In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman makes the point that the printed word does not easily transfer to the television screen. That statement made me immediately think of all of the books that have been made into movies, and I can't help but think that he does have a point. Many of the books that have been translated to the movie screen often lose some of their essence that makes them so intriguing. Scenes are often changed or deleted and extra elements such as a romance are added to make the movie more interesting and attractive to viewers. As a result, while the heart of the plot is still there, much of the other essential details are lost, making the movie much more different from the book it claims to be dramatizing. I believe that these book-movies show how hard it is for the original print to make it to the theater screen and essentially prove Postman's point that the printed word was not made for television. So do you guys agree or disagree?
-Sejal Shah
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Yes, many times when a book is made into a movie many scenes are deleted and edited, but we must keep in mind that a movie cannot contain all of the scenes of a book. If the movie is kept exactly like the book, it would become more than the normal two hours long. There are very few people who would be willing to sit through a movie longer than three hours. So, Postman is correct that the printed word was not made for television.
I agree with the point that the printed word does not easily transfer to the television screen. Most of the movies that were originally from books loose lots of scenes primarily to keep the movie on a good length. If the movie was 3 hours or longer it will be extremely boring to sit and watch. These book-movies show how hard it is for the original print to make it to the theater screen, but I think it doesn't matter that much because usually its the small things they leave out. For example in a lot of movies, the book version will have the character wearing white shoes, but in the film version they will be wearing black shoes. In some cases however the film version did a horrible job at the setting of the place as in the movie I Am Legend. In the book the setting is in a small city whereas the film version was set in New York.
-Rishabh Mehta
I agree with the fact that when books are made into movies or television shows most of the time the writers of the movie leave very important parts from the book. On example is the new show "Gossip Girl." I had just finished reading the finish reading the first book when the show came out. The whole plot was diffent and characters described in the book weren't used in the show.The book,in my opinion was way more interesting than the pilot episode of "Gossip Girl" As a reader I was highly disappointed but I remembered that televison companies want ratings and they want people to watch their show.
I do agree that many details are lost in the translation, however, that usually is the point of making the books into movies. In Chapter 10 of Postman's novel, he describes 3 "commandments" of television teaching. One of these is that it can't be too perplexing or the audience will lose interest. The director creates these movies for an audience of non- book readers, so it makes sense that many of the details that non-readers find confusing wouldn't be there.
i agree that when writters make books into movies or t.v. shows, they edit or remove things that happened in the book. Not every little same detail is gonna be just how you read in the book.
It's not every little occurrence can be put into a movie. And if so then how many people are gonna actually sit and watch a movie that long. I know I wouldn't.
Post a Comment