Well I believe that when adapting a book into a series, maybe after the first 2 seasons, the makers of the series tend to drastically implement their own ideas and plots into the movie, in order to surprise viewers who've read the book and keep the show interesting. A Classic Example is GOT (Game of Thrones). The Bienoff Brothers, followed the book by George RR Martin, probably for the first 3 or 4 seasons, and then later, started to add their own elements, gradually ending the show in a manner totally different from what RR Martin had in mind. Thought there still would be some elements of the book while adapting it into movie picture, Creative differences were major. The same can be said for Harry potter.
We should understand that reading a book and watching a movie/OTT-Series are two different experiences. The perceiving process is different. While reading, the reader imagines a world and the characters in it as one reads the written words. And in the latter, the viewer is given fixed definitions to images and character, induced and understood by the maker of the movie, and based on one's convictions of universal appeal. Sometimes these images may fall short of the descriptive imagery in the book. Sometimes the spectacle created becomes more effective than the written words. So it varies, from reader to viewer, and from filmmaker to wordsmith.
Super. Thanks for your thoughts Sir 🙏 What works for me is reading a good book, making a journey with the characters, living and empathizing with their world and imagining/thinking. And if the book is very good and has an impact, I do look out for movies/series
made on them(if any). I cannot think it will work other way around- movie first and then read a book. Very few rare cases in my opinion- Baahubali, GOT comes to my mind :)
'Marathon Man' is a great example excellent conversion to movie. 'Bridges of Madison County' is again a treat to read though the movie is an awesome, sincere try to make the best of it.
Awesome. Will look out for these movies. Thanks you Sir 🙏
What Sab sir has detailed is very correct, I feel.
Have one or two comments.
Author of a book and the script writer-director of the movie have different sorts of liberties, advantages and disadvantages at their hands.
A good novel may not always mean it can be made into a good movie.
Sometimes a good novel is made into an even greater movie- for example Koodevide by Padmarajan is based on a Tamil novel by Vasanthi.
Sometimes even a short story will make a great movie.
I had read the english novel Q & A by Vikas Swarup within weeks of its publication in 2005, as I was interested in quizzes. Even before completing the book, I realised that it would make a nice Bollywood ( never ever thought of Hollywood😜) thriller.
With all due respect to all the accolades Slumdog Millionaire has won, I have certain strong opinions.
When made into a movie, the movie makers renamed the hero Ram Mohammed Thomas into Jamal. Why???
They cut off one of the most important & interesting characters Neelima Kumari.
Instead they deliberately added shit and lots of it into the movie, which the movie makers believed would correctly represent India. What a pity!!
To me conversion of Q & A into Slumdog Millionaire was a bad affair.
Well said, Dr Ajith! I'm a great fan of the novel Q&A. The movie is but a very limited adaptation, of course.