is quite common when it comes to film adaptations are often done without neglecting the most obvious reference: the literary text. Is understandable if we consider that the novel or story has been the starting point for this or that project is unnecessary, from a personal standpoint, always look askance at the written material as a stick to measure qualitatively the result final screen.
Unnecessary, yes. For search for possible virtues make a great literary work on a film is demanding, a posteriori, the director that mimics the writer and is, therefore, try to find in the movie series of resources that are foreign because they are exclusively literature in both language. The film, therefore, has, while also language, its own resources, as the wit, sensitivity, the ability of the filmmaker to use, make the existence of great films regardless of whether they have taken as a starting point the literary world or not.
Perhaps wary too, but I do not entirely trust those who talk about the film, product adaptation, always making reference to the novel or story. And trust me, for always, or almost, I leave the impression of wanting to discuss the text on the pretext of the movie, as if it were required to serve the window. Typical: the movie is bad because the novel is very good. Bah! The movie is bad because bad is your manager or is a masterpiece because he has made known to use their resources. Owes nothing to the literary work, except the premise-premise and subject to appropriation process - which allows for the story presented in images. Point.
On one occasion a colleague quite rightly said that a smart filmmaker ignores - or at least should, in the shadow of the original author to bring the material to their own land, their own universe. Thus, a Thomas Mann became a Visconti (Death in Venice , Italy, 1971) although in this case I was with Death in Venice the first and not the second, because the land of Visconti, ie his style, sometimes I was a little excessive given to aestheticism and irritating. My problem was with Visconti as a writer, then, and not so much the greater or lesser fidelity to the novel itself Mann.
But why all the cantinfleo, you ask. What happens is that I thought writing about The road (EU, 2009), the film that made John Hillcoat from Cormac McCarthy's novel, and I have found such thoughts that appeal to the superiority of the novel as to discredit the film. In my case, both the novel and the film I found products full of successes, successes that in each case are due to the enormous capacity of both writers (literary and cinematic) to use the resources that each language provides. Possibly, in the case of Hillcoat should be noted the certain proclivity toward sobremusicalización (obviously, signed by Nick Cave that enamored), but otherwise there is otherwise in place.
thought delve into further detail about the movie, but you are not to know ... within hours I'm going on vacation to San Francisco, California, jejeje. So I do not have much time, then we are better - or we read.
(Joseph Abril)
