I've just read A Handmaid's Tale and am now two episodes into season two of the Elisabeth Moss show. I'm enjoying the show way more than I did the book. Blasphemy? Perhaps!
I remember writing in some recent comment on POV my then very young son's word's that will stick with me forever : 'A book is like a movie you watch in your head.' Because so much van be left to the imagination to fill in. Yet when you are writing historical fiction, you really want to get the details right. And in any story where there's going to be a fight, especially in an enclosed space.
I have not read A Handmaid's Tale, and I believe I got through the first two seasons, but in general did not enjoy them, as I found them very slow, and I wonder if the book is faster-paced.
But there are two more up my alley that I gotta ask about! You could probably see it coming (from me), but, The Shining?
And, please bear with me, but comics and graphic novels count too, right? So what about The Walking Dead universe? I never read the graphic novels, but learned from the aftershow Talking Dead that some plotlines were followed almost so to the letter that certain scenes had the actors and set reproduce full-page spreads from the books, and yet other plotlines are either altered or discarded, and there are entire storylines original to the shows. One really basic and surprising one is that one of the show's most beloved characters, Daryl Dixon, portrayed by Norman Reedus, was invented for the show, and does not exist in the books.
My husband has all the Walking Dead Compendiums so I ran this by him. He says the Neegan/Glen scene is the perfect example of on-page art turning into on-screen action. He really loved how closely they mirrored the art from the comics.
I have never seen The Shining or watched The Handmade's Tale. I wonder if their popularity comes from the larger audience that have not read the books?
Stephen King, the way I understand it, likes and respects Jack Nicholson, but the problem was Nicholson saw and approached the character his own way. The result was that Stephen King never released full creative rights to a studio again. And I think A Handmaid's Tale also benefits from heavy marketing.
As for TWD, an example they gave on Talking Dead was earlier than the one your husband referenced, but also involved Glen, in what was either a full or two page spread when they first meet Abraham Ford's group; all the actors at an end-of- episode cliffhanger are positioned to replicate the drawing almost precisely.
I just think that what got on my nerves was the length of those lingering shots of Elisabeth Moss just staring (expressively, of course) at the camera. But that's on the directors.
And in The Shining, I think that everybody knows Stephen King really dud not like the way the main character was portrayed by Jack Nicholson in the movie, as being a man who seemed waiting for an excuse to let his thinly-veiled true nature out, as opposed to a man who was desperately trying to do the right things, but was corrupted by an evil place.
I LOVE the premise of this essay! For me, the book is often better because I find I’m able to imagine its world as I encounter it, rather than someone else’s interpretation. I also enjoy the slower pace of reading the book, working through it (usually!) over a few weeks and diving into all the details.
That, and I’m also just generally just not a film person so I’m probably biased towards books anyway 😂
Same! Although, I found myself enjoying adaptations more when I started to think of them as a fellow creatives interpretation of a book rather than someone trying to put what's on the page on the screen. Allowing them artistic freedom helps me enjoy the creative slant the movie takes. (At least when it coincides with my creative slant. LOL.)
If you love classic cinema, I have a rec for you. Leave Her To Heaven. Its about a writer who falls in love and has some of the best outfits I've ever seen.
I've just read A Handmaid's Tale and am now two episodes into season two of the Elisabeth Moss show. I'm enjoying the show way more than I did the book. Blasphemy? Perhaps!
Haha! It’s allowed. It can be fun to see a book visually come to life… as long as the vision is close to what you saw reading.
I remember writing in some recent comment on POV my then very young son's word's that will stick with me forever : 'A book is like a movie you watch in your head.' Because so much van be left to the imagination to fill in. Yet when you are writing historical fiction, you really want to get the details right. And in any story where there's going to be a fight, especially in an enclosed space.
I have not read A Handmaid's Tale, and I believe I got through the first two seasons, but in general did not enjoy them, as I found them very slow, and I wonder if the book is faster-paced.
But there are two more up my alley that I gotta ask about! You could probably see it coming (from me), but, The Shining?
And, please bear with me, but comics and graphic novels count too, right? So what about The Walking Dead universe? I never read the graphic novels, but learned from the aftershow Talking Dead that some plotlines were followed almost so to the letter that certain scenes had the actors and set reproduce full-page spreads from the books, and yet other plotlines are either altered or discarded, and there are entire storylines original to the shows. One really basic and surprising one is that one of the show's most beloved characters, Daryl Dixon, portrayed by Norman Reedus, was invented for the show, and does not exist in the books.
My husband has all the Walking Dead Compendiums so I ran this by him. He says the Neegan/Glen scene is the perfect example of on-page art turning into on-screen action. He really loved how closely they mirrored the art from the comics.
I have never seen The Shining or watched The Handmade's Tale. I wonder if their popularity comes from the larger audience that have not read the books?
Stephen King, the way I understand it, likes and respects Jack Nicholson, but the problem was Nicholson saw and approached the character his own way. The result was that Stephen King never released full creative rights to a studio again. And I think A Handmaid's Tale also benefits from heavy marketing.
As for TWD, an example they gave on Talking Dead was earlier than the one your husband referenced, but also involved Glen, in what was either a full or two page spread when they first meet Abraham Ford's group; all the actors at an end-of- episode cliffhanger are positioned to replicate the drawing almost precisely.
I just think that what got on my nerves was the length of those lingering shots of Elisabeth Moss just staring (expressively, of course) at the camera. But that's on the directors.
And in The Shining, I think that everybody knows Stephen King really dud not like the way the main character was portrayed by Jack Nicholson in the movie, as being a man who seemed waiting for an excuse to let his thinly-veiled true nature out, as opposed to a man who was desperately trying to do the right things, but was corrupted by an evil place.
I LOVE the premise of this essay! For me, the book is often better because I find I’m able to imagine its world as I encounter it, rather than someone else’s interpretation. I also enjoy the slower pace of reading the book, working through it (usually!) over a few weeks and diving into all the details.
That, and I’m also just generally just not a film person so I’m probably biased towards books anyway 😂
Same! Although, I found myself enjoying adaptations more when I started to think of them as a fellow creatives interpretation of a book rather than someone trying to put what's on the page on the screen. Allowing them artistic freedom helps me enjoy the creative slant the movie takes. (At least when it coincides with my creative slant. LOL.)
If you love classic cinema, I have a rec for you. Leave Her To Heaven. Its about a writer who falls in love and has some of the best outfits I've ever seen.