Briefly about the article: How often, in anticipation of the adaptation of our favorite novel, we rub our hands in anticipation. We spend hours on the Internet and buy up all the magazines in which there is an article about him. We make plans, trying to imagine and predict how the heroes will look on the screen, or the Great Galactic Security Station, or an ordinary ancient vampire. And when, on the day of the premiere, we go to the cinema to watch a mega-blockbuster filming our favorite science fiction novel ... what happens is what has to happen. We see a movie that features anything but our favorite book. Why does this happen? What are the possible ways to film a single novel? What is the difference between the English Dickens series, Tarkovsky's film and the Hollywood blockbuster?
Adaptation cost
Fantastic film adaptations of today and tomorrow
To conquer Pluto, Mankind went to great expense. The Directed Mutation Program was successfully implemented, adapting the settlers to the terrible conditions of the ninth planet. After going through a series of hormonal and genetic reforms, the settlers managed to adapt successfully.
Yes, this is a breakthrough! Victory for Humanity!
But there is one catch ...
You understand ... Those who conquered Pluto and populated it ... were no longer Humanity. This is how it came out ... adaptation.
From a conversation at the Galactic History Conference, 2450.
How often, in anticipation of the adaptation of our favorite novel, we rub our hands in anticipation. We spend hours on the Internet and buy up all the magazines in which there is an article about it... We make plans, trying to imagine and predict how the heroes will look on the screen, or the Great Galactic Security Station, or an ordinary ancient vampire. And when, on the day of the premiere, we go to the cinema to watch a mega-blockbuster filming our favorite science fiction novel ... what happens is what is supposed to happen. We see a movie that features anything but our favorite book.
Why does this happen? What are the possible ways to film a single novel? What is the difference between the English Dickens series, Tarkovsky's film and the Hollywood blockbuster? What is the cost of adaptation - we'll talk about that today.
The basis of opposition
There are two spectator positions in the perception of the adaptation.
"The adaptation must match the original!" -some say, angrily defending the level of a literary source.
“She owes nothing to anyone! A screen adaptation cannot be a copy of a book, and it's good if it is original, ” - others say.
Tellingly, very often, speaking about one, someone complains: "Fuuu, how they mutilated the book!", and the other shrugs: "Great film turned out, why you cling to little things!"... And this can be both because in the first case the original source is dear to the person, and because the second film is really more successfully shot. So should the film adaptation correspond to the original source or not? ..
| Film comics |
Separate types of film adaptations include movie comics. The phenomenal success of "Superman", repeated many years later by "Batman", and the current "new wave" of comics, literally sweeping Hollywood - all this is before our eyes. For the most part, the Russian viewer is not familiar with the culture of the comics, and it is difficult for us to judge how successful the film adaptation is. However, this does not interfere with evaluating the quality level of the films themselves. Movie comics have a funny twist: while they are mostly great adaptations, almost all of them are weak films. To convey the atmosphere, to fill the viewer with “tasty” details, ideas accumulated by more than half a century of comics development history - this is the advantage of a comic strip, which otherwise performs a purely entertainment function and does not carry any additional semantic load. However, there are exceptions to any rule. For example, a painting by Tim Burton "Batman Returns" so refined in the field of style, characters and atmosphere that it comes close to the title of "just a good film." |
| Our breakthrough |
Naturally, speaking about the film adaptations of science fiction, we could not ignore the recent premiere of the first national science fiction blockbuster Night Watch, based on the novel of the same name by Sergei Lukyanenko. The first film of the expected film series opens up fascinating prospects for the domestic filmmaker. It turns out that we can shoot “like in Hollywood”. By the way, "Night Watch" in a short time overtook all Hollywood films in grossing in the Russian box office. For us, science fiction fans, this is a good sign - no matter how one of us feels about the film, it is important that it appeared, and that the titanic work of its creators led to such a box office success. This means that science fiction in our country has been given the green light, and that new Russian science fiction films should be expected in the coming years - hopefully, good and different ones! |
What is a film adaptation?
The encyclopedic dictionary formulates the answer quite clearly:
That is, the main thing in film adaptation is to convey what was in the original source, using the cinematic language, cinematographic means (which differ significantly from literary ones). And therefore, it is natural that the viewer will evaluate any screen version primarily by how much it has not reached the level of the original source or surpassed it (this also happens).
After all, why are books being filmed at all? To transfer a well-known, popular and beloved work to a new format. A good film adaptation gives the viewer the opportunity to live once again, to feel what delighted and touched him in the book. She “visualizes” what he could only imagine before. But if, perhaps, everyone agrees with this idea, then in applying it to a single film adaptation, the same dispute will arise: is it good or bad.
"Lord of the Rings" - an excellent film adaptation or a pop-pathetic blockbuster?
"Johnny the mnemonic" Is it low-budget cyberpunk thrash or Gibson's original storyline full of visuals?
Types of film adaptation
There are, in fact, only three approaches to film adaptation, and each follows its own inner goal.
Direct film adaptation (sometimes literal adaptation)
Such a film adaptation should repeat the book, giving the viewer the opportunity once again, only this time in a cinema format, to get in touch with the source. An example is "Harry Potter" Chris Columbus (1 and 2 films). Literal adaptations are many European series, filmed according to the classics (numerous adaptations of Dickens, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, etc.), in which the book is scrupulously transmitted, series after series, in all its glory, sometimes quite literally, before all the dialogues and offscreen texts. " dog's heart”Is, perhaps, the best strict screen version of science fiction in Soviet cinema.
This approach recreates the atmosphere of the original source, brings the book to the screen. Films of this kind are almost always solid films that are a pleasure to watch. But very rarely, with this approach, you can create a masterpiece. Film by Leonid Bondarchuk "War and Peace" is one example where a live adaptation turns out to be more than a neat, cozy and unassuming transposition of a famous text on a tap.
In foreign fiction, perhaps the closest thing to this level came "Endless story" Wolfgang Petersen, now a classic of fantastic and fantastic cinema. From the modern - another direct film adaptation, a very recent film by Alfonso Cuaron "Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban", in which the director successfully combined the following of the plot with many visual and directorial findings.
Based on the
The main task of such films is to show a familiar work in a new perspective. Often this form is used when the book physically cannot be literally transferred to the movie screen: due to a discrepancy in volumes, for example, or when the action in the book is closed to the hero's inner experiences, which are difficult to show without transformation into dialogues and events. The adaptation of this type does not strictly correspond to the original source, but conveys the main thing and adds something new. The overwhelming majority of such adaptations are in modern cinema and, perhaps, in the history of cinema in general.
An example is "Peter Pan" Pi Jay Hogan (in which J. Barry's fairy tale was modernized and found a new context, becoming interesting to today's children and adolescents) and most Soviet film adaptations of children's books: from "Mary Poppins, goodbye!"before "Little Red Riding Hood", which were often a worthy translation of the book into film language.
Many foreign films show us successful work in this direction - from the adaptations of Philip Dick ( "Blade Runner"and "Special opinion") to Disney Treasure Planets, which favorably represents the old adventure plot in a new setting.
But as the other side of the same coin, one can point to such not very successful works as to a very uneven Johnny Mnemonic, terrible "The Witcher", as well as fresh but indistinct "King Arthur".
General film adaptation
With this approach, the goal is not to convey the book as accurately as possible, but to create a new, original work on its material, which, nevertheless, is clearly interconnected with the original source and supplements it. Successful examples are Tarkovsky's films ( "Solaris"and "Stalker"), "A Space Odyssey 2001" Stanley Kubrick. This is a movie that goes a step further than conventional film adaptations. It not only transfers the original source to the screen, but makes discoveries in the field of film culture and film language.
* * *
At the initial stages of film history, film adaptations were more in line with the first type (“direct film adaptation”): books were accurately transferred to film. With the passage of time, a trend emerged for “based on” films, the development of which, paradoxically, led to both simplifications of the primary form (compare "Vampires of Carpenter" or "Dracula 2000" from "Dracula" 1931) and to complication (already mentioned "Stalker", "Solaris", "A Space Odyssey").
Examples can be used to catch the trend that prevails in the modern approach to film adaptations. fantastic movie. I'm talking about simplifying primary sources and enhancing the entertainment function at the expense of the semantic one.
This is how Hollywood sees
Americans go to the movies often. Arriving at the entertainment center for the weekend, they spend time there with the whole family from morning to evening, visiting bars, attractions and cinemas. Americans go to the films they like repeatedly, and much more often than, for example, Russians. That is why the main thing for the studio is to make a film that the “target audience” will love, and to which they will come again. The resulting film product meets American standards, which are largely unsuitable for a European or Russian audience.
A large percentage of American viewers do not go to the cinema for any particular film, but simply: “John, let's go to the cinema!”. The desire not to dive into "unnecessary" details is one of the traits of the modern American, whose culture is built on the archetype of "ready-made well-being." Having come to the cinema, the viewer chooses the film spontaneously, and the stars, genre, advertising and intelligibility... It is for this clarity that Hollywood works. Faced with something incomprehensible, the American viewer feels uncomfortable, and strangehe doesn't like cinema. This is not a Japanese man who will enthusiastically review the 26 episodes of Evangelion and all of its alternative endings. The American film standard is ideally suited to the wishes of the consumer.
Looking at enchanting scenes "Van Helsinga", the viewer laughs and shouts joyfully: “Coooool!” The incoherence of the plot and the lack of meaning in what is happening are perceived for him as a natural state, because the presence of these components would prevent him from swallowing the film so easily and without problems and getting "fan" from it. "Hulk" for such a viewer is too drawn-out and abstruse (however, the first cannot be taken away!), but Spider-Man 2 - an example of drama and good acting; and starting to watch “Treasure Island”, filmed according to the original source, he would simply fall asleep, because an interesting movie about pirates should be like "Pirates of the Caribbean".
Hollywood Studioswho studied the market thoroughly, crossed the invisible quality threshold, and began to make special, specific films, which are a new culture, a discovery of the end of the 20th century. Films that create the ideal listening environment shake the viewer and make them shout "Cooool!" Just by saying "Cooool!" the first time, such a viewer will come to the film again. This is a new movie from the beginning of the 21st century - Hollywood Blockbuster. For some time now, this is not a label that is attached to a successful movie, but a special genre.
80% of the current blockbusters are film adaptations, and more and more often - fantastic ... Why is that?
The blockbuster should bring in 150 million or more in revenue. How can you guarantee payback and how can you calculate the future profit from the project? We've already listed: ease of perception, star actors, attention-grabbing special effects, exciting action, powerful advertising campaign ... and Idea. After all, the Idea, it turns out, is capable of attracting the viewer even stronger than other components. Let's consider two “conceptual” examples.
Recently, the Hollywood industry has matured to the state in which Tolkien was filmed. Not a single star of the first magnitude. A sea of \u200b\u200bdangerous things for a blockbuster - the protractedness of the first part, the abundance of incomprehensible names, titles, and - most importantly - the plot break into three parts! .. Everything worked. Nothing stopped the triumphal procession "Lord of the Rings"all over the world. The box office was fantastic - far more fantastic than the plot itself.
"Harry Potter" - “a silly fairytale TV show for toddlers,” as many have said. "Who is interested in this, except for children?" And - an absolute triumph.
Ideas rule the world
Yes, ideas rule the world. Ideas that have formed in the treasury of world culture over the millennia are taking over the world of cinema. World, or rather, Hollywood, cinema, always constrained by means and technical capabilities, has only now reached, has seized upon a great storehouse of plots that previously could not be adequately embodied. Detectives, action films, melodramas and other areas of art and culture have long been worked out, and fiction - here it is, almost untouched, just waiting to come and film it, embody it in the stream of the latest digital technologies.
World fiction, the domain of writers, is now becoming the domain of screenwriters, directors, producers, and special effects creators. Nowadays, science fiction is gaining more and more weight, and in a dozen years will be an equal sister of science fiction.
Hollywood is happy - without paying the stars, it can make films with many risks that one Idea can handle. Without spending extra money on brand promotion, he can simply say: “We have here in half a year will be released“ The Wizard of Earthsea ”- and this guarantees an average blockbuster collection.
Soon a stream of film adaptations of science fiction and related genres (for example, pseudo-historical colossus like "Troy" and soon "Alexander the Great") will rush with even greater intensity. "The Chronicles of Narnia", "The World of Fire and Ice", "Black Squad", "Neuromancer", "Ender's Game", "The Chronicles of Amber" and so on, and so on - all this awaits us, I have no doubt.
Of course, these will be “simplified” adaptations. However, there are positive aspects to all this. The creators explore the space, experiment with form and content. As a result, the same “Troy” in some moments turns out to be an order of magnitude higher than the sleek and heroic “Gladiator”.
* * *
How can we now, in the light of all of the above, answer the question: what should be a good film adaptation? Perhaps very simple: it should be at the level of the primary source or above it.
You should not judge the film on the basis of extreme positions. Neither “it should be according to the book!”, Nor “the book and films - different languages \u200b\u200band universes” will give us the opportunity to evaluate the tape adequately. Because in the first case, we contradict the mechanics of cinema (the language and format of which are really far from the literary ones). And in the second, we lose the point of reference that will allow us to see the film for real.
Any screen adaptation, even the most distant from the original source, uses its ideas, material, plots, images, atmosphere. That is, it takes certain resources of the "source" and disposes of them. And therefore it is fair that it is by the degree of implementation of these resources that we will evaluate the result. To paraphrase Saint-Exupery: "... the filmmaker is responsible for what he filmed."
briefly
1. Retelling-illustration, or direct adaptation.
1. The text is shortened or enlarged.
2 . Prose descriptions are translated into the form of dialogues or monologues, into different types offscreen speech.
3. If a play is filmed, then the dialogues and monologues, on the contrary, are reduced.
Example; S. Gerasimov " Quiet Don"(1957-1958); D. Galsworthy "The Forsyte Saga". S. Bondarchuk "War and Peace" 1966-1967; V. Bortko "The Idiot"; G. Panfilov. "In the first circle."Unsuccessful retelling F. Zefirelli "Romeo and Juliet"; S. Bondarchuk "Boris Godunov".
2. New reading, or based on.
1. Modernizing the classics.
Example; B. Luhrmann "Romeo and Juliet"; B. Luhrmann "Romeo and Juliet"
2. Transferring the validity of the original to another time and to another country.
Example; A. Kurosawa "Idiot" and "Throne in Blood"; G. Danelia “Don't Cry!”; A. Konchalovsky "Lovers of Mary"; M. Foreman "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest".
3. Recycling of the original in all directions (mainly style postmodernism).
Example;A. Kurosawa "Rasemon" (1950); Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Gildestern Are Dead (1990);unsuccessful rework I. Annensky "Anna on the neck" (1954).
3. Arrangement, or film adaptation.
This is an adaptation or transposition of a literary work into the language of cinema, while maintaining the peculiarity of the writing style, the spirit of the original. So that the story told to the viewer, using cinematographic techniques, would remain clear that it is Chekhov or the Strugatsky Brothers. (from)
Example;S. Samsonov "Jumping"; S. Bondarchuk "The Fate of a Man"; L. Visconti "Death in Venice"; A. Sokurova "The lonely voice of a man."
full
Based on the foregoing and agreeing with the need to schematize the material, we can say that there are three main types of film adaptation:
- retelling-illustration, or direct film adaptation.
- new reading,or based on the.
- arrangement.or film adaptation.
Retelling-illustration
This is the least dramatic way of film adaptation. Abroad they call him "Adaptation" (from Lat. adaptatio - adapt), that is, the adaptation of the literary text to the screen. "Retelling-illustration" characterized by the smallest the remoteness of the script and the film from the text of the screened literary work... What happens in such cases?
A) The text is shortened if it is larger than the estimated footage of the film, or (which happens less often) is increased due to fragments from other works of the same writer.
B) Prose descriptions of the thoughts and feelings of the characters, as well as the author's reasoning, are translated, if necessary, into the form of dialogues and monologues, into different types of offscreen speech.
C) If a play is filmed, then the dialogues and monologues, on the contrary, are reduced. The director of the film “Romeo and Juliet” F. Zefirelli said: “The film contains all the big scenes and monologues of the play, but it has more action. The author's text has been removed more than half ... "
Some of the scenes that take place in the interiors are transferred to nature. At the same time, large theatrical scenes are usually divided into several fragmentary ones, taking place at different venues. As it happened, by the way, in F. Zefirelli's film with the very first scene of Shakespeare's play, the scene of which is designated as "Piazza in Verona".
Such, in essence, a reproductive method of film adaptation, far from always leads to great success, because here the specific advantages of cinematography are not used to the proper extent and, at the same time, the advantages of a prose text or the strong side of theatrical action - its live connection with the audience are lost.
So, the film of the great master of Russian cinema - Sergei Bondarchuk - his adaptation of Pushkin's drama Boris Godunov can hardly be considered a serious success. In the course of work on the dramatic basis of the picture, all the above methods of adapting the play to the screen were used: remarks and monologues were noticeably reduced, mass scenes were filmed on a "historical" nature. However, all the efforts of a powerful creative group did not lead, unfortunately, to the creation of a truly cinematic work - theatricality was never overcome.
For the sake of truth, it should be said that the cinematic retelling of classic literary works can turn out to be its strength. We sometimes see this in multi-part film adaptations of novels. Here the original property of this type of work with a literary text is revealed: the possibility of jointly with the audience, as if "page by page", reading a great work of literature on the screen.
A. Hitchcock once admitted: “Had I taken Dostoevsky’s“ Crime and Punishment ”, nothing good would have come of this venture either. Dostoevsky's novels are very verbose, and each word has its own function. And to equivalently transfer the novel to the screen form, replacing written speech with visual, you need to count on a 6-10 hour film. "
Serial films have provided filmmakers with this opportunity.
An excerpt from Dostoevsky's letter to Princess V. Obolenskaya is often quoted, who asked the great writer to "allow" her to remake Crime and Punishment into a drama: "... almost always," the writer answered to the correspondent, at least quite. There is some mystery of art, according to which the epic form will never find a match in the dramatic. "
But it turned out that the "epic form" of the novels began to find quite a worthy "self-correspondence" in the series of films.
Almost the first and very successful attempt to adapt the Russian classic novel to film was S. Gerasimov's staging of a picture in 3 episodes based on the novel “Quiet Don” (1957-1958) by M. Sholokhov.
The TV serial based on the novel by D. Galsworthy "The Forsyte Saga" enjoyed great success with the audience.
Created in 1966-1967, it became a major success of Russian cinema. S. Bondarchuk four-part film based on the epic novel by L. Tolstoy "War and Peace" (Oscar award). It is significant that both during the work on the picture and during its discussions, the authors - screenwriter V. Soloviev and director S. Bondarchuk strongly emphasized: this is not their film, this is L. Tolstoy. In the credits of the picture, in large print, at first there was: LEV TOLSTOY, and then in much smaller print - the names of the scriptwriters and the director.
Notable events in Russian culture in recent years have become TV series adaptations based on the novels The Idiot by F. Dostoevsky (directed by V. Bortko) and A. Solzhenitsyn “In the First Circle” (directed by G. Panfilov). Particularly respectful attitude to the original source in the latter case was also indicated by the fact that in the offscreen speech "from the author" the voice sounded not of the director or actor, but the voice of the writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
The conclusion is best in retelling-illustration, or direct film adaptation, many serial films are obtained.
New reading
These are films-adaptations, in the credits of which we find subtitles: "based on ...", "based on ..." ("based on the novel ...") and even "variations on a theme ..."
“It's another matter, - wrote F. Dostoevsky further in the letter cited above to V. Obolenskaya, - if you remake and change the novel as much as possible, keeping only one episode from it, for processing into a drama, or, taking the original idea , completely change the plot? ..
In contrast to " retell-illustrations» new reading presupposes an extremely active introduction of filmmakers into the fabric of the original source - up to its complete transformation. With such an approach to film adaptation, the author considers the literary original only as material for creating his film, often not worrying about whether the picture he created will correspond not only to the letter, but even the spirit of the work being filmed.
What is a film adaptation
Screen adaptation - the interpretation by means of cinema of works of another type of art (prose, drama, poetry, songs, opera and ballet librettos). Literary works have been the basis of screen images of cinema from the first days of its existence, so some of the first film adaptations are the works of the founders of feature cinema, Georges Méliès, Victorin Jasse, Louis Feyad, who transferred the works of Swift, Defoe, Goethe to the screen.
That is, the main thing in the film adaptation is to convey what was inherent in the original source, using film language, film media (which differ significantly from the literary ones). And therefore, it is natural that the viewer will evaluate any film adaptation primarily by how much it has not reached the level of the original source or surpassed it (this also happens). After all, why are books being filmed at all? To transfer a well-known, popular and beloved work to a new format. A good film adaptation gives the viewer the opportunity to live once again, to feel what delighted and moved him in the book. She “visualizes” what he could only imagine before. But if, perhaps, everyone agrees with this idea, then in applying it to a single film adaptation, the same dispute will arise: is it good or bad.
The main problem of the film adaptation remains the contradiction between the pure illustration of a literary or other original source, its literal reading and departure to greater artistic independence... Sergei Eisenstein believed that a film adaptation is impossible without the original "cinematic thinking" of the writer. Based on this, several types of film adaptation are distinguished:
Direct film adaptation (sometimes literal adaptation)
Such a film adaptation should repeat the book, giving the viewer the opportunity once again, only this time in a cinema format, to get in touch with the source. An example is Chris Columbus's Harry Potter (films 1 and 2). Literal adaptations are many European series, filmed according to the classics (numerous adaptations of Dickens, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, etc.), in which the book is meticulously transmitted, series after series, in all its glory, sometimes quite literally, before all the dialogues and offscreen texts. " Heart of a Dog ”is perhaps the best strict screen version of science fiction in Soviet cinema - see further detailed analysis
This approach recreates the atmosphere of the original source, brings the book to the screen. Films of this kind are almost always solid films that are a pleasure to watch. But very rarely, with this approach, you can create a masterpiece. Film by Leonid Bondarchuk "War and Peace" is one example where a direct adaptation turns out to be more than a neat, cozy and unassuming transposition of a famous text on a tap.
In foreign science fiction, perhaps the closest thing to this level is Wolfgang Petersen's "Endless Story", now a classic of fantastic and fantastic cinema. From the modern - another direct film adaptation, a very recent film by Alfonso Cuaron "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban", in which the director successfully combined the following of the plot with a variety of visual and directorial findings.
Based on the
The main task of such films is to show a familiar work in a new perspective. Often this form is used when the book physically cannot be literally transferred to the movie screen: due to the discrepancy of volumes, for example, or when the action in the book is closed to the inner experiences of the hero, which are difficult to show without transformation into dialogues and events. An adaptation of this type does not strictly correspond to the original source, but conveys the main thing, and adds something new. The overwhelming majority of such adaptations in modern cinema and, perhaps, in generalhistory of cinema.
As an example, we can cite PJ Hogan's Peter Pan (in which J. Barry's tale was modernized and found a new context, becoming interesting to today's children and adolescents) and most of the Soviet film adaptations of children's books: from Mary Poppins, bye! to "Little Red Riding Hood", which were often a worthy translation of the book into film language.
Many foreign films show us successful work in this direction - from the screen versions of Philip Dick (Blade Runner and Minority Report) to Disney's Treasure Planet, which favorably represents an old adventure plot in a new setting.
But as the other side of the same medal, one can point to such not very successful works as a very uneven "Johnny Mnemonic", a terrible "Witcher", as well as a fresh but indistinct "King Arthur".
General film adaptation
With this approach, the goal is not to convey the book as accurately as possible, but to create on its material a new, original work, which, nevertheless, is clearly interconnected with the original source and complements it... Successful examples - movies Tarkovsky (Solaris and Stalker”),“ A Space Odyssey 2001 ”by Stanley Kubrick. This is a movie that goes a step further than conventional film adaptations. It not only transfers the original source to the screen, but makes discoveries in the field of film culture and film language.
The section is very easy to use. In the proposed field, just enter the desired word, and we will give you a list of its meanings. I would like to note that our site provides data from various sources - encyclopedic, explanatory, word-formation dictionaries. Also here you can get acquainted with examples of the use of the word you entered.
The meaning of the word film adaptation
film adaptation in the crossword dictionary
Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. D.N. Ushakov
film adaptation
film adaptation, pl. no, well. (new cinema). Adapting something. for showing in cinematography, on the screen. Screen adaptation of the novel.
Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. S.I.Ozhegov, N.Yu.Shvedova.
New explanatory and derivational dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.
film adaptation
g. Creation of a film or television film based on a literary work.
Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998
film adaptation
interpretation by means of cinema of works of prose, drama, poetry, as well as opera and ballet librettos.
Screen adaptation
the interpretation by means of cinema of works of another art form - prose, drama, poetry, songs, opera and ballet librettos. Immediately after its inception, the art of cinematography used literary plots and images. The first Russian fiction film "Stenka Razin and the Princess" (1908, also called "The Lowest Freelancer") - E. of the song "From Beyond the Island to the Rod". Until 1917, about 100 films were created in Russia based on the novels and stories of A.S. Pushkin, F.M.Dostoevsky, A.P. Chekhov, L.N. Tolstoy and others. Literary works were widely filmed abroad ("Hamlet" Shakespeare and others). After the October Revolution of 1917, the assimilation and development of the realistic traditions of the classical and modern literature greatly contributed to the formation of Soviet cinema. With the advent of sound cinema, the expressive and genre possibilities of cinematography were immeasurably enriched - a cinematic novel, a film story, etc. were created. Among the largest e. Soviet cinema: "Mother" by M. Gorky (1926, dir. V. I. Pudovkin), "Dowry" by A. N. Ostrovsky (1936, dir. Ya. A. Protazanov), "Peter I "After A. N. Tolstoy (1937-1938, directed by V. M. Petrov)," Gorky's Childhood "," In People "and" My Universities "after Gorky (1938-40, directed by M. S. Donskoy) , Young Guard after A. Fadeev (1948, dir. S. A. Gerasimov), Othello after W. Shakespeare (1956, dir. S. I. Yutkevich), Quiet Don (1957-58 , directed by Gerasimov), “The Fate of a Man” (1959, directed by S. F. Bondarchuk) - both after M. A. Sholokhov; Hamlet after Shakespeare (1964, directed by G.M. Kozintsev), War and Peace after Leo Tolstoy (1966-1967, directed by Bondarchuk), The Brothers Karamazov after Dostoevsky (1969, directed by I. A. Pyryev), “The Dawns Here Are Quiet ...” after B. L. Vasiliev (1972, directed by S. I. Rostotsky). In foreign ecology, the method of transferring the action of a classical piece is widespread. in another temporary (mainly modern) era. E. is especially widely used in television art (serials - Soviet - "How the Steel Was Tempered" by N. A. Ostrovsky; English - "The Forsyte Saga" by J. Galsworthy, and many others).
Lit .: Eisenstein S.M., American Tragedy, in his book: Izbr. articles, M., 1956; him, Dickens, Griffith and we, in the same place; Romm M., About cinema and about good literature, in his collection: Conversations about cinema, M., 1964; Weissfeld I., Facets of Life, in his book: The skill of the screenwriter, M., 1961; Manevich I.M., Cinema and Literature, M., 1966.
M.S.Shaternikova.
Wikipedia
Screen adaptation
Screen adaptation - interpretation by means of cinema of works of another kind of art, most often literary works. Literary works have been the basis of cinema screen images from the first days of its existence. So, some of the first adaptations are the works of the founders of feature cinematography Georges Méliès, Victorin Jasse, Louis Feuillade, who transferred the works of Swift, Defoe, Goethe to the screen.
The main problem of the film adaptation is the contradiction between the pure illustration of a literary or other primary source, its literal reading and departure into greater artistic independence. When filming, the director can abandon secondary storylines, details and episodic characters, or, conversely, introduce into the script episodes that were not in the original work, but which, in the director's opinion, better convey the main idea of \u200b\u200bthe work by means of cinema. For example, in the film adaptation of MA Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog", a scene with Sharikov dancing during a scientific lecture was introduced by director V. Bortko. The idea of \u200b\u200bthe film adaptation can polemicize with the original work, examples are such interpretations of Christian texts as "The Gospel of Matthew" (directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini) and "The Last Temptation of Christ" (directed by Martin Scorsese).
Examples of the use of the word film adaptation in literature.
Then a contract for Mosfilm for film adaptation, traditionally and remained a treaty - Yu.
What engineers and other bosses usually do in sequel production romances that are so popular in Clone and film adaptations which no-no yes and get into the rental of the United Nations?
The point is not in the details of the plot and not in the historical correspondence of events, but in the fact that the most obvious absurdity has once again become an unshakable truth right before our eyes, and this is the case when we can easily trace it all together, because if someone and did not read Dumas, then I certainly saw him numerous not impressive film adaptations.
To allow them to be damaged is to cause damage a thousand times more than a reliable one is worth. film adaptation premises where the main servers are installed.