A census taker tried to quantify me once. I ate his liver with some Fava beans and a…
a) Nice Chianti.
b) Cheeky Lafite.
c) Big Amarone.
The answer is c).
It is. Go on, look it up.
No, not in the movie. In the book.
For reasons far too dull to go into, I’m currently reading The Silence of The Lambs. It follows the movie pretty closely (or rather vice versa), but there are some interesting changes, including that most famous line (it is also not followed by the sentence, ‘Lecter then sucked in air like a starving man gobbling up an unruly oyster’.)
I know, I know: that’s interesting enough. I have already rewarded your kindness in visiting ITIABTWC with that little tidbit alone, but hang on, there’s more:
The process of adaptation is a fascinating one. Many people have told me that No Country For Old Men is a virtual carbon copy of the book (The Road certainly was, although they left out the bit about babies cooking on a spit). Whereas Schindler’s Ark is a very dry read with very little narrative, unlike the tear-stained movie it inspired.
The reason I point this out is that no one ever really explains how the process of adapting a movie is actually very similar to that of ‘adapting’ your ad script.
Both go through many layers of approval, budget strictures, eye-watering research and lots of witless, talentless, tasteless cunts poking their noses and oars in to the detriment of the final product.
And both involve changes that can make the initial script look unrecognisable.
For example, I heard the the initial script for Levi’s Running Through Walls (I can’t call it Odyssey; I’m not quite enough of a wanker) had a man waking up in a box, then breaking out of it before doing some other stuff that sounds a bit too on the nose. The Glazer read it and basically came up with the ad we all know and love.
Of course, the creative process can also take things in the other direction, but it’s worth remembering that what’s on the piece of A4 is just a starting point.
Will it be massaged to brilliance or rogered to oblivion?
Well, unlike in Hollywood, advertising writers do get some say in the process.
Whether that say makes any difference is up to you.
(Of course it fucking isn’t. It’s up to the client’s wife.)
I take it your book has been optioned, you are writing the script for it or something along those lines. In which case, congratulations!
Great book, Silence of the Lambs. Only book I have ever read in one sitting.
Also, it’s very well adapted. Fight Club for me is the best adaptation. It’s faithful to the book and better than it.
The film version of No Country For Old Men is indeed very faithful to the book which is one of the reasons it never fully worked for me. I know it won the Oscar but I came to the conclusion, when watching it, that in cinema you really do have to give people a bit of what they want otherwise they leave feeling cheated. Guess that’s not so important in books.
No such luck (yet). I wouldn’t imagine anything will happen until the book comes out and we can see how well (or badly) it does. (By the way, its publication date has been changed, so it’ll actually be out late Nov/early Dec. Something to do with Tesco. Fine by me.)
But if I do sell Instinct, that’s exactly what I will be doing: selling it for someone else to do what they want with it in another medium. Books aren’t films, so adaptations needn’t be that faithful.
When Red Dragon was adapted for screen (Manhunter) they simplified the ending. Which you could understand as it was a little tricksy, but it left you feeling a bit short changed if you’d read the novel. Still a damn good film though in an 80s synthesizer sort of way. I don’t know how any of that relates to advertising though. Sorry.
speaking of adaptation. you would not believe the degree to which Nick Pileggi and Martin Scorsese stuck to the book by Henry Hill that inspired GOODFELLAS. It was scene-for-scene. they just shot the book. and good for them!
that levis thing was all CGI anyway. so who really cared?
i agree with you though. i once had a discussion with sir john hegarty. and he impressed on me the importance of “who would kill to direct this?”. and that’s always very true.
Bleeber, I just finished RD. Ending twist a bit obvious but I can’t remember the Manhunter ending or the one from that shit remake they did a few years ago.
Very well written, though. As is TSOTL.
Vinny, you should get the new UK GQ. It has a brilliant interview with Henry Hill. He’s fucking crazy. And there’s a good Mad Men article with some very pleasant shots of Joan.
Regarding Sir Heg and his agency: Fred and Farid once sent a Levi’s script to Frank that said ‘People rub themselves in Levi’s jeans.’ You can see the resulting ad in Frank’s archive on the Gorgeous website.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Elliott Quince, Ben Kay. Ben Kay said: Another post. Go on, you know you want to. Or don't. http://ow.ly/2qztZ […]
Currently reading David Lynch Interviews. Some interesting insights into his take on art vs Hollywood, adapting the work of others vs writing his own screenplays, etc. An interesting read because he’s such an odd character and yet manages to work in the mainstream. And of course, he does both ads and movies. (As well as painting, music and dismembering fish.)
They basically missed the twist out as far I remember, so no bit where Graham’s face ending up looking like ‘Picasso drew it’. Not sure if they kept it more faithful in the remake. Two cracking books though.
Neil, is that a book or something to be found online?
When’s your book out Ben?
Can’t wait.
The only book I’ve ever read that the movie was infinitely better was “Planet of the Apes.”