This is one of my all-time favorite movies.  It is one of the few favorite films that I list off of the top of my head when asked.  Most people assume that it is based on a book, and that the book is what the grandfather reads in the film.  A little bit of research and you’ll find that those people are only half right.  It is based on a book of the same name, but the author, S. Morgenstern, doesn’t really exist.  William Goldman wrote the book, which was published in 1973.

The book is formatted in much the same way as the film.  It starts in a fictional reality that you find yourself almost believing, and gets into the history of S. Morgenstern’s Princess Bride, and how the book is actually much much larger than one remembers, because the only parts that have been read are “the good parts” which explains how the grandfather in the film is able to complete the book reading in what seems to be one day.

This is one case where the book and the film are on the same level.  Neither is better than the other.  I can say that, without a doubt, the book did not have anything that was truly necessary for the film that was missing.  The script for the film was written by the author of the book at the same time that he wrote the book.  It only took about fourteen years for the film to finally be produced.

The film captures the essence of the book, and seems to act as the good parts of the book, omitting things that would have been either impossible or expensive to film.  Instead, it is a focused storyline that moves through the storyline, acting as a great storytelling movie that takes us on an adventure that is quite unique.  Taking us on an adventure through a story within a story, and managing to captivate us with both.

The book does have a lot of things that the movie doesn’t, such as more in-depth back stories for all of the characters.  While it was interesting to read about the things the movie shows us in pieces, none of it was really all that necessary.  The movie does a good job of giving each of the characters pretty good histories in very unique ways.  The book also has some very unusual sequences about the politics of the countries in the story, that are very unnecessary to it all.

Though one thing the book has that I found very interesting, though, was a new chapter added to the book for one of the anniversary editions.  The first chapter of the sequel to The Princess Bride.  Called Buttercup’s Baby, it details what happened immediately after the four heroes left on horseback.  Where did they go?  What happened next?  Well, it details all of that, leading to a cliffhanger ending, and I really want to know what happens next.

The simple fact that the author of the book is the same person that wrote the screenplay means that he made all of the decisions on the changes from book to screen.  It also shows that changes from book to screen are both necessary and perfectly fine, when either the story is streamlined or enhanced by a performance of the material.  It shows that a movie doesn’t ever have to be a word for word translation to still work.  If an author of a book, and its’ screenplay, can make changes to the story, then it should be possible with any book, when translated to the screen.

The same situation happened with Louis Sachar’s Holes.  There were some significant changes there, too, including the weight of the main character, Stanley Yelnats, being different from book to screen.

Anyway, I’ll continue to explore this concept in future editions, comparing book to screen, with the film either matching the book or beating it.

Related Posts

• November 2, 2008 -- The Book Isn’t Always Better – Part 1: Big Fish

It could be that the filmmaker had a better vision for the story. It could be that the filmmaker is simply a better storyteller. It could be that the book just lends itself to also be great on film.

When I do my comparative analysis, I’m going to let you know whether I’ve read the book that the film is based on, and whether I read it before or after seeing the film, as all of these things have an effect on the results.

Some of the books/movies I plan on covering include Big Fish, The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Shawshank Redemption, The Princess Bride, The Neverending Story and perhaps a few others.

We’ll start with the lesser known of the adaptations.

Big Fish

I saw this movie the day it was released in 2003. Needless to say, I totally loved it. It’s a great film with so many wonderful sets and characters that my imagination was very entertained. I mean, the movie has it all. From scary moments, to adventure, to love, to sacrifice, to mystery and hi-jinks. I could go on.

This is a movie that made me want to spend more time in the world that I discovered through the lens of Tim Burton.

I had heard that it was based on the book by Daniel Wallace, so I soon ordered it, and plunged myself into that world on the page. I found that there were many things that were different, which is not uncommon and could be expected. However, there was one major plot point that the movie had right, but the book had horrible wrong.

In the film, Edward Bloom is a fun-loving and dynamic character. He is completely selfless and wants what is best for everyone. Even when winning the girl of his dreams, he quips “she doesn’t belong to anyone” to her then-fiance. He helps a giant find a future in a circus, and he helps a small town to be revitalized. The character is also so very madly in love with his wife, that when temptation comes along, he turns it down.

That’s what the book gets wrong. In the book, Edward Bloom goes way out of character and has an affair. Sure, you could argue that makes him more human, with real flaws, but that’s not the point of the story. The point is that Edward Bloom has larger-than-life stories that make him a unique sort of superhero. The book, in one chapter, cheapens the character from someone that is infinitely more likable, making him into just another guy that happens to tell great stories.

A character like Edward Bloom, that tried so hard to win the heart of the girl of his dreams would not, ever, throw his love for her out for a night with another woman. He’s just not that guy.

This is one case where, when I finished reading the book, I went back and watched the movie again. I wanted my old perception of Edward Bloom back. I was able to separate the world of the book from the world of the film, thankfully, and Edward Bloom is once again the man he once was.

Thank you, Tim Burton and writer John August, for recognizing this and saving the movie from falling short of greatness. And thank you Danny Elfman for the amazingly varied and tour-de-force of a musical score that accentuates the story so well. The music written for this film is majestic and uplifting, and I consider it to be Danny Elfman’s magnum opus.

This is a case where the movie is definitely better than the book.

I’m not sure what I’ll write about next, but I will continue this series with another title to itself.

Related Posts

• July 19, 2004 -- The Iron Giant and Big Fish.
• December 31, 2004 -- The Best of 2004
• March 23, 2004 -- Some of the best DVDs of 2004
• July 1, 2009 -- My Most Anticipated Movies of July 2009: Ice Age 3, Harry Potter 6, G-Force
• April 5, 2005 -- Star Wars

J.R.R. Tolkien was a professor of Language, who didn’t take a real place and make a false place or a parallel dimension or any such thing.

Tolkien, in The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, and The Lord of the Rings created a WHOLE WORLD, with Histories, and races, and wars, and all sorts of incredible characters and they even had their own languages! Languages that fit logically with the characters. The Black Speech of Mordor is very harsh, while the Elvish tongues of Sindarin, etc. are very beautiful. Tolkien’s novels were released 50 years ago this year for the first time. While the Silmarillion was started in the trenches of World War I, I believe in 1917, it wasn’t finished or published until 1976, after Tolkien passed on. The Hobbit was out in the mid-30s. It took Tolkien 15 YEARS to craft THE LORD OF THE RINGS.

Tolkien carefully crafted the entire book to the full. It is something that people of nearly any age, with a brain, can get into and enjoy. If you can’t, I feel sorry for you.

J.K. Rowling, like it or not, needs to tighten up her writing. Remove all of her “said Harry angrily’s,” and “said Harry really angrily’s,” and replace them with simply “said Harry.” Not only will that save ink, but also paper. The Order of the Pheonix has about 20,000 of those words. That is the length of a short story. No wonder they book appears to be so long. It’s not really. It’s just got a lot of extra wording padding it, making it appear longer than it is. The problem isn’t that she USES those explanations for how a character is talking. It’s that she uses them ALL THE TIME.

Also, given that Potter hasn’t yet ended, to compare the entire SEVEN BOOK Harry Potter to the ONE BOOK Lord of the Rings (as intended, although LOTR is actually SIX Books, with an appendix of what happens next as well), is foolish. You do not know what will happen at the end of Book Seven, and the whole series is dependent on that, like it or not. The end of The Lord of the Rings is perfect. You are happy, but sad as well, because you realize the price of freedom and at what price everything they fought for had. You see all the other people that were untouched by the war, that you don’t know if they even care or know anything about the hardship you went to to bring that peace. You want to read it again, to have these adventures and meet these friends, and you can, because the books are so long that you can’t possibly remember every little thing at first. And the films compliment the books wonderfully. They capture the spirit of the story written by J.R.R. Tolkien. You can sit down and watch all three in roughly 12 hours depending on food breaks and what not. Or you can spend a few weeks on the books, and travel with the characters, and you end up investing yourself in at least one of the characters. The one that you see yourself in the most. For me, reading it for the first time years ago, that was Sam. I realized this when I got to “The Choices of Master Samwise” and he had to make the decision to take the Ring and go the rest of the way alone.

Harry Potter hasn’t had any of that as of yet, and I don’t think it’ll end up being more than Voldemort making one last try at returning, and being stopped for the last time, no more than a typical evil wizard story told time and time again. Granted, it should be bigger than this, but that we won’t know for probably 3 years.

http://forums.matrixfans.net/showthread.php?p=378851#post378851

Related Posts

• November 2, 2008 -- The Book Isn’t Always Better – Part 1: Big Fish
• August 29, 2005 -- Song: This Man by Jeremy Camp || Lord of the Rings
• December 31, 2004 -- The Best of 2004
• April 15, 2011 -- The Hobbit – Start of Production Video Blog
• February 23, 2010 -- Is Lego Lord of the Rings possible?