The pen and the lens

HANNAH SWAMIDOSS DHARMARAJ

Will the movie version of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone be as exciting as the book? Will it include all the details from the book? Would it be possible to do that in the time frame of a standard movie? Will there be differences? Do you think you will like the book or the movie, or both?

Books have often been the inspiration for movies. Sometimes people have enjoyed the movie and sometimes you hear them saying "the book was much better." Others may argue that you use your own imagination when reading a book, whereas in a movie you are watching someone else visualise for you. Occasionally, if you read a book after having seen the movie version, you may have a few surprises about the differences you find. Children's books have been the stimuli for some recent popular movies.

The Hundred and One Dalmatians by Dodie Smith was published in 1956. There was a cartoon version of it before Glenn Close starred as Cruella de Vil in the Walt Disney version. The book is well worth reading expecially since the dogs exchange some terrific lines. Pongo is described as having one of the "keenest brains in Dogdom," and he makes England "safe for Dalmatians". After reading the book you might want to ask why the movie producer preferred not to have the dogs talking to each other. (After all, in "Babe" the animals do most of the talking.) There is a twist in the plot of the book which the movie leaves out. You can compare the differences in the story line and decide which was more effective.

"Stuart Little" was written by E. B. White, and after you read the book you can see that in this movie too the plot of the story has been changed considerably. In the book, White left the ending unresolved, something rather unusual for children's books. If you had ben directing the movie what would you have done? Do you think an unresolved ending for a movie would be good? It might also be interesting to compare "Stuart Little" with "Charlotte's Web" and "The Trumpet of the Swan" by the same author, to see the different directions White takes with each book.

Dick King-Smith the author of "Babe the Sheep Pig" has written several other equally humorous books. (You might try reading "The Fox Busters" which is about three exceptional young hens.) The movie version of "Babe the Sheep Pig" follows the plot closely although some characters have been added. It is for you to decide whether this has made the story more colourful and exciting.

"Dr. Doolittle" by Hugh Lofting is yet another book that has led to a popular movie, though in this movie starring Edie Murphy (Rex Harrison starred in the 1956musical "Dr. Doolittle") it seems that only the basic theme of having a doctor being able to understand animals talk was taken from the book. You may want to reflect on whether a movie needs to include everything that was described in the book. Lofting has written several books about Dr. Doolittle and his adventures.

At the end of this year, the first part of J.R.R. Tolkien's trilogy "The Lord of the Rings" is going to be released. Again there was an earlier cartoon version. It is sometimes difficult to replicate in a movie what a writer describes in the book. Tolkien has a whole host of non-human characters that would be rather hard to portray (walking trees, talking eagles, not to mention hobbits!). It is going to be interesting to see how the producer and actors tackle this.

One aspect common to all these movies, is that someone thought that what the book said would make an interesting and worthwhile movie. While the producers approached the books in their own different styles, and perhaps introduced changes, additions and deletions, their initial inspiration was from the book. It is well worth the effort looking up these and other books that have been the vision behind movies.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Building temples in the heart
Next     : Ever- pink