Film Vs Books

I’m actually quite guilty of watching films before reading the books they’re adapted from but I put that down to the fact that I love books and film in equal measure. This got me thinking about stories that I’ve both read and watched, how they compare and if the films do the books justice. Below are four of these stories and how I think they’ve measured up. There will be spoilers ahead.

Trainspotting 

I am a big fan of Trainspotting. After watching the film I read the screenplay and then the book. So I’ve sort of worked my way backwards and I can say that I’ve enjoyed it in each form. The book itself I felt was more able to really delve into characters and actually show the brutality and tragedy that addiction can inflict on addicts and those around them.

Something I really enjoyed was the humour in Welsh’s writing, in particular any of Begbie’s chapters (It’s quite impressive how many C bombs you can drop in one sentence.)  I believe the film is a great adaptation. It is honest in a brutal way that recreates the tone of the book whilst also keeping the humour that works so well in the novel. Even the soundtrack reflects the music that plays its way through the book. What is perhaps the most different is the flow, with the film having more of a continuing narrative whereas the book feels almost more like a collection of short stories that build to an arching narrative.

I felt that Tommy’s story was communicated so devastatingly in the book in just a short chapter and one particular line in it: “Tommy will not survive winter in West Granton.” It was Tommy's story in the film that I found the most emotive but I actually prefer how it's shown in the book. Tommy goes from being a strong man who indulges in alcohol and drugs but distances himself from heroin until his girlfriend leaves him. His character quietly fades away in the background of others stories until he becomes weak, desperate and isolated. I think choosing to show the destruction of Tommy's life in this subtle way is actually more impactful and realistic than the films presentation. In the film, Tommy is a more innocent character who's life falls apart when he begins using drugs. His death in the film actually happens to Matty in the book, it's almost like all the characters who are HIV positive are rolled together into Tommy's character for the film.

It's worth noting that there are more stories in Welsh’s novel that reach more characters. There are some parts of the book I would like to have seen in the film such as Renton's brothers and more of the women's stories as these were some of the quieter, more hard hitting moments of the novel for me. All in all though, I do think the film is an accurate and brilliant adaptation of an incredible novel.

Into the wild 

Into The Wild is a bit of a tricky one, especially as it is based on a real story. I found that how Christopher is portrayed in the book vs the film is really different. In the book he seems slightly arrogant and naive but his intentions and feelings feel human and understandable. This book was actually part of my A-level studies and in discussion it often came up how frustrating it was to see him behave recklessly and be quite selfish especially in regards to Ronald Franz. Whereas in the film, his actions and beliefs feel quite glamorised and his character was framed as an almost inspirational figure. His death in the film still reflects the mistakes he made but doesn't show just how unprepared he was, with safety, information and escape all seeming available to him if he had done more research. 

However, I did thoroughly enjoy both the book and the film despite them feeling a bit like two different stories. The film feels like a great big adventure and Christopher's journey is presented beautifully. I think the film really highlights his realisation that “happiness is only real when shared” and this makes the end of the film feel very bittersweet because I found myself rooting for his journey only for him to achieve his dream and realise he was missing connection. 

The book is such an interesting read that I would recommend to anyone. Krakauer tells Christopher’s story from so many perspectives, talking to people who only briefly met Christopher McCandless along his journey. It focuses on the practical elements of exploring and other stories of young men who wanted to venture into the wild, even drawing on Krakauer's own experiences. I would perhaps say I prefer the book slightly more but it’s difficult to compare as they feel like two separate stories. So although the film and book are very different, they both have merit in how they tell Christopher's story, which has touched and inspired so many people. 

Normal People 

I watched the 2020 TV adaptation of Normal People straight after putting the book down and I will say it is one of my favourite adaptations out there. It is so loyal to the book which I thought was great. It managed to capture such interior feeling of the characters which TV and film can sometimes struggle to do in comparison to books. The casting is also great with Marianne and Connell being exactly how I pictured them whilst reading. Interestingly whilst reading the book I spent a lot of time feeling myself empathising with Connell (which annoyed some people when I told them) but in the series I felt much closer to Marianne. It just goes to show how different mediums of the same story can change how we feel about them.  I recommended my sister to read the book after she enjoyed the series and she actually really struggled to get through it because of how similar it was. So perhaps it’s possible that it's almost too accurate of an adaptation for some people. For me though, it’s just right.

Pride and Prejudice 

For this blog I'm referencing the 2005 film adaptation of Pride and Prejudice although I know lots of people love the series from 1995. This for me is a great film that feels very romantic. I love the feelings of late summer days that it captures which is something I didn’t feel in the book. Obviously The film has the iconic scenes of Mr Darcy’s hand flex and his walk through the mist to Lizzie. I even make trips to Stour Head just to see where they filmed the rainy proposal scene!

The book is also great (obviously) and I always find it interesting how well Austen's humour relates to modern social settings. I’m sure lots of us can relate to awkward moments and catty comments made at parties. The film captures this humour amazingly and I actually think it boosts the romantic elements a bit more than the book does. Obviously Mr Darcy’s secret acts of kindness are what Lizzie falls in love with but I also felt whilst reading that seeing his house and wealth is what seals the deal for her. I actually think this is still quite funny and very reflective of the time period that Austen was writing in so isn’t necessarily a negative factor of the book. However, this maybe makes me look to the film for a rewatch rather than the book for a reread. It definitely depends on what your tastes are and you won’t be disappointed whether you watch the film or read the book.