by Joelle Steele
Are you hoping that your novel, short story, or autobiography will one day be made into a screenplay? Or are you just having difficulty deciding whether to write your story as a novel or a screenplay? As a writer, I much prefer books to anything a movie can offer, so my first choice is always going to be writing a book. But, in general, if a writer envisions their work on the silver screen, then I advise them to skip the book altogether and go straight to writing a screenplay instead. Why? Because so much can happen when a book is made into a movie, and even if you’re writing the screenplay yourself, it’s all pretty much out of your hands.
Screenplay Challenges
Screenplays are nothing like novels because they are meant to be performed, to be produced. Potential budgets, number of actors, types of sets, etc., must be considered while writing a screenplay. And then there is the obvious: Movies are usually only about two hours in length, while a book can take about 8 hours to read depending, of course, on how quickly you read. Condensing a book into a movie means that something’s gotta give. You simply cannot take a story page-by-page and make a movie or even a mini-series, especially for an epic saga. Screenwriters who adapt novels must make decisions about what to keep, what to omit, and possibly what new elements to add. They also have to decide how to handle typical story-telling devices such as flashbacks and the thoughts of the characters.
Supporting characters are often omitted or blended into two characters on film. This makes sense, since casting is a rather substantial expense in making a movie. And casting can often result in disappointment if a chosen actor does not accurately resemble a character or does not play the role the way the story’s author intended. How much of a deviation from the original story is acceptable? The answer: It’s about how acceptable it is to the movie-goer. And that movie-goer is unlikely to notice the difference – unless they read the book! Here are examples of four very different stories that were made into highly successful multiple-award-winning movies and how the original stories differ from their cinematic counterparts.
Blade Runner. This 1982 award-winning movie was loosely based on the 1968 Philip Dick novella, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.” The screenplay was by Hampton Fancher and David Peoples and it focuses on a small part of the novella in which the character Rick Deckard pursues some renegade androids. The movies omits the real essence of the story, mainly the fact that earth is a disaster, all the animals have died out, some people have electronic pets, and most humans have moved to Mars colony. And on top of all that, there is a new religion called Mercerism, in which electronic implants enable all the earthbound people to share the same mood, to not be depressed, and to lose their sense of self in the process. Rick Deckard adheres to this religion. The omission of Mercerism doesn’t ruin the movie but it’s shallow and lacking by comparison to the novella.
The Sound of Music. This 1965 Oscar-winning movie musical was adapted from the stage musical, which was adapted from a 1956 German film called “Die Trapp Familie,” which was based on the 1949 book, “The Story of the Trapp Family Singers” by Maria von Trapp. The 1965 screenplay was written by Ernest Lehman. If you’re looking for the true story of Maria von Trapp and the Trapp Family Singers, you aren’t going to find it anywhere in this movie. The names of Maria and Georg von Trapp are about the only real things in the movie. The book was merely inspiration for a movie that is 99% fiction. And just in case you’re interested, the true story is far better.
Out of Africa. This Oscar-winning 1984 movie was based on two books by Isak Dinesen (Baroness Karen von Blixen-Finecke): “Out of Africa” (1937) and “Shadows on the Grass” (1961). The screenplay was by Kurt Luedtke. Karen Blixen’s account of her life in British East Africa is a true story, and the movie, again like “The Sound of Music,” is a terrific tale, but it lacks many of the facts which could have enhanced or even improved the movie. The movie takes place between January 1914 and August 1931, a period of almost 18 years, and it is difficult to determine how much time has passed from one scene to the next. It lacks most of the facts about Blixen’s life, because Luedtke focuses largely on an almost 100% fictional account of Blixen’s relationship with Denys Finch Hatton. Very little factual information, like the amount of time she spent traveling in other countries, had her mother visiting for months at a time, lived on two different farms, and had her uncle running the farm in the beginning. Her letters have been published and are far more interesting and insightful.
Gone With The Wind. This was a 1939 Oscar-winning movie based on Margaret Mitchell’s best-selling 1936 novel, her only novel before she was killed ten years after the movie premiered by a drunk driver who hit her as she crossed an Atlanta street. The movie is great, but the book is spectacular. As a story set during the Civil War era, its historical accuracy was relevant, but screenplay adherence to the book was pretty much absent. Again, as with “Out of Africa,” the screenwriter, Sidney Howard, excerpts the relationship of Scarlett O’Hara and Rhett Butler and makes that the entire story.
Still want to write that novel and hope it gets turned into a screenplay? If you want the money, keep dreaming. But if you care about adherence to your carefully crafted story, think again.
