- Entertainment and Media
Page to Screen Page 2
This is my second page in providing links to my Page to Screen adaptations descending in alphabetical order. After creating several links already in one long page, I figured sequential pages would allow navigation to be much easier for a reader.
If you're just coming to this page out of nowhere, know that Page to Screen discusses the adaptation of films that are originally based on books or short stories. I give a quick snippet into what each page discusses for every link.
I Am Legend (2007)
In 1954, Richard Matheson released a cornerstone in numerous types of horror called I Am Legend. Focusing on an immune survivor of a plague that turned many into undead vampires, it focuses on the psychological terror and physical taxation the character, Robert Neville faces, as well as the surprising moral decisions he's forced to make. While the film did initially take some liberties, it's the originally released ending that causes the meaning of the story to be completely different, making it rather interesting to compare and contrast.
Isaac Asimov is known for his science fiction worlds and exploring the future possibilities of artificial intelligence. A large collection of his short stories were piled together into what is called I, Robot. The film however creates its own story, with Asimov's rules and some character names and considerably more action and a more negative potential endgame. Nevertheless, the changes are interesting even if the movie doesn't stand up as well as the book has.
One of Steven Spielberg's massive and profitable franchises, Jurassic Park is an undeniable hit. How does it match up as an adaptation though? While Spielberg has had some experience with adapting other works during his career, he continues his trend of taking the idea of something, a handful of moments, and recreating a story around it.
Another one of the so-called few proper adaptations of its original source, The Martian brings great visual to a setting previously only imagined with, with a cast that performs exceedingly well of their created characters. Not to mention, either work is great on its own, fit for entertainment.
The Maze Runner
After having been lured to the series via mysterious and intriguing trailers, I quite enjoyed The Maze Runner film, so much in fact that I decided to listen to the audio book. Unfortunately for a variety of reasons, I was incredibly dissapointed, effectively cancelilng my desire to read the rest of the series before more cinematic adaptations were released. Nevertheless, the film is quite possibly one of the best and more successful adaptations I've experienced by doing very little to change the story.
One of Stephen King's numerous book to movie adaptation, I'd like to think this is definitely one of the better ones. The adaptation is largely a true one, although some of the focus is different as well as a drastically different, and yet controversial, ending.
No Country for Old Men
Never before have I been so frustrated with a book only to be so pleased with its adaptation. Granted it's my own experience, but the Coen brothers really drew out the best potential that could be found in Cormac McCarthy's novel.
A signature Nolan film with atmosphere, ambiance, actors, and twists, this adaptation is a bit looser than it is transcribing the page to screen, but the adaptation is a wonderful example of how to turn a story on the page to one approachable to film without losing much of the elements established in the original story.
The Princess Bride
William Goldman's highly entertaining work was originally written in 1973 and is the popular go-to story about lost and enduring love with nefarious political plots, unforgettable characters such as a rhyming giant and drunk fencing Spaniard, countless quotable lines, and more. The cinematic adaptation in 1987 was also written by William Goldman, ensuring most of the word was preserved and well presented, although many could argue that it's the cast that truly brings this film to life.
An adaptation of much controversy based on Stephen King's horror novel, Stanley Kubrick's conversion to the movie screen took several liberal liberties to the point it may be considered one of the worst adaptations of all time, or perhaps an entirely different beast altogether compared to its source material.
Originally a novel written by Neil Gaimen in 1999, this fantasy-action romp is largely agreed to not only do the book justice, but also improvesupon it, making it one of the few exceptions that come across as better than its source material. It follows a young man pursuing a fallen star in order to prove himself to the love of his life, only to come into a land filled with magic and eccentric characters. It stars Michelle Pfeiffer, Claire Danes, Ricky Gervais, Peter O'Toole, Robert De Niro, Henry Cavill, and Ian McKellen, among many others.
The Sum of All Fears
While not necessarily my favorite genre, I was urged to read a Tom Clancy novel, which I did and quite enjoy despite its massive detail and depth of things I'm barely familiar with. The plot was huge and intricate. The adaptation is extremely watered down in numerous ways, however for the big screen, it's actually good and presents itself very well to a new audience.
Created around the same time as its source material written by Blake Crouch, it centers on one FBI agent investigating a strange town full of secrets and twists. After discovering the secret, he has to decide to keep it or to reveal it, both which are heavy choices with their consequences. M. Night Shyamalan produces its television show adaptation.
Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory
The first adaptation of Roald Dahl's children's book, this was was actually shunned by the author despite being a major cult classic. Gene Wilder's performance as Willy Wonka is both iconic and unforgettable. The story would later be remade many years later by Tim Burton with Johnny Depp replacing Wilder as the chocolatier.