Adaptation

From the perspective of a screenwriter, what is essential in creating an adapted
script? Is it possible to keep the true essence and theme of a piece of literature
when translated to film? Can literary techniques be directly transformed into
cinematic terms? Should the two even be compared?

–Jeremy Vandiver

Sure. Books and movies should be compared, if only to understand what each
does well.

Using words alone, a good book manages to evoke images and emotions in the
reader that add up to a coherent story. The best writing makes a reader feel
like he’s seeing, hearing and touching what the character experiences, putting
you "in his shoes." Of all the literary tools available to the writer,
the most valuable may be insight. The novelist can choose to tell the reader
what the character is thinking, or fill in extra details, or sketch out relationships,
that have nothing to do with the current scene. In fact, the novel doesn’t
need to have "scenes" at all. Moments and observations can float
freely in space and time, arranged in whatever order best suits the story.

A movie — and by movie I mean what’s actually projected on the big screen
— has basically the same goals as a novel. It wants to transport the viewer
into a different place and time, making him feel like what he’s seeing and
hearing is real. A movie has many advantages over a novel. Not only are there
concrete visuals, but you hear the characters speak and watch them fight.
It’s an exaggeration to say that a picture is worth a thousand words, but it
would be very hard to capture the essence of THE MATRIX’s bullet-time on paper
without having seen if first, or the feeling of a John Williams soundtrack.
But this efficiency comes at a cost. With rare, art-house exceptions, movies
have scenes. The viewer is seeing and
hearing something that is taking place at a specific time and location. Movies
move relentlessly forward at 32-frames
per second, and the viewer cannot choose to stop and think about something,
or flip back a few pages to catch something he missed.

Most importantly, movies lack insight. Aside from an occasional voice-over
or narrator intrusion (done recently, and effectively, by AMELIE and Y TU MAMA
TAMBIEN), a movie can’t communicate anything to the viewer beyond what is seen
and heard. Since a movie can’t flat-out tell you what the hero is thinking,
it has to be very specific with its images and sounds to let you know what’s
going on inside a character’s head.

Now for the terrifying truth: a screenplay is the worst of both worlds. It’s
a work of literature that has to conform to all the limitations of a movie,
yet without any of cinema’s special abilities. That above all else is why screenwriting
is so hard.

In terms of adaptation, the screenwriter has to look for ways to take ideas
that "float" in a novel and tie them down to specific moments, locations
and times. Sometimes this means simply repurposing internal thoughts as dialogue,
but more often it involves a fundamental rethinking of the structure, storyline
and characters to achieve the goal.

I think one reason that many adaptations rely on voice-over is that the filmmakers
never found a way to externalize the essence of the novel they were adapting.
Instead of making a movie that could stand on its own, they created the cinematic
equivalent of a book-on-tape. To me, these movies always "feel" written,
a huge limitation.

This question is going to suck. I have an idea to turn a computer game (I
feel so cheap) into a screenplay. Just as a side-note, it’s more of the atmosphere
of the game that’s appealing, not the quick buck mentality. Obviously I can’t
afford to buy the rights, but where do I lie submitting it to agencies? Would
they even look at it?

–Chris

Your question doesn’t suck. I adapted a computer game into
a movie ("American McGee’s Alice"), and I didn’t feel a wee bit cheap.

But then, it was a damn cool game, and I got paid. So there you have it.

Since you don’t think you can get the rights to the game, ask yourself if
you’re still willing to write a script that can never get made (or even sold).
If the answer is yes, go for it.

Some agents will avoid reading your script, simply because they know they
can never sell it. But some agents will read it as a writing sample, and if
the atmosphere of the game world is as cool as you say, maybe they’ll like
it and see you have potential.
Make sure you identify your source material on the cover page, which would
read:

TITLE

written by Chris Somebody

 

based on the videogame "Underpants Wars"

published by Powerful Software Company

Considering you’re probably broke, and the fact you won’t be able to sell this anyway, there’s
very little danger
Powerful Software Company would bother coming after you. But you’re
morally and karmically better off giving credit where it’s due.

I’ve heard it being said that one of the ways to get producers interested
in your screenplay’s story is to do it the long way and write the book first.
Do you agree, and is it harder to get a book published than a screenplay bought?

–Brian

Wow. Writing a screenplay, and then writing a book based on the screenplay,
seems like a tremendous amount of misdirected work. Yes, some producers do
like to read novels, but the vast majority would prefer a script to a novel
any day of the week. After all, a script is a lot closer to being a movie than
a book is. Plus it’s shorter, and you can throw it across the room without
damaging your walls.

My advice is to pick the format you’d prefer to write, hopefully the one that
best matches your story. If you choose to write a book, make it the best book
possible — don’t go overboard trying to load it up with "this would be
a great movie!" moments. If you choose to write a script, trust that the
quality of your writing is all you’ll need to sell it.

I recently adapted a book called BIG FISH by author Daniel Wallace. Meeting
with him for the first time, I was surprised to see he had never thought of
his book being a movie. The moments I thought were cinematic, he thought were
just good storytelling.

As for your second question, I’m not sure whether being published is easier
or harder than selling a script. My gut instinct is that it’s easier to be
published, simply because there are so many different publishing houses, and
frankly, so many books. But there’s a big difference between being published
and making money.

I recently graduated from college with a film and video degree. The one thing
I can’t get anyone to answer is on adaptation. I have asked people ranging
from well known screenwriters, feature film producers and so on. They always
dance around my question!

I am writing a screenplay based on a true-life story,
but my information is coming from a non-fiction book that tells the story.
Much like THE PERFECT STORM in the way that it is told by a third party writer
of the facual events. What is the process that I need to go through to get
the
rights,
without
putting me in debt for life?

–Scott Adams

The reason people are dancing around the question is because there are so
many variables in each situation. A blanket answer probably would be false
as often as it is true. I can talk you through a very general scenario that
will give you an idea of the issues involved, but an experienced attorney will
ultimately need to get involved.

The first two questions this person would ask are:

To what degree are you basing the project on the book, versus public domain
material? In the case of THE PERFECT STORM, the movie is very clearly
based on Sebastian Junger’s book, relying on his research, characterization
and storytelling structure. The producers paid Junger money – in this case,
quite a lot of money – for the right to adapt his book into a motion picture.
Even though the people and events depicted are non-fiction, it’s Junger’s unique
telling of the story that makes it literary material. Junger controls the copyright and
all subsidiary rights (such as making a movie).

Other producers might make a movie
about the same maritime tragedy without buying the book rights. But the job
would be a lot more difficult. First, they
would have to document all their research – every interview, every article
– to defend themselves against a possible lawsuit by Junger and THE PERFECT
STORM’S producers. These interviews would be more difficult than you think,
because Junger probably
made contracts with the key people involved
in the story, so that they couldn’t cooperate with other writers. Finally,
the rival producers would need to come up with an original storytelling structure
that doesn’t mirror Junger’s.

It sounds difficult, but it’s not an impossible task. An example is OUTBREAK,
which was produced by Arnold Kopelson for Warner Brothers. He and producer
Lynda Obst were both trying to buy the rights to "Crisis in the Hot Zone" an
article about an ebola scare that would eventually become a best-selling novel.
Obst ended up winning the rights, but undaunted, Kopelson developed a fictionalized
version and got it into production first. The "real" version never
ended up being filmed.

Are the characters in your movie based on real people, even if the names or
some details are different? If so, you face problems of defamation, libel and
invasion of privacy, among other complications. This topic is an entire semester
in college, so I won’t try to summarize the details and defenses. But know
that you’ll have to tread carefully. For instance, Kimberly Pierce’s BOYS DON’T
CRY faced legal action from one of the women portrayed in the movie, because
the film placed her at an event she denies witnessing. And 60 Minutes reporter
Mike Wallace was none too thrilled about his depiction in THE INSIDER.

Don’t take this as saying you can never use real-life people in your story.
Just remember that it’s complicated.

After asking yourself these two questions, answer honestly: Are you adapting
events, or are you adapting a book? If the answer is the latter, you need to
option the rights.

Are you including real-life people in your story? If so, you need a plan for
addressing the potential challenges they may bring.

I hope this helps.