Hello, night owls! When I talked about The BFG movie last week, I mentioned that movies will be different from the books they're adapted from. Some may be more faithful to their source material, but most of the time, there are going to be differences and changes. Why, you might ask? Because the medium of film is different from the medium of literature. Film is all about visuals and the more interesting the visuals, the more likely your audience is going to stick around. Literature, on the other hand, depends entirely on words to paint the world of the story, so there are often a lot more details and pieces of exposition to help the reader understand.
The simple fact of the matter with a film adaptation is you can't have everything. If you try to keep every expository piece or every little character/event, you're going to have a two hour movie and probably a very bored audience (unless the movie is something like Lord of the Rings, and even those movies don't have every single thing from the books). You have to know what cuts to make in order to keep the story going but to also keep the audiences in their seats.
There's also another thing that directors do that gets to me more than cutting out story parts - adding in/exaggerating parts. What do I mean by this? Basically, if a director feels that the majority of an audience will find a certain joke, sequence, or character entertaining, they'll throw in either an original character of their own or they'll take one of the book's characters and adapt him/her to a stereotype. Perhaps the director doesn't know what to do with a part of the story or they feel they need to throw in something more, but whatever the case, it bothers me. It makes eccentric characters absolutely unbearable and surreal sequences complete torture to sit through.
But no matter what changes or cuts are made to a book's story for an adaptation, there is one thing above all that most directors try to keep from the book: its spirit. Above all else, it should have the same atmosphere, the same enchantment as the book - it has to whirl you away into a magical experience like the book did. That way even those who have never read the source material can still get the idea of the world and characters around them. This is more important than leaving in a subplot or secondary character, because the integrity of any story is in its spirit.
That's why I no longer get pissed at adaptations if they don't follow the books to a T. If they can stick to the main plot and if they can still give me the same atmosphere I felt when reading the books, I'll generally walk out content.
With that in mind, how does Henry Selick's 2009 adaptation hold up to Neil Gaiman's Coraline?
Well...
I'd better get my biased viewpoint out of the way first. When I was 11, I read Coraline for the first time. I didn't like it back then because I was 11 and scared of everything. Years later though, I read the book again as a teenager - still scared of everything! - and found that there was more to this book than I originally thought. I loved Coraline for her bravery, I loved the creepy Other World, and the Other Mother is still one of my favorite literary villains. So naturally, I loved the book enough to the point where I had expectations for the movie.
Upon watching the movie, I came away feeling...well, not completely satisfied. However, I watched it again quite recently. After setting aside my partiality, I came away with a slightly different view.
Coraline, the film adaptation, is almost perfect.
To be honest, the only part of the movie that really bothers me is the first half before everything goes to hell.
The parts in the first half that bother me most are the ones that are exaggerated: the real parents, the neighbors, and the scenes with the Other neighbors. My only problem with the real parents is they seemed either too neglectful or too mean at times. But I find more fault with the neighbors.
They're too eccentric.
I never thought I'd say that about Gaiman characters, but in the movie, the neighbors are way too weird. Mr. Bobinsky, Miss Forcible, and Miss Spink are supposed to be "unique" and they are portrayed as such in the book. However, in the book, they seemed like genuine people - albeit a bit strange, but they felt like people you might meet if you moved into an apartment complex...minus the circus mice. In the movie, though, they are played as complete character types. Really annoying character types. They're loud and obnoxious. The moment they appear on screen, you can't wait until they go away.
In the Other World, they're even worse. I can't watch Forcible and Spink's entertainment scene because it's too obnoxious. It's pure torture to for me to sit through. I know the scene is cheesy in the book, but it wasn't outright unbearable like this. At least in the book, you weren't bombarded by a crazy song and the unpleasant imagery of Forcible and Spink before they become young again. This scene is probably done this way for "humorous" reasons, I suppose, but I can't help but skip that scene every time I watch the movie. As for Bobinsky, he's a little too much for me, too, and I'd probably skip his scene as well if it wasn't for the incredible animation of the circus mice.
Overall, the scenes with the Other neighbors felt jarring and they just halted the story. It was such that I was desperate for the second half - the part of the story where seriously creepy stuff goes down - to kick in.
And when that second half kicked in, it was so good!! All the imagery, from the Other Mother's creepy transformation and her insect sitting room, to the deformed Other neighbors was perfect. It was a true nightmare, as frightening and exhilarating as it was in the book. For that second half alone, I would watch the movie again.
But if only the second half is the best part of the movie, then does that mean the adaptation failed?
Personally, I don't think so. I feel like it does a good job at portraying Coraline as the tough yet relatable heroine that she is. She's funny, she's fierce, and you really feel for her when everything normal about the real world is taken away from her. And in spite of the changes that were made, I feel that it did a good job of preserving the main story, with all its themes of bravery and togetherness. In fact, some of the changes they made added more to the story in a positive way (e.g. the character of Wybie, who gives more insights about the Other Mother's deeds). Stop-motion animation was the best medium to be used in order to bring out all the spooks, quirks, and charm of this story. The sets/designs bring out the right atmosphere for the real world and the Other World. A quaint, poignant musical score dotted here and there with vocals brings out feelings you might not have felt when reading the book. And over all, it still maintains the spirit of the Coraline story. Because at its heart, it's still about a girl who realizes the worth of her family and decides to fight for it, no matter what enemies she has to face.
P. S. The Cat in this movie is awesome!!
~Maud,
Official Night Owl
No comments:
Post a Comment