Steven Pressfield: Adaptations 'Less Satisfying than the Book'

Bestselling author Steven Pressfield addressed "the ongoing question of book vs. movie" at Word & Film: "The Godfather, yes. To Kill a Mockingbird, definitely. Maybe a few others. But with these notable exceptions, almost every adaptation of a novel is less satisfying than the book itself. Why? Not because film is an inferior medium. You and I love film. But the form demands truncation, condensation, and simplification--and none of these helps any work of fiction." Pressfield also noted the particular challenges faced by a novel-to-film adapter:

  1. Make it shorter. A lot shorter.
  2. Make it work in a rhythm.
  3. Find the core throughline and cut everything else.
  4. Strip it down to three acts.
  5. Lose all interior prose and poetry.
  6. Cut all long speeches.
  7. Make it work for a single star.

 
"Nothing is better than a great film," Pressfield observed. "But the overflowing chalice of the novel, particularly a full-blooded one, is often more than the shot glass of film can contain. A lot of good booze gets spilled onto the floor. Often short stories (see Philip K. Dick) or even magazine articles make better material for adaptation than full-on novels. The adapter doesn’t need to be loyal. He can tear down and build afresh."

 

Powered by: Xtenit