There are movies like Wild, and The Big Short that are books based on real life events. I have not had an issue with any of these type of adaptations and largely I haven't read any of the books these kinds of movies are based on, so I realize I have positively reviewed many movies based on books, that are based on real life events, but these aren't the one's I am really talking about.
The biggest issue with the way books are adapted is that most of time, a story about a strong independent woman that happens to have a love interest in the story is turned into a movie revolving around that love interest (I'M LOOKING AT YOU HUNGER GAMES). I don't even want to know what they did to one of the only women of The Maze Runner series who has this etherial connection to the main character. I would bet they probably threw in some sexual tension and RUINED what character she actually had so she was just an object for the boys in the movie. This point doesn't count for movies like The Fault in Our Stars, Twilight, or Gone Girl, because those plots literally center around their love stories. But for movies like Divergent or namely The Hunger Games (and probably The Maze Runner), the female characters are whittled down to most nothing besides their male counterparts. In Divergent there is a lot of a love story, but the main female character still has substance besides the guy she's paired with. In the movie her love interest is her character. I genuinely cannot stand the fact that these feminist female characters who are actually really helpful for young women to read about and look up to, are reduced down to how interested they are in their romantic counterpart in these movies. It's really gross how that is the way to appeal to the masses-- to not give female characters any substance. Christ, The Hobbit movie inserted a female elf character solely for the romantic aspect between her and a hobbit. STUPID.
Looking at the substance of YA from the perspective of someone who definitely read a lot of them when I was younger but now doesn't really bother with any of them anymore (besides The Fault in Our Stars), I can admit there aren't really any characters that are these feminist icons. However, as a transitional genre it's a great introduction to strong female characters.
In the Hunger Games and Divergent, Katniss and Tris were actually really great characters; Tris less so than Katniss, but still they were both pretty good. The Hunger Games' best books for Katniss' character is probably the first book (The Hunger Games) and the second half of the third book (Mockingjay--also my favorite). It was really great to read how amazing and influential this young woman is in this fictional world. It's hard to explain how nice it was for me, a teenager, to read about this badass chick leading a goddamn revolution! I really appreciated this series and I distinctly remember wishing there was less Gale and Peta because I was so into reading about Katniss' political influence. The best book for Tris' character was the first book (Divergent) and the last bit of the third book (Allegiant). It's hard with Tris' character because Four is so apart of her character from the very beginning. And again, the best part of these books was learning about Tris' influence on the political climate! So no, I don't mind the fact that there is a romantic sub-plot, I mind how that sub-plot is portrayed as the main plot of the movie. There is more to these women than just how hunky their boyfriend is and how much she is in love with him.
On a less feminist note, another terrible thing about book to movie adaptations is that all the best parts of the books are changed in the movies. Without fail every single best part is ruined. My Sister's Keeper had the best most upsetting ending and in the movie it was the most pansy-ass stupid ending. I was angry, as well as personally offended, that the wrong people died in that movie. I haven't seen the end of Divergent or the end of The Hunger Games but I can almost guarantee the people who are supposed to die and the ways in which they are supposed to die will on some level be incorrect. In Stephen King adaptations nothing is ever right! The right people never die. There are also the issues of ratings-- so if a character is supposed to die in a particularly gruesome, meaningful way, because the target audience are young adults, the rating has to be PG-13 and so much of the deaths in these movies are downplayed and much of the violence that help readers understand the horrible situation our characters are in are nowhere near as terrible as they should be and really need to be (I'M LOOKING AT YOU HUNGER GAMES).
There is also the terrible theme of royally ruining the characters with bad casting. I've been particularly pissed off at the way only attractive people are cast in these movies. Even if the character in the book is described as unique looking and not conventionally attractive there is no doubt that the actor/actress in the movie will be very traditionally beautiful even if the character is not supposed to be attractive. It drives me crazy. I also know there is a lot of white-washing in casts. If there is no specific description that says this certain character is 100% not white, then that actor will 99.9% of the time be white. Casting can be sincerely disheartening to me because I personally can't stand when the easiest details about a character aren't right! Hair color, height, eye color, skin tone, little mannerisms-- nothing is ever right! Also, if a character is not specifically deemed as heavy set they are always beautifully thin! It is an extremely rare situation that characters look as they are described in the book(s). The only ones I can think of that fit are Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss in The Hunger Games and Shailene Woodley as Hazel-- more so Shailene Woodley because she doesn't have the most perfect body, she cut her hair for the role, she didn't wear really any noticeable makeup for her part, she fit the character so well I was so impressed. I will say that The Fault in Our Stars was overall a pretty good adaptation with only a few issues.
Overall, movie adaptations are just never right. Casting is wrong, key events in the plot are almost always altered to attract more to the masses, and largely, these movies boil the main female character down to her characteristics in relation to her romantic counterpart. Movies alter many of the best parts of the books so that it appeals to the masses and they can make money. The base of the terribleness of book to movie adaptations is that the book is changed to appeal to a larger audience. The changes made for mass consumption gentrify these great stories so that they are all basically the same. This process ruins amazing books and forms a stigma about YA novels, particularly that they are just sappy stupid romance books meant for girls going through puberty because that is what the movie adaptations of these books convey.
No comments:
Post a Comment