or pale them into insignificance?

With Meg Rosoff’s novel How We Live Now recently made into a film, and the fantastic novel The Book Thief due for release later this month, books are constantly being turned into films, and hence perhaps threatened by the ever-increasing amount of blockbusters. While I was watching the trailer of The Book Thief, I was a bit sceptical about how it will translate into film. Anyone who has read this (and if not then I would really recommend it!) will know that it is narrated by death, who plays a very symbolic and important role in the story. Understandably, it was decided not to include this narrative device in the film, probably because it wouldn’t work in quite the same way and would be in danger of becoming distasteful. Touches like this that work so well on paper can never be fully transferred to the screen.

When a book is transferred to film the characters and places are immediately frozen in a specific idea of how they should be. For me, Keira Knightley will always be Elizabeth Bennet. When I later saw the BBC version it just felt strangely wrong. As much as I adore the film, the problem is that I won’t be able to read the book now without thinking of the film, and this is probably a similar case for everyone else who’s seen it. Books work so well precisely because people can read the same thing and each imagine a completely different world. In a way, when reading a book you make it your own story. People may watch Pride and Prejudice, or The Great Gatsby, and decide that they need not read the novels.

On the other hand, the popularity of some films definitely improves the popularity of the book they are based on. For example I had never heard of The Hunger Games series before the first film came out, and now all my friends are imploring me to read the books, there is a strong desire to find out what happens next before the films come out. One of the interesting things about watching an adaptation is being able to compare it to the novel.

The key thing that makes the book sometimes more rewarding than its film version is the subtlety found between the pages. Luhrmann’s Great Gatsby is an amazing artistic spectacle but some viewers I know would prefer a more sophisticated, less brash adaptation of Fitzgerald’s novel. I think that books will more often than not trump their adaptations, which are after all just a reader’s interpretation.

Emma Pidsley, Books Team

Screen Talks is Back!

This Autumn sees a new season of Screen Talks, a series of unique screenings in partnership with Exeter Picturehouse, each with a brief introduction by a member of faculty.

The first screening: Upstream Color (2013)
Image credit: Paste

The full schedule has now been confirmed as follows:

• Mon 7th October, Upstream Color (Shane Carruth, 2013) introduced by Dr Matt Hayler
• Mon 21st October, A Dangerous Method (David Cronenberg, 2011) introduced by Dr Jana Funke
• Mon 4th November, Plein Soleil (Rene Clement, 1960)
• Mon 18th November, Oliver Twist (David Lean, 1948) introduced by Prof John Plunkett
• Mon 2nd December, Rust and Bone (Jacques Audiard, 2012) introduced by Ryan Sweet
• Mon 16th December, Blue is the Warmest Colour (Abdellatif Kechiche, 2013) introduced by Dr Will Higbee

For more info, click here to follow Screen Talks on Twitter, or find them on Facebook.

Review: Olympus Has Fallen

Emma Sudderick reviews explosive disaster flick Olympus Has Fallen, which gains points simply for having Morgan Freeman in it. But is a starring role from the man who played God enough to buoy the plot?

THINK Die Hard with dialogue and you have the latest action-thriller Olympus Has Fallen. Yet despite having a cast which includes renowned actors like Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart and Morgan Freeman, the film is perhaps more commendable for its outstanding use of CGI than for its narrative ingenuity.

Image credit: Collider

The story follows Mike Banning (Gerard Butler), a former guard and companion of the President, as he tries to rescue the President and his son after a Korean terrorist’s assault on the White House.

Though the plot is somewhat lacking in complexity, it seems the real emphasis of Antoine Fuqua’s action-thriller is on the astonishing special effects, which are both horrifying and captivating in an instance. That is not to say the story-line is tedious, but rather trivial in comparison to the visual effects.

This said, the plot is ominous in its relation to current affairs regarding disputes between North and South Korea. Indeed, Butler was reportedly spooked by the similarities between the production, which completed filming in 2012, and the currently unfolding situation regarding nuclear missiles in North Korea.

Image credit: Digital Trends

However, there is just a hint of paranoia in the unlikely plot. Whilst the events of 9/11 have proven terrorist attacks are a very real threat, Olympus Has Fallen takes radical activism to its extreme and has the potential to be scare-mongering in its effect.

Nevertheless, the film depicts heroism and patriotism in an exciting, if not familiar, manner and it is impossible to claim that Olympus Has Fallen is lacklustre and uneventful.

Complete with helicopter crashes, excessive fire-arms, collapse of the Washington Monument and the total destruction of the White House, the visual treat and noble performances by the cast ensure a thrilling viewing experience which is well worth the cost of a cinema ticket.

3/5

Let us know your impressions of Olympus Has Fallen on Facebook, Twitter or by commenting below.

Cinema unchained: should violent films be censored?

William Cafferky explains why he believes that the censorship of violent films is not the solution.

In the wake of his new release, Django Unchained, director Quentin Tarantino hit the headlines after refusing to respond to a question from Channel 4 news anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy regarding the effect of violent movies on the human psyche. Having been to the opening night of the film, it’s not hard to see why it has raised a few eyebrows. Its depiction of the brutality shown towards slaves, and the subsequent backlash certainly accounts for the film’s certificate – 18. However, it is equally obvious to see why the question was met with such cold distain by Tarantino. He’s frequently been quizzed on the issue before, especially surrounding the slash-fest classics that are the Kill Bill films. He highlights a separation between cinema and the real world. We go to the pictures, in many cases, to escape reality, to allow ourselves to be immersed in unfamiliar worlds, characters and cultures. It is almost impossible to ascertain the affect this experience is going to have; it’s too subjective and case-specific.

All photo credits to Gideon Tsang.

Furthermore, if a film is found to have influenced a violent act, it is almost impossible to propose a sensible solution. In the short-run, you could ban the film, but from then we begin to blur the lines of free-speech. Especially in the case of Django Unchained which, whilst considerably brutal at times, is not the most violent film I’ve seen, by some way. If we were to ban Django, there would be little argument against banning all films either more violent, or equally so. And why should we stop there? Why not censor music whose tone is angry or even violent in nature, or art work, which portrays acts of violence or war? Books too, arguably the most influential art form to date, shouldn’t we shield people’s eyes from the ‘horrors’ of potentially dangerous opinion? Now clearly I exaggerate, but there’s no denying that the censorship of film is a slippery slope. Equally the aim is somewhat futile. By attempting to eradicate seemingly unprovoked acts of violence we are essentially attempting to avoid something which has been at the heart of human behaviour and society for some time. Throughout history we have seen people act in an apparently unpredictable and unprovoked way.

It has seemingly always been the desire of people, and notably news corporations, to point the finger. It seems this week’s victim has been the film industry. Tarantino’s film was released in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in America – a clear example of a senseless act of violence without clear reason or explanation. Unsurprisingly, the killings left people horrified and scared. The fear ultimately arises because we can’t comprehend why this would ever happen. Whilst no one has gone so far as to point to cinema as the key influence, Krishnan Guru-Murthy’s question highlights society’s need to explain the unexplainable. If you find the cause of a problem, then you can go about fixing it; but in truth there is no single cause. Whilst loose gun control laws and the alleged poor quality of mental healthcare in the US may increase the frequency of events like Sandy Hook, to eradicate them entirely is impossible. Art may shock, offend, scare or even corrupt, but that is the price we pay as in return it is equally capable of delighting, inspiring and fulfilling us to be better people. Cinema is a beautiful and powerful art form, one which we would be foolish to sacrifice in an attempt to prevent unpredictable and anomalous human behaviour.

Campus cinema: A Freshers Guide

If you’re new to Exeter and you love film you are, quite frankly, in for a treat. We will be slaving away on the Screen section ofExeposé for the pleasure of our movie mad readers each and every week. There is also the fascinating Bill Douglas Centre for the history of cinema and popular culture, which you can find in the Old Library building, and crucially there is the indispensable Campus Cinema.

The Campus Cinema usually hosts screenings every Tuesday and Sunday in Devonshire House. Newcomers to Exeter will soon learn the whereabouts of this building because it is linked to the landmark that is the new Forum complex, and perhaps even more memorably, it is the home of The Ram Bar. Tickets can either be pre-booked at the Student Guild Info desk or purchased on the door at the M&D Room.

Exeter’s Campus Cinema is great for loads of reasons but chief among them are variety and affordability. Tickets are a mere £1.80 for members and £3.60 for non-members. The programme of films available is always a refreshing mixture of recent mainstream releases, independent projects and classics.

Personally I find Campus Cinema to be a life saver when it comes to catching films you’ve annoyingly missed, not that long after their initial release. It’s also an intimate big screen experience, with a friendly touch, that is refreshing compared to the mass mechanics of the multiplex.

Throughout the year Campus Cinema also put on quizzes, poster sales and special screenings in collaboration with other societies.

Students old and new can check out the Campus Cinema website, and full term programme, here. But here are a few of our highlights from the first few weeks.

Welcome Week– The year kicks off with not one, not two, not three but four fabulous events for film loving freshers. There’s Seth MacFarlane’s hilarious and slightly controversial Ted on Tuesday, followed by a quiz on Wednesday. Earth’s mightiest heroes assemble on Friday and then Wes Anderson’s star studded and quirky Moonrise Kingdom draws the week to a close on Sunday.