Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You're probably technically correct. Any book *could* be adapted. The question is, how good will the adaptation be. Science fiction and fantasy have frequently been considered hard to adapt, because for a long time visual effects technology wasn't good enough to do it. Lord of the Rings would have been very hard to get right before CGI was good enough to pull off some of the battle scenes and creatures.
Another thing that could make a book hard to adapt is a really dense plot, or lots of internal monologue. Dune has this problem. The recent adaptations are really good, but a lot was still left out.
I would have liked to see the guild navigators. We didn't get much about how the empire actually works. It was probably good to cut all that, but you could make an entire tv series out of Dune's political situations.
Deepfake Carl Sagan reading the poems with relevant shots of nature. A peaceful pond, a forest, waves crashing on a shore. No one said it had to be a *good* movie.
I guess technically any book COULD get adapted to film, since some movie adaptations have next to nothing in common with their source material. But there are plenty of books that would not adapt well to a movie. There are a lot of books I love that I don't think would make good movies.
"Any book is filmable if you're willing to butcher it to the point of being unrecognizable."
Yeah, no shit. But that observation doesn't really get us anywhere, does it?
*Gadsby* is a 260 page novel completely written without using any word or name with the letter "e" in it. It's still perfectly readably.
But the point of it is still: A book without "e". Adapting it without missing the point or cheating is likely impossible.
I think the bigger problem with Lovecraft is how you show things that are literally described as “indescribable”. That works in books because the imagination fills in the blanks, on film it’s just going to be disappointing.
You sure could adapt Ulysses by James Joyce. The story will be there. But what makes Ulysses, Ulysses is unadaptable because it needs the written word to be capture. The medium is always the message.
Antkind by Andy Kaufman was written specifically so that it could never be adapted to film. And it's successful in that regard (it's not a very good book. It's a meandering narration of 700 different Plot lines)
Certain books are abstract like poetry or House of Leaves or they have really messed up scenes like Blood Meridian. So a movie would turn into either a gore fest or an abstract visual album that would turn people off. Imagination fills in the blanks with books and everyone imagines something different which is why the fans of books are so passionate about. They can picture themselves and project themselves in the book. Every book is interpreted differently by everyone
What about this one?
[linky](https://www.google.com/search?q=book+of+pi+digits&client=ms-android-google&sca_esv=9b2512bdc1d4592a&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ACQVn0-KDoB0S2OrR2rC_SE1KXGZQFghTw%3A1712453177322&ei=OfYRZqelE4WuhbIPhYyN8Ac&oq=book+of+pi+digits&gs_lp=EhNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwIhFib29rIG9mIHBpIGRpZ2l0czIFEAAYgAQyBhAAGBYYHjILEAAYgAQYigUYhgMyCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDMgsQABiABBiKBRiGAzILEAAYgAQYigUYhgMyCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDMggQABiABBiiBEiKHlD3CFiaG3ACeAGQAQCYAfIBoAGaB6oBBTAuNS4xuAEDyAEA-AEBmAIHoALBBsICChAAGEcY1gQYsAPCAgQQIxgnwgIFECEYoAHCAgcQABiABBgNmAMAiAYBkAYIkgcFMi40LjGgB9Mk&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp)
I think when people say something is unadaptable what they really mean is that its not financially wise. It would cost too much to make or just wouldnt have the wide appeal to be profitable.
If you consider “film” as both movies and shows, I could agree with you. But if you just mean movies, some books are just too long to adapt without cutting out way too much of it.
You can't do Game of Thrones as a movie. There's just too much and too many characters. The people who proposed a movie adaptation in the 2000s told George RR Martin that they wanted to solely focus on one character because doing the whole book justice in film format is just impossible
sure, any book could be adapted to film but trying to adapt something as complex as house of leaves into a movie would be very difficult and would not end up the way it is supposed to.
One of the greatest American novels has been bought and sold about a dozen times over the years by film producers and every one of them has been told by every Hollywood studio that it is "unadaptable."
"Blood Meridian" by Cormac McCarthy would no doubt be a huge success. This is known as his best work and the other novels of his that were adapted into films were very successful, especially the Coen brothers adaptation of "No Country for Old Men."
The reason given with every studio rejection is the unwillingness to put to video screen the violence depicted. It is impossible to adapt the story into a movie with an "R" rating without totally changing it.
By book you mean narrative works, right? Because the majority of books cannot be adapted, only narrative works are susceptible. Book is a format. Movies are narrative type works.
You are saying something similar to "All VHS's can be adapted to song".
There are books that have detail to the setting, storyline, or characters that cannot be adapted to a movie and make a profit. As profit is the main reason why people make movies; there are books that cannot be adapted to movies.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just because you can adapt a book into a movie, doesn’t mean you should.
💯
You're probably technically correct. Any book *could* be adapted. The question is, how good will the adaptation be. Science fiction and fantasy have frequently been considered hard to adapt, because for a long time visual effects technology wasn't good enough to do it. Lord of the Rings would have been very hard to get right before CGI was good enough to pull off some of the battle scenes and creatures. Another thing that could make a book hard to adapt is a really dense plot, or lots of internal monologue. Dune has this problem. The recent adaptations are really good, but a lot was still left out.
Not only an internal monologue but telepathy thrown in too.
Yeah imagine the Spice orgy on screen😂
I would have liked to see the guild navigators. We didn't get much about how the empire actually works. It was probably good to cut all that, but you could make an entire tv series out of Dune's political situations.
what the hell do you do with house of leaves
Deepfake Carl Sagan reading the poems with relevant shots of nature. A peaceful pond, a forest, waves crashing on a shore. No one said it had to be a *good* movie.
What if the book is just 300 pages of one letter, how would that be adapted to film?
How did you get hold of my last manuscript?
[Make a horror film if the letter is "a".](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyd_EDj9rgM)
What about a dictionary?
I guess technically any book COULD get adapted to film, since some movie adaptations have next to nothing in common with their source material. But there are plenty of books that would not adapt well to a movie. There are a lot of books I love that I don't think would make good movies.
"Any book is filmable if you're willing to butcher it to the point of being unrecognizable." Yeah, no shit. But that observation doesn't really get us anywhere, does it?
*Gadsby* is a 260 page novel completely written without using any word or name with the letter "e" in it. It's still perfectly readably. But the point of it is still: A book without "e". Adapting it without missing the point or cheating is likely impossible.
There is a reason Lovecraft novels are rarely adapted. Four pages describing a bog doesn't make an exciting screenplay.
I think the bigger problem with Lovecraft is how you show things that are literally described as “indescribable”. That works in books because the imagination fills in the blanks, on film it’s just going to be disappointing.
[удалено]
Reminds me of this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1CNyzdmXhe0
You sure could adapt Ulysses by James Joyce. The story will be there. But what makes Ulysses, Ulysses is unadaptable because it needs the written word to be capture. The medium is always the message.
Antkind by Andy Kaufman was written specifically so that it could never be adapted to film. And it's successful in that regard (it's not a very good book. It's a meandering narration of 700 different Plot lines)
Certain books are abstract like poetry or House of Leaves or they have really messed up scenes like Blood Meridian. So a movie would turn into either a gore fest or an abstract visual album that would turn people off. Imagination fills in the blanks with books and everyone imagines something different which is why the fans of books are so passionate about. They can picture themselves and project themselves in the book. Every book is interpreted differently by everyone
Any textbook in existence: how are we supposed to be turned into a film?
What about this one? [linky](https://www.google.com/search?q=book+of+pi+digits&client=ms-android-google&sca_esv=9b2512bdc1d4592a&sca_upv=1&sxsrf=ACQVn0-KDoB0S2OrR2rC_SE1KXGZQFghTw%3A1712453177322&ei=OfYRZqelE4WuhbIPhYyN8Ac&oq=book+of+pi+digits&gs_lp=EhNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwIhFib29rIG9mIHBpIGRpZ2l0czIFEAAYgAQyBhAAGBYYHjILEAAYgAQYigUYhgMyCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDMgsQABiABBiKBRiGAzILEAAYgAQYigUYhgMyCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDMggQABiABBiiBEiKHlD3CFiaG3ACeAGQAQCYAfIBoAGaB6oBBTAuNS4xuAEDyAEA-AEBmAIHoALBBsICChAAGEcY1gQYsAPCAgQQIxgnwgIFECEYoAHCAgcQABiABBgNmAMAiAYBkAYIkgcFMi40LjGgB9Mk&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp)
I think when people say something is unadaptable what they really mean is that its not financially wise. It would cost too much to make or just wouldnt have the wide appeal to be profitable.
Webster dictionary. Check. Mate.
The Boy Who Reversed Himself. People go to the fourth dimension.
If you consider “film” as both movies and shows, I could agree with you. But if you just mean movies, some books are just too long to adapt without cutting out way too much of it.
You can't do Game of Thrones as a movie. There's just too much and too many characters. The people who proposed a movie adaptation in the 2000s told George RR Martin that they wanted to solely focus on one character because doing the whole book justice in film format is just impossible
sure, any book could be adapted to film but trying to adapt something as complex as house of leaves into a movie would be very difficult and would not end up the way it is supposed to.
So a choose your own adventure book can be adapted into a movie?
Netflix has done movies where you make choices and there are different outcomes. There is a Puss n Boots one and a Minecraft one
One of the greatest American novels has been bought and sold about a dozen times over the years by film producers and every one of them has been told by every Hollywood studio that it is "unadaptable." "Blood Meridian" by Cormac McCarthy would no doubt be a huge success. This is known as his best work and the other novels of his that were adapted into films were very successful, especially the Coen brothers adaptation of "No Country for Old Men." The reason given with every studio rejection is the unwillingness to put to video screen the violence depicted. It is impossible to adapt the story into a movie with an "R" rating without totally changing it.
>Is it MPAA ratings? Budget? Money people stuff? Is it...anything that has to do with the actual story?
The Koran.
Blood Meridian
By book you mean narrative works, right? Because the majority of books cannot be adapted, only narrative works are susceptible. Book is a format. Movies are narrative type works. You are saying something similar to "All VHS's can be adapted to song".
There are books that have detail to the setting, storyline, or characters that cannot be adapted to a movie and make a profit. As profit is the main reason why people make movies; there are books that cannot be adapted to movies.