Adaptations of stories come in various styles, including book to film, film to book, film to film, and video game to film. People have been adapting films since the late 1800s. There have been plenty more book to film adaptations since then, including many in recent times, like the Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins and the Grishaverse series by Leigh Bardugo.
I’ve read several books based on characters from Disney movies. One of my favourites of these books is Beauty and the Beast: Lost in a Book by Jennifer Donnelly, which is a retelling of the story in the original animated movie. I liked both the book and the movie. When comparing the two, I prefer the book because it’s more unique with it being a magical escape into a world beyond the one in the movie. This unique storyline in the book is a way to get lost in the book.
To see what NAIT students think, I asked some questions to Hyen Contado, a Landscape Architectural Technology student and Alicia Jaeger, an Interior Design Technology student, about their opinions on adaptations.
Q: Which adaptations have you read and/or watched?
Hyen Contado: The Hunger Games
Alicia Jaeger: I’ve seen the book to TV series adaptations of Heartstopper (Alice Oseman, Netflix) and American Gods (Neil Gaiman, Amazon Prime).
Q: Do you prefer the original? Or do you prefer the adaptation?
Contado: I prefer the original one, because the books contain much more details that would’ve been missed in the movies because they weren’t given much emphasis. Books also delve deep into the characters’ personalities, stories, and thoughts, and allows me to fully understand the decisions they make throughout the book. Yes, it is way easier to watch movies because we’re being shown a visual narration, but I like that books encourage me to imagine the plot myself and envision the scenes to my liking.
Jaeger: Heartstopper: I have no preference! I devoured everything available to me in one sitting. At the time, the graphic novel had 3 volumes available online, and the second season had just premiered on Netflix.
American Gods: I very much prefer the original. The tone of the TV series was … off putting in my opinion. The first episode had lost a lot of the exposition that made the world so rich to begin with, and the acting felt as if there was little to no stage direction. Things felt rushed.
Q: Do you think the adaptation was successful? Any pros and cons?
Contado: I would say that the adaptations were successful, because it delivered the story with 85-90 per cent accuracy. The aesthetics were cool as well and fit the description in the books, but there were tiny details that only readers would’ve noticed that have gone missing or have changed.
Jaeger: Heartstopper: I do believe that the adaptation was successful. Between the Graphic Novels and the TV series, different characters and plot lines were added to more fully encompass the many experiences that the LGBTQ+ community can face. Both versions retain the grounded and tumultuous times that coming of age brings, no matter what identity you resonate with.
American Gods: I’m torn on this one! I rather liked the novel version, and I tried my hardest to give the TV adaptation a try. With seasoned actors like Ian McShane and Ricky Whittle starring in the lead roles, I was excited to watch. Sadly, they removed some of my favourite characters and added (in my opinion) unnecessary additions to other places instead.
