I have not been enthused about any movie adaptation of books in a long time. I don’t think I ever really was enthusiastic about book adaptations. If I was, it was probably because it was a popular book that I could talk to other people about (looking at you, Twilight and The Hunger Games). And those came out when I was a teenager, back when I had actual time to spare a thought or two about book adaptations in any form.
There are just too many adaptations coming out these days that it’s hard to keep up with. Even trying to read the original source material before seeing the adaptation seems to be too much of a hassle. I already have a growing TBR list, since I haven’t been keeping up with the latest publications as of late for financial reasons. To add even more books just because it has a movie or TV show being made from it is just too much pressure for my fragile mind to take.
The only adaptation that I’ve been excited by this year was The Handmaid’s Tale, based off of Margaret Atwood’s infamous novel of the same name. And, honestly, if you have seen the show, can you blame me? It’s such an amazing show, and the way that they’re expanding the original material is so good to watch. We get to see how the world is functioning outside of Offred’s personal views, and that is something I was excited to follow, especially with the way that it ended. I cannot wait to see what they throw at us in season two.
But as far as anything else? Nope, don’t really care to see them. I’m constantly aware of their existence, whether by advertisements or social media or friends talking about them, but I don’t feel like going out and seeing them, much less reading the original source material.
Now, supposedly, I can go see a movie adaptation of a book without reading the original source material, but there’s some ridiculous stigma surrounding that whole idea. At least, if you are a self-proclaimed bookworm. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard someone say, “the book is better” when people talk about only seeing the adaptations of a book. Which, they’re kind of right in the sense that books allow a lot more details to be presented to the audience because there isn’t necessarily a time limit on reading. With other media forms, if it’s longer than two and a half hours, people start to get antsy. Theater productions are required to have an intermission to give the audience a break from the excitement. Television shows have commercial breaks. Movies only have the trailers at the beginning, and then people sit there for at least an hour just watching the movie. And some people will purposely break away from the performance on the screen to relieve themselves or fill up on snacks. People need breaks to fully enjoy their entertainment.
With reading, it’s as simple as putting the book down. Then the person reading it can go do what they need to do and come back where they left off. And if they want to read through it with no break, then they can. There’s no guidelines or arbitrary rules to enjoying a book, despite how some people present their “preferences.”
But purposely reading a book just to compare it to an adaptation is not a priority on my list. I have other books that I need to read, and I’m not going to push them down the list just because I’m being bombarded with trailers for the new Young Adult movie adaptation.
Heck, sometimes I just want a break from hearing about the “new spins” that entertainment companies are putting on old material. How about something new and “original,” huh?