It seems that dystopian fiction is becoming one of the most popular genres of this generation. Successful novels, such as Divergent, The Hunger Games and The Maze Runner have gotten so many sales, the authors of these popular books have been offered and have accepted movie deals. Obviously, changes must be made from the novel to create the movie. But some of these changes aren’t exactly necessary.
In the recent film release of Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials, many changes were made from the book to fit the film's theme. Readers of the novel definitely noticed the differences and similarities between the film and the book with the shared name. These differences and changes caused large discussion on whether the film can even be called an adaptation anymore, seeing as this film had very little connection to the actual novel itself. Some fans said the changes enhanced the storyline and gave it a more action packed and science fiction feel to the story, while others felt that it ruined the original aspect of what James Dashner, the author of The Maze Runner Trilogy, was trying to express in this sequel.
This is not the first time we have seen extreme changes in book-to-movie adaptations. With every novel recreated on the big screen, one could say that the transition undergoes some sorts of changes. It occurred in The Maze Runner adaptation the previous year, and Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials is no exception.
This is where the question now lies; do the changes made in film adaptations of books increases the film’s entertainment, or does it ruin the true meaning and interest generated from the novel?
Being what most would call a “booknerd”, I do feel that novel to movie adaptations should be made where the movie is staying true to the original story. Seeing as it is an adaptation, differences shouldn’t be very massive. In this film, there were what would be called massive, unneeded changes.
If you read The Scorch Trials, you would have expected the movie to show the Gladers, boys who had just escaped the maze, starting their newest test that W.I.C.K.E.D (a human testing and experimental facility) had set up for them. You would have expected to see the boys to team up with a group of first staged cranks; invaders and carriers of the man made, mind-destroying disease called “The Flare”. You would have expected to watch the Gladers to end up back where they started, in W.I.C.K.E.D’s control and with more tests headed their way.
Sadly, none of those crucial points were included. At least not in the way the novel had intended them to be. Instead, the whole course of the film was changed, and not in a positive way, as most readers would have expected. In this adaptation, the Gladers leave W.I.C.K.E.D in a frenzy, and enter the Scorch(the dried up outside world), in hopes to escape W.I.C.K.E.D and their tests. In the novel the whole point of the boys going into the Scorch was to try and get to a safe haven. This safe haven would give them the cure to a disease they had. At the end of novel, they arrive at the safe haven, back in W.I.C.K.E.D’s headquarters, prepared to rebel if they’re lied to again. Instead of this occurring, a huge battle between W.I.C.K.E.D and the Gladers is shown. Minho, one of the main characters, is kidnapped and taken away by W.I.C.K.E.D, leaving Thomas, Newt and the rest of the Gladers in rage and defeat. As you can see, very different aspects of the story were told.
Many fans were upset by the differences in the film, and felt that the changes would negatively impact the next movie’s storyline(Maze Runner: The Death Cure, set to be released in Feb. 2017). Fans also stated that scenes were added from the third book into the second movie, which will only disrupt the flow of the story. Readers felt that Wes Ball, the director of both The Maze Runner film adaptations, overdid this movie and that he added and took away scenes that weren’t necessary to be removed or altered.
After I had watched Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials, I felt like the film itself was amazing, but as an adaptation, it failed. The movie was filled with action, the graphics and effects were amazing and it had the people in our theatre at the edge of their seats. Despite this, the extra changes in this film turned into a completely different movie in general, and I don’t think that does the book the justice it deserves.
I understand that from a movie maker's perspective, not every little detail of the book can be recreated on film, and sometimes changes do benefit the story. But when the entire film, or the most important parts of the story have been changed or taken out, the flow is disturbed and it slowly becomes its own story being told. When this happens, the original story is forgotten, and calling the film an ‘adaptation’ is misrepresentative and can no longer be held up to its name.
Changes in any book to film creation need to be made, as not everything can always be recreated in full. However, if these changes take away what was so interesting and liberating about reading the novel itself, then the changes shouldn’t be made at all.
By: Suad Alad
0 comments:
Post a Comment