A Critique of the Adaptation of Harry Potter PDF

Preview

Summary

  A Critique of the adaptation of Harry Potter Film, and stage performances before that, have adapted from books for centuries upon centuries, with the written story used as a basis for cinematic pieces. But today adaptations, be they from books, films, tv shows, video games, true life articles etc,...

Description

 

A Critique of the adaptation of Harry Potter Film, and stage performances before that, have adapted from books for centuries upon centuries, with the written story used as a basis for cinematic pieces. But today adaptations, be they from books, films, tv shows, video games, true life articles etc, are adapted further than just a film, today an entire franchise is built upon the characters and books. Most recently The Hunger Games has received this treatment with costumes, jewellery, companion books, films and a massive range of merchandise. Though like many adaptations before it, fidelity has been overshadowed in favour of a romance story, which there is in the books though it is no where near the focus that the films have given it. This is where for directors and screenwriters will struggle to adapt for their audience, a mass audience doesn’t want the Marxist tale of the oppression of the workers scared to rebel, they want the young adult love triangle. We have seen this before with films taking a different turn than the books have to gain or expand the target audience. Fidelity to text is a big question, many fans cling to their books as they become films scared that the screen version will not meet the greatness of the book. The way an author might when handing over his or her book to a screenwriter, their baby is being taken and there will be changes. There is also the challenge of, yes, it is a good film but is it a good cinematic representation of the book and did they stay true to the characters and storyline originally written? “Adaptation is undeniably an appropriation of the text, and although the plot remains the same, the telling - or the interpreting of it - radically changes from one generation to the next,” writes Deborah Cartmell in her book Interpreting Shakespeare and Film. Taking in to consideration Cartmell’s own books subject matter, Shakespeare has been interpreted and spun in several different ways through cinema and stage, from modern and period dramas. Get Over it (2001) was an adaptation of A Midsummer Night’s Dream but addressed in a manner of high school drama instead of the aristocracy. Showing how we can adapt something in such diverse manner and still keep the plot the same, this is a more modern adaptation which shows how things have changed throughout generations. In this essay I have chosen to discuss the Harry Potter book series and film franchise

 

which has been adapted far beyond the films to video games of each film, lego video games and toys, clothing, costumes, stuffed toys, amusement parks and now Pottermore, the website created to tell the stories in an entirely new way. In its own way Pottermore is an adaptation of the books, in that further information is divulged by J.K.Rowling herself about the characters to help us indulge further in our enjoyment and knowledge of her books. The films, bar one, were adapted from novel to screen by Steve Kloves who described adapting the books as ‘tough’ and saying that the first film, The Philosopher’s Stone didn’t “lend itself to adaptation as well as the next two books.” Director Christopher Columbus worked very closely with both Kloves and Rowling herself, to make sure details of the books were being realised in the films. In Empire Magazine in 2001 Columbus discussed his relationship with Rowling saying he would call her and ask questions like “​What color are the wings of the Golden Snitch? Or how many uses are there for dragon’s blood?”. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone’s opening chapter is written from the point of view of Vernon and Petunia Dursley (Harry’s aunt and uncle) a day before they are supposed to take Harry in, this chapter paints how muggles react to the idea of magic. Columbus decided to cut this and open the film on the child being delivered to the home of the Dursley’s. As you read the first chapter you can see why it was cut, simply because it can be addressed differently, as it is when we meet other Magic folk. There was no need filmically for this scene and for a film about magic and fantasy to start on the dreary lives of muggles on Privet Drive wouldn’t be half the impact of a giant on a flying motorcycle. J.k.Rowling’s demands for involvement were odd, she had script reviewing privileges and one firm demand that it was to be British. Casting then remained almost entirely British and Irish, except those actors in the fourth film/book who were european. Kloves also seen the story as being a very British tale and Columbus was said to have taken some of his inspiration for the cinematic image of the wizarding world from David Lean’s adaptation of Great Expectation, “steeped in colour, mood, and detail.” The casting played a large part in the fidelity of the adaptation, Alan Rickman taking on the role of Professor of Potions, Severus Snape which initially caused a stir as in the book Snape is meant to be in his early thirties, where Rickman was twenty years older. One could argue that his age pulls away from the bitterness that was meant to be there, a young man whose bitter, supposed, hatred of Harry seems out of place where as a bitter older man is just accepted as a normal role. Other argue that Rickman’s portrayal was perfect but due to his “sex appeal” (which is only apparent to some) made people warm to a character that Rowling hadn’t wanted you to love, just yet. Though it is undeniable that the casting was perfect in the role, his droll

 

voice, stature and darkness brought the character to life. The casting of the Golden Trio; Harry, Ron and Hermione was tested during the third film, director Alfonso Cuarón asked Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint to submit to him an essay written by their character in first person about their lives before the wizarding world. He asked Grint why he didn’t submit it and Grint replied ‘I’m Ron, Ron wouldn’t do it.’ He tried to instill this idea of truth to the characters in each of the actors he asked them to find the character again for themselves and bring them to set. Rowling often spoke with them to make sure they understood their characters and why they acted in such a way when faced with... The fidelity to text in the first film of the series is strong, small details change, but all in all help the text progress and do not interfere with the plot. Removal of background characters such as Peeves the Poltergeist whose role was primarily comic relief in the books, this role is now filled in other ways with the Weasley twins more as head pranksters. The Philosopher’s Stone was widely received with a rating of 80% on Rotten Tomatoes though one reviewer, Richard Corliss of the Times, described the film as “by the numbers adaption” explaining that the film basically replicates the text rather than taking on it own form. Bring back this question: ​it is a good film but is it a good cinematic representation of the book and did they stay true to the characters and storyline originally written? Many say not a cinematic representation as much as a replication. ​Though its cinematography was criticised as well as being not very magical the film stayed true to certain aspects of the visuals that Rowling wrote about, but they did change some of her creations. The Quidditch pitch was originally described as normal football stadium but was changed somewhere through production to be a more open field with towers as bleachers with assigned house colours checkering the field. There are many scenes omitted or edited but again they do not change the plot, often simply make Harry out to be more of hero than he is when it fact it was a three person feat. We shall be skipping the second novel to film adaption to look more at The Prisoner of Azkaban because as Kloves said the next two novels lent themselves to being adapted. The Harry Potter series of adaptations begins its steady crawl of becoming difficult to adapt, Azkaban being the first novel to exceed 300 words and the thickening of plots. We also have a change of director as Columbus took a lesser involved role and Alfonso Cuaron took his position, who took a much more character driven approach, which has been mention in the essay as regards the essays he asked the “Golden Trio” to complete. In this film we see a lot of the fidelity to text fall away, with explanations and connections to aspects of the narrative are never full sewn up. A large fault is

 

the lack of explanation as to how The Marauder's Map is connected to Harry’s parents, the nicknames Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs are never actually addressed as Remus Lupin, Peter Pettigrew, Sirius Black and James Potter, which is key knowledge in explaining the characters and this story of betrayal. The film is seen to roll past many key aspects of Sirius’ back story and the story of the betrayal that left him in jail are never truly realised. This lack of fidelity is also smoothed over by the on point ​look ​of the film, which thanks to Cuaron is much more open and has lost its childish warmth now that Harry has grown. We do get the true character response of growth with Harry, Ron and Hermione and we get our first glimpse of a Harry that will stand up and fight. “I hope he finds me. Because when he does, I’m going to be ready. When he does, I’m going to kill him!” Creating a gritty reality made it so the magic came from a much more integral and personal place and next to the expanse of the landscape showed that they were just kids at a school. This change in visual gave so much more to the narrative than the warm glow that radiates from the first film did, “Cuaron has given Hogwarts a much more atmospheric feel where fears are hidden among the shadows created by his moody light​ing”. With the Prisoner of Azkaban you realise it is more a story about a story, Harry’s discovery of the true story of how his parents came to meet their end. This is done through narrative overlaps, Harry angry at what he learns of his parents betrayal, that their best friend was to blame, the narrative of Hermione and the time turner and the narrative involving The Marauders past’s. The back story and its realisation for Harry are the main focus of this novel and film setting up history that ties back into the plot again later. Though, as mentioned before, the film fails to fully address the details of this backstory such as The Fidelious Charm which in one quote is explained and infers the guilty party. “An immensely complex spell,” [Dumbledore] said squeakily, “involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find — unless, of course, the Secret-Keeper chooses to divulge it. As long as the Secret-Keeper refused to speak, You-Know-Who could search the village where Lily and James were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his nose pressed against their sitting room window!”

 

The inclusion of this quote would have raised the fidelity to text that the films climax lacked and would have more clearly painted that Sirius Black was an innocent man, however we are left a little unsure of him by the end of the film. ​This novel was primarily the set up for that which would come but the film fails to be as strong a lynchpin in the series as the novel was. At this stage in the series they had stayed away from flashbacks though it would have been a good medium to explain the secret keeper’s situation, however it was simple excluded from the plot. In all though in parts is incredibly truthful to the novel we do feel the story is somewhat incomplete which is not a feeling found at the end of the novel. The lack of explanation leaves us with a lack of resolution. An incredibly interesting challenge that was faced my Kloves as he adapted the novels was that the book series was not yet completed, he had no notions of the future of Rowling’s characters. He often asked her, hoping that in a writer to screenwriter bond and a unified hope for the series that he might give her a glimpse of the resolution. Kloves would have also had the pressure of adapting a films that by Harry Potter and The Chamber of Secrets has arrived on screen was a worldwide phenomenon and now there is a much wider audience waiting for the film to ruin the book. But remember what Professor Philip Nel said about adaptations, “the film does no violence to readers’ imagined versions of characters and events, but is does not offer its own creative vision”. A film may not produced or reimagine the characters or events they way you had pictured them but ones own imagination is of our own creation and so therefore is bound to have its unique imagery. The two filmic examples I have used may have had flaws in fidelity but they created a world and a story to lay companion to the novel series. The films in many case stand alone as good cinema even if their fidelity to text falls somewhat short and its true to say that in some of the films the idea of spectacle overshadowed the actual plot. The struggles with adaptation only go to show that it isn’t as easy as it looks.

Bibliography

 

Cartmell, D (1999). ​The Shakespeare On Screen Industry​. London: Routledge. p29-36. Cartmell, D (2012). ​A Companion to Literature, Film, and Adaptation​. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p5-12, p391-405. Rowling, J.K. (1997). ​Harry Potter and The Philosopher's Stone​. London: Bloomsbury. Rowling, J.K. (1999). ​Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkban​. London: Bloomsbury. Kloves Script for Prisoner of Azkban http://e-card.51.net/movie.scripts/Harry.Potter/Harry-Potter-and-the-Prisoner-of-Azkaban .htm

References   Cuaron sharpens, not worships, Rowling's work http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-06-04/entertainment/0406040337_1_harry-potter -mega-selling-books-azkaban-harry Harry Potter: The Past and The Future http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-06-04/entertainment/0406040340_1_harry-potter -katie-leung-steve-kloves Time Magazine’s Archive - Wizardry Without Magic http://web.archive.org/web/20070710155832/http://www.time.com/time/2001/harrypott er/review.html Harry Potter Review - TalkTalk http://www.talktalk.co.uk/entertainment/film/review/films/harry-potter-and-the-prisone r-of-azkaban/233 Screenwriter Kloves Talks Harry Potter http://uk.ign.com/articles/2001/02/06/screenwriter-kloves-talks-harry-potter Davis Confirms Potter Role http://uk.ign.com/articles/2001/01/08/davis-confirms-potter-role...