Blog #25
Early Rough Draft
Literature vs. Cinema: Is There a Superior Format?
Introduction
With the rise of more advanced and more sophisticated technology,
the ability to create fictional settings or even whole fictional characters
with the aid of CGI has never been simpler for filmmakers. As such, the door has been opened for movie
studios
The
main focus of this case study is to find out if there is a solid answer to
whether or not the stereotype is true that the written format of storytelling is
superior to the visual and audio cinematic format of storytelling. On top of this, I wish to find out if the way
that we as people read and process the information in books versus the way that
we read and process the information presented to us in movies has any
contributing factor to this notion.
Literature
Review
Remediation: Understanding New Media.
James Paul Gee: An
Introduction to Discourse Analysis
"Book vs. Movies." TIME Magazine
Methods
To collect the data that I needed, I felt that the only
way this could be achieved was if I selected a story that was known for having
both a literary and a cinematic adaptation, and study the experiences that
people had while reading and viewing both formats of the story respectively in
the form of a series of interviews. This
was conducted by looking specifically at both the movie and novelized versions
of the story Harry Potter and the
Sorcerer's Stone by JK Rowling. I
chose this particular story because it was the safest bet for gathering large amounts
of information, because of how drastically large of an impact that the Harry
Potter name has made on popular culture on a wide spread scale. Considering how the case study centers on the
tastes and opinions of the public, I felt that the best way to approach collecting
my data was through the use of personal interviews. Specifically, I interviewed individuals who
were known to be extreme fans of the Harry Potter series because they are the
most likely to be well knowledgeable of the story in both of its formats as
opposed to just one over the other. The
volunteers during the interviews were asked a brief series of simplistic
questions. These questions included, but
were not limited to; do the fans have a more enjoyable experience reading the
novel or viewing the movie and why? Is
there a happy median between the enjoyments of the two medias? Do the personal ways that the viewers and/or
readers take in information play a role in how they enjoy the story in any way?
In order to obtain the most accurate information about
the opinions of the Harry Potter fan base at large, I felt the necessity to
interview at least two Harry Potter fans.
Both interviews lasted approximately twenty minutes long each. The first person that I interviewed, who I
will refer to as M for the sake of confidentiality, was a Film major who
attended Kean University; he was approximately twenty years of age. The interview took place in person in the
quiet comforts of M’s living room and was recorded with an old-fashion tape
recorder. The second person that I
interviewed, who I will refer to as A, was an English Writing major who also
attended Kean University. The interview
was not done in person, but rather through video chat online the social media
network Skype. This interview was also
recorded with a tape recorder.
The
Presentation and Analysis of the Data
To
make sure that I had as varied of opinions as possible for my data, I found it
necessary to conduct at least two separate interviews. The first individual, who for the sake of
confidentiality I will refer to as M, was interviewed in person in the comforts
of his living room. The second
individual however, who I will refer to as A, was not interviewed in person,
but was instead interviewed by means of video chat on Skype. Both interviews were captured using a basic
tape recorder. One of the things that I
did not realize at first was that the selection of the two people that I
interviewed could not possibly have been any better since both of the
participants, although both huge fans of the Harry Potter franchise, offer such
diverse ideas and approach both the films and the books in such contrasting
ways.
For
example, the first person that I interviewed, M, is a Film major. As such, he has both extreme knowledge and
extreme passion on the subject matter of cinema. You could tell in his speech that he knew
what he was talking about and was eager to get his opinions out, almost to the
point where he would cut me off and start answering the questions before I
could finish asking them. This was most
prominent whenever I asked him questions that were specifically geared towards
the film adaptations of Harry Potter.
Specifically, it was when I asked M about how special effects influence
people's experience watching a movie that he gave me his longest answer and
revealed his ties to being a film major.
As I read the transcript to this interview, I realized that the emphasis
of the conversation ended up spending the most time talking about the
films. When it came to visualizing the
characters in the book, M stated that the author's descriptions of the
characters and settings did not matter much to him (although he did acknowledge
them), and instead he preferred visualizing things his way. Much of his opinions of the series were from
a visual standpoint. He did confess that
the films did have a big part in how he viewed the Harry Potter world in later
installments. The more Harry Potter
films that came out, the more that M visualized the actors in the shoes of the
book characters, and he believed that this was the case for many other people
who read the series. Despite M's
emphasis on discussing the film adaptation in my interview with him, M admitted
that in the end, he did in fact preferred the Sorcerer's Stone book more than
the movie as a stand-alone story. In M's
eyes, when following a series such as Harry Potter, the magic in the book was a
lot more powerful because with your imagination it can become so much more
amazing. In other words, from a visual
standpoint, while the human imagination is timeless and can make certain
settings and magic as vivid as the human mind will allow, the technology of the
time period in which the film was released basically limited how extravagant
the settings and the magic could be. He did not fully dismiss the movies
however, and in fact despite liking the book more, he defended them, saying that
Sorcerer's Stone did not make any unnecessary cuts to the book, and succeeded
in leaving in only what was necessary, which is good for casual fans who do not
want to be overwhelmed or weighed down by the bulky size of the first Harry
Potter book.. In fact, M went as far as
to say that it would be most beneficial for both the films and the books if
people went to go see the movie before picking up the book. In this way, people watch the movie without
having the pre-determined standards that people who read the book first have to
live up to and can enjoy it as its own piece of cinema. On the flip side, since the movies tend to
have less content that the books, fans can go back, read the original book, and
be pleasantly surprised and entertained by all of the extra content, obstacles,
and challenges that are in the book for them to experience.
On
the other end of the spectrum, unlike M who was a film major, A was an English
major, specifically an English Writing major.
A is an experienced writer, and has even written some works of her
own. As such, I was fortunate to obtain
opinions from people of both the cinematic and literary persuasion. Unlike M, who was quick and eager to answer
each question, A took her time with each question, making sure to choose each
of her words carefully so that she could give the clearest and most efficient
answer possible. At first, her answers
were very terse and to the point, and it was only further into the interview
that she began to warm up and give longer and more detailed answers. While reading over the transcript, I was
surprised to find that unlike my interview with M, my interview with A was a
lot more about the literature side of the series. Also unlike M, A felt that when visualizing
the sets and characters, a lot of what she saw in her head was based off of the
author's character descriptions. In
fact, A went as far as to state that detailed descriptions were some of the
most important aspects when reading a book, and without them the formula
becomes dry. A had her own opinions
about how a fan of the series should handle experiencing both the book and the
movies. A believes that even if you do
decide to view the film adaptation first, you should at least read the original
book no matter what. A also argued that
it would actually be more harmful for the book experience if you saw the movie
beforehand, basing her opinions on the fact that when reading the settings, the
characters, and the magic spells, your mind would already have pre-programed
images of what all of these things look like, thus creating a narrower mind
with what you can experience after watching the movie. Once you watch the movie first, that is all
that you think of. Meanwhile the imagination
is endless, which ties in to an extent what M was saying about the book
experience. A also stated that sometimes
that it can be a huge damper on the experience of the film when certain content
from the book is altered or left out entirely in the book. This is because if the director or script
writer goes too far with the changes, it could end up completely altering the
possible outlook of the scene, thus possibly losing the original meaning or
significance that the original author intended to be included in there. However, A did confess that in terms of
changes to The Sorcerer's Stone, they got all of the major points needed for
the first film to remain relevant, and actually adapted the original first
story pretty well, much like M thought.
On top of this, A also admits that in some instances watching the movie
adaptation first could potentially add to the original book as well because the
reader would have the additional audio (voices, sound effects, music, etc.) and
visual images to make the reading experience more involved and realistic. A also made a very valid point that it may
not necessarily be the fact that "literature is superior to cinema"
per say, but rather fans (and people in general) are very set in their ways,
and tend to prefer a story in whichever format it was released in first simply
because that is what they knew first. In
this case, because it is much more common to see books made into movies in this
day and age, people go into the movie theaters with pre-determined standards
for what the films should live up to instead of viewing it as its own piece. As such people tend to say "the book was
better" more often because it was all that they knew first, and humans are
creatures that don't like change.
Perhaps if we lived in an alternate universe where movies tended to get
turned into books more often, it may be possible that the general discourse
would be "meh, the movie was better".
Conclusion
In
the end, even though both participants had stronger knowledge on one side of
the media conflict or the other, both seemed to have common views on the
original book. However, neither
volunteer would specifically or outright say that the other format was inferior
or worse. Both participants provided
evidence to support both forms of media.
So really, what does it all boil down to? Which is truly the superior format? Going based solely off of this information, I
would have to say neither. The data is
inconclusive, not from a lack of information, but rather from an excess of
information. Perhaps it is true that the
only reason that many people prefer literature over cinema is because we are by
nature creatures of habit that do not like to see change to the things we like
and are comfortable with. On the other
hand, maybe literature does tend to take more if its time to properly explain
the details of the world while allowing you to remain as creative as you wish
while creating this vast universe in your mind, unchained and unhampered by the
technological limitations of the time we live in. Either more data must be collected, or in the
end, it all depends on how willing a fan is to open up or narrow their mind
when processing the information given to them.
Work Cited
Bolter, David Jay, and
Richard Grusin. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cabrridge: The MIT Press, 2000.
Print.
Corliss, Richard,
Richard Schickel, et al. "Book vs. Movies." TIME Magazine. 27 Nov.
2005. Web. 19 Feb. 2013 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1134742,00.html
James Paul Gee: An
Introduction to Discourse Analysis
No comments:
Post a Comment