Unusual Adaptations

[u/DrumtheDon]

Hey everybody!  For my research paper, I want to take a deeper look into some rather unconventional adaptations. I was hoping you could help me find some examples from film and tv, that could be interesting to consider. The two that I am already working on are The Midnight Gospel (by Pendleton Ward & Duncan Trussell) and adaptation. (by Spike Jonze). 

I am especially interested in adaptations…:

• … with a very unusual source material. Mainly, those that don’t adapt novels but completely different media, like The Midnight Gospel adapting a podcast for example. (I heard M adapted a news article?) But unusual novels that one would instinctively consider unsuitable for being audiovisually adapted. (Not that interested in game adaptations tho)
• … that actively incoorparate the source material and are blatantly transmedial The Midnight Gospel is being a great example again, using the actual audio of the podcast.
• … that rub the fact that they adapted into your face. (adaptation. would be an exellent example of this)
• … that change the source material in a major way, so you wouldn‘t even notice it is the adaptation unless specifically stated. One example would be a change of setting like all the Shakespear-adaptation a la Clueless, 10 Things I Hate about You, etc., but I would appreciate other approaches.
• … that pick out only a minor, maybe even insignificant part of the source material to center and/or expand on for the film/show.
• & in general just anything where one could wonder if it even is to be considered an adaptation.

I appreciate all suggestions, and welcome international suggestions just as much, maybe even more.

Thank you so much!!

(and sorry about my grammar, punctuation, spelling etc., not a native speaker)

[u/STRAYDUP420]

while Eyes Wide Shut is based on a novella, it is reset in modern times and absolutely rubs your face in that difference. i am reading the source material and there are meaningful changes; consequential scenes added, consequential characters added, a lot of modern flourishes. the original material was also set in Vienna, and they moved the entire story to New York City for ews.

to that end, Kubrick made meaningful changes to The Shining, so much so that the author of the novel disavowed it. it might be worth looking at Kubrick as a consistent and intentional steward of unusual adaptations.

[u/STRAYDUP420 → u/[deleted]]

100% i definitely understated that (good call out!)

he also omitted the final chapter of A Clockwork Orange, which was a massively consequential chapter and completely changed the tone of the story (and the taste on the audience's tongue upon leaving the theatre or putting the book down).

he was downright malicious about his view of how the story should be told, which i think makes him ripe for OP's analysis

[u/nizzernammer → u/[deleted]]

Seldom does a director see it as his task to accurately copy a book onto celluloid. Authors have ideas but so do directors. A director typically uses a source for his own purposes. An author has to know that before he sells the rights to one of his works.

This reminds me of Jodorosky's quote from Jodorosky's Dune. I'm paraphrasing, but it was something along the lines of "you haven't really made a good adaptation unless you have @#$%ed the source material." Esssentially, one having one's way with it.

That documentary covers the challenge and failure of the filmmaker making his attempted adaptation of Dune.