FILM ADAPTATION, ALTERNATIVE CINEMA AND

LYNCHIAN MOMENTS OF TRANSPOSITION

By

NICK VAN VUGT, B.A.

Supervisor: Professor Robert Hamilton

A Major Research Paper

Submitted to the Department of Communication Studies and Multimedia

in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

for the Degree

Master of Arts

in Communication and New Media

McMaster University

Copyright by Nick van Vugt, August 2011

van Vugt 1

Film adaptation is the transfer of a written work to film. It is recognized as a type of

derivative work. Whether adhering strictly to the source material or interpreting concepts derived

from the original work, adaptation are necessarily extensions or interpretations of the original

story. These interpretations can augment or detract from the original work. This paper will

explore common variations of adaptations found in contemporary cinema.

When referring to adaptations, this paper will use the broad definition a work in one

medium that derives its impulse as well as varying number of its elements from a work in a

different medium (Konigsberg 6). This definition can extend to a multitude of interpreted work,

but for the purposes of this paper we will be looking at adaptation in film: working with source

material and producing and/or directing a film based on a work of literature. This paper will

analyze adaptations within Hollywood films using examples by the Coen brothers No Country

for Old Men (2007) and David Lynchs works The Elephant Man (1980), Wild at Heart (1990)

and Lost Highway (1997). This paper will discuss the films Memento (2000) and Adaptation

(2002) for their interpretation of source material through alternative cinema. Finally, this paper

will assess the artistic liberties taken within these films including their use of specific film

techniques.

This paper is divided into three complementary analyses: the first is an assessment of

adaptation how one writes an adaptation, interprets source material, and the way directors have

adapted written works to create original films. The second analysis exists to determine how

directors use adaptation to create new works that stand apart from the original written material

but operate as an extension of the original works meaning. The third analysis includes a

deconstruction of the classic Hollywood narrative system of filmmaking by utilizing stylistic

devices that are found in alternative cinema. This third analysis assesses adapted works and how

van Vugt 2

these alternative film styles work in conjunction with the extension of meaning.

Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan outline many ways of assessing and critiquing

adapted works in their book Screen Adaptation. They give an outline of three specific ways of

categorizing adaptation from Geoffrey Wagner:

1. Transposition in which the screen version sticks closely to the literary sources, with

a minimum of interference.

2. Commentary where the original is purposely or unwittingly altered due to the

intentions of the film-maker.

3. Analogy a completely different work of art which is a substantial departure from the

original (Cartmell and Whelehan 5).

Breaking down specific films by these details helps clean up preconceived notions of adaptation.

According to the criteria listed above, a film that is classified as merely an analogy can hardly

be compared to its original work as it shares so few key common features.

Many filmmakers who use original works in adaptation do so through transposition.

Looking at the example of the Harry Potter franchise, we can assess the difference between

transpositions and commentaries. Regardless of the films being made for commercial gain,

Harry Potter fans would be upset if the original text is not followed to closely (as many fans of

any franchise would be). Manipulating phrases of dialogue or leaving out specific details could

greatly impact the way fans of the franchise view or consume the films - forcing directors to pay

close attention and follow the original text down to the sentence. Having made the films closely

after the release of the novels, the filmmakers wanted to stay true to the original story and create

something that can be seen as having minimal interference to the original intent of the story.

There are some exceptions however, as the film release of Harry Potter and the Order of

van Vugt 3

the Phoenix (2007) omitted a minor detail from the novel published in 2003. This omitted detail

featured a two-way mirror that Sirius gives Harry before he dies. Since the mirror was never

explained in the following novel - Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, released in 2005

David Yates left it out of his film. It was not until the release of the final novel in the series:

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows only a few days before the theatrical release of Order of

the Phoenix in July 2007 that director David Yates realized the mistake by not including the

mirror. In the final novel of the series the two-way mirror plays a major role in rescuing Harry

and his friends by providing a means for communication and escape. Unfortunately without

explaining the mirror previously, Yates was forced to include a scene in Harry Potter and the

Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011) explaining its use (Tunney 2010). For this reason alone, the

theatrical release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I (2010) can only be seen as an

unintentional commentary due to the intentions of the filmmaker. The terms transposition,

commentary and analogy will be used throughout this paper to describe the various levels of film

adaptation.

The economic benefits of adapting novels or other stories for films are clear. Crafting an

original screenplay or script from an established set of characters or pre-existing story can save

time and money and is an obvious choice for many filmmakers and screenwriters. Film series

such as The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter come with a pre-established audience. The 44

million people who purchased the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows novel in the first year

after its release (Forbes.com 2008) guaranteed ticket sales for its eventual theatrical release.

When Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I hit theatres in November 2010, it made $24

million in just midnight opening sales alone (Gaines 2010), and $43.5 million for the second half

which opened July 15th (Rich 2011). Filming an adaptation is also a bit of a gamble for studios.

van Vugt 4

As Linda Seger remarks:

Doing an adaptation means paying for the project twice first to purchase the rights,

second to pay for the screenplay. And the material needs to be evaluated twice: first the

potential workability of the source material must be assessed; then it must be decided

whether the screenplay is the best translation of the story (xiii).

The idea of paying twice for a single film means adaptations can be seen as a gamble for studios.

Stray too far from the original, established work and a studio could see this as risking the loss of

potential fans, but more importantly money. Studios purchasing the rights for adaptations can see

the risk involved, but the artistic integrity of the director has the benefit of flexibility in creating

these works. Adaptations could see the inclusion or exclusion of particular characters, the re-

working of specific scenes or plotlines within the story, or completely retooling the story itself.

In what ways are novels or written works adapted to the visual medium? Are there

examples of works that do away with typical notions of adaptation? Directors can take a

published work and do as they wish adding their viewpoint to the narrative. The creative

control of the director needs to be assessed in conjunction with the idea of what typical

narrative cinema is. Narrative cinema refers to any film that emphasizes story (Konigsberg

261) and in the Hollywood system refers to a specific kind of film that focuses on the story or

plot of the film over stylistic choices or advances in character development. For many directors,

adapting a work allows for an expression of the directors aesthetic, which when used

consistently can be considered a specific style that a director often uses when creating a work.

The director may be partial to using specific camera lenses or dragging out longer scenes to

accomplish a specific sense of pacing. These techniques can be seen in any Coen brothers film,

which tend to feature long shots with sparse dialogue, or through stylistic devices in a David

van Vugt 5

Lynch film which give scenes an altered angle or sets that seem out of place. These directorial

touches can impact the way the film is interpreted by an audience. Films that fall into

alternative categories of filmmaking such as art film, surrealism, experimental, and French

New Wave focus heavily on visuals and editing techniques to drive the narrative. This can break

from notions of continuity and temporal (referring to time) relations within the plot of the film,

sometimes breaking up the narrative or making the film more jarring to watch.

A film analysis approach is necessary when assessing and analyzing films that are based

on original written works. Jeffrey Geiger states in his book Film Analysis that many moviegoers

see the cinema as no more than an entertaining visual experience, requiring little explanation or

thought (2005), and for this reason many would find the analysis and deconstruction of the

ideas presented within films tedious. If an audience wishes to see a film that does not require

looking deeper into the meaning of the film, then assessing the films subtle context and issues

presented within the narrative would not be interesting. Many others worry about the way these

adaptations interpret the original written work (Bluestone, Leitch, Harrington, Cartmell and

Whelehan). It is beneficial to study these adaptations by using a film analysis approach which:

strives to examine the myriad narrative, thematic, and stylistic choices that are part of

every film. [It] brings films and their narratives into the realm of the social, allowing us

to put their effects into perspective, to compare them to other films and other kinds of

cultural artifacts, and finally to begin relating the films we watch to the wider world

around us. (Geiger and Rutsky 18-19)

This approach will help determine how these adaptations interpret the original stories and allow a

greater appreciation of the meanings within the original works.

ADAPTATION AND AUTEURSHIP

van Vugt 6

The differences between film and written stories are apparent at first: the two media are

marked by such essentially different traits that they belong to separate artistic genre (Bluestone

vi). As film is a visual medium, there are qualities and characteristics that work specifically well

for the storytelling, whereas novels are a linguistic medium (Bluestone vi) that focus heavily

on the use of words and imagination that the reader has to fill in themselves. George Bluestone

describes that:

film necessarily leaves behind those characteristic contents of thought which only

language can approximate: tropes, dreams, memories, conceptual consciousness. In

their stead, the film supplies endless spatial variations, photographic images of physical

reality, and the principles of montage and editing (vi-vii)

It could be argued that the qualities of language that Bluestone lists have been further touched

upon since his initial written work in 1957. There are films that are created for the sole purpose

of interpreting and conceptualizing consciousness and there are ways of detailing and describing

tropes, dreams and memories within film that are done successfully in many Hollywood films.

Directors like the Coen brothers, David Lynch and Guy Maddin use film as an opportunity to

explore these concepts and ideologies in a visual way by adapting original works with their own

thoughts and opinions.

In response to the commentary of contemporary directors creating films that are original

and against the typical Hollywood style, Jeffrey Geiger and R.L. Rutsky detail in their book

Film Analysis: A Norton Reader that:

the classical Hollywood style is itself a stylistic structure, a set of stylistic rules that

governs the particular kinds of films that can be made within it. These rules are designed

to make the stylistic structure of Hollywood films invisible, allowing all attention to be

van Vugt 7

focused on the flow of the narrative (Geiger and Rutsky 36).

This is not to say that alternative modes of cinema do not follow specific sets of rules (stylistic or

formulaic), but were created as a response to this structured classical system.

Emerging in the 1950s with the introduction of French New Wave cinema, a series of

anti-establishment rules and regulations were determined by filmmakers who wanted to create

something different from Hollywood Cinema. A series of art-film magazines founded by Andr

Bazin called Cahiers du Cinema established rules for how French filmmakers should create

films that were different than those which already existed by introducing the concept of the

auteur. Derived from the French word for author, an auteur is a director who infuses the entire

work with his or her personality and point of view and all of whose films can be related in terms

of similar techniques, style, and themes (Konigsberg 24). This was common for French New

Wave filmmaking to observe the figurative stamp that a particular director puts on their

specific works. Recent examples of auteur directors working presently would be Quentin

Tarantino, Guy Maddin, Kevin Smith, Lars von Trier, and more importantly in relationship to the

argument of adaptation and alternative forms of cinema David Lynch, who will be discussed

later in this paper.

It was Jean-Luc Goddards Breathless (1960) that solidified French New Wave as a

filmmaking means to counter Hollywood cinema (Moullet 40). Using techniques that were

unheard of in Hollywood cinema, such as jump-cuts (cuts that break temporal continuity in a

scene by leaving gaps in time) (Sklar 369), and long-takes which extended scenes well past their

action, meant Breathless was something completely different that broke from conventions of

storytelling within narrative film.

Both Andr Bazin and French New Wave director Francois Truffaut had differing

van Vugt 8

opinions on how adaptations should work within the film world. Truffauts attack was upon the

artistic precedence of the literature the adaptation was being derived from. He believed that the

director should assume the role of the auteur and to take cinema out of the hands of literary

people, and give it to film directors (Sklar 367). This would give the auteur filmmaker control

over the work and allow complete creative control even with adaptations. If scenes were too

difficult to film, they were typically re-written instead of finding a way to express its meaning

visually (Sklar 367). Bazins argument was that film can extend art, and believed that

faithfulness to a source material is the only way to respect literature (Harrington 5). Bazin states

that many filmmakers go to novelists for inspiration or character development (Bazin 13)

because these established characters and ideas are easier to interpret once they are created by

another individual. He also states that he finds many written sources (such as detective novels)

are written with a dual purpose: not only to write a novel and to have it published, but also with

an eye on a Hollywood adaptation (Bazin 14). This of course allows filmmakers to interpret the

actions of not only the story, but that of the author. Many actions that are brought to screen are

dependent on how the author has written a particular character that has already been established.

Even through adaptation, a filmmaker will connect to the This ideology is one that many

filmmakers follow staying true to the source material is essential in creating an adaptation that

is an accurate reproduction of the original source.

To further tie concepts of auteur filmmaking with that of adaptation, one needs look no

further than one of the first established North American auteurs Alfred Hitchcock. Hitchcock

had secured the rights to some of his most popular films of the time Strangers on a Train

(1951), The Trouble with Harry (1955), and Psycho (1960) for hardly any money at all. In this

manner, he was able to rework the original stories, doing away with a straight forward literary

van Vugt 9

adaptation and instead turning it into an auteur film that contained all the same dramatic

suspense and reliable generic thrills (Leitch 239) that audiences had come to expect from

Hitchcocks work.

ALTERNATIVE CINEMA

Directors who work primarily with alternative forms of filmmaking interpret original

works with ideas and stories in a manner that is different than that of conventional Hollywood

films. Directors like Steven Spielberg, Ron Howard, Chris Columbus and Rob Reiner all work

with notions of cinematic storytelling and narrative that appears similar. There is rarely a

signature left on the film, camera angles are consistent and rarely jarring and the acting can be

seen as formulaic. Alternative practices such as surrealism, art film, experimental, and French

New Wave work with notions of storytelling that differ by using stylistic techniques that are not

used in Hollywood genre films. These stylistic techniques can be seen as altering an audiences

perception of time and space within the world the director creates.

A good example of how time and temporal qualities within a feature film can be altered

would be Christopher Nolans Memento (2000). The film centers on a character with short term

memory loss, looking for the man who killed his wife. He tattoos things to remember on his

body and every day he wakes up he forgets everything that happened the day before. This leads

to manipulation, lying and a timeline that is hard to make out. The events within the film are hard

to put into order upon a first viewing the beginning of the film is really the ending, followed by

short scenes that are edited out of sequence from the rest of the film. For the audience, the

conclusion of the film finds the plot slowly tying together and wrapping up, but to the

protagonist, the events are just as jumbled and mixed up. This reflection of temporal qualities in

the editing of the film shows that film manipulation can be expressed through directorial

van Vugt 10

decisions to obtain a much greater impact. This departure from classic editing is one of the ways

alternative filmmakers are able to create original films.

It must be noted that although alternative forms of cinema such as surrealism were

created outside of the Hollywood system, they have been carefully adopted and situated to

appeal to mass audiences within the system as well. Canted camera angles, intense subject matter

and surrealist film techniques like photomontage can now be found in big summer blockbuster

films such as Christopher Nolans The Dark Knight (2008), a superhero film. With critical

success of his film Memento, Nolan began making blockbuster films that incorporated his style

of filmmaking, including alternative methods of filmmaking and temporal notions that are much

more widely used in Hollywood films now. Even through adaptation, the re-interpretation of a

singular film through editing and careful replacement of particular scenes can completely change

the impact or way audiences perceive the films narrative, and one director consistently comes to

mind whenever alternative is mentioned.

To discuss how alternative filmmaking was able to permeate Hollywood so successfully,

it is necessary to discuss director David Lynch. Lynch has created some of the most original,

surrealist films from within the Hollywood system. From the early 90s to the early 2000s,

Lynch had crafted some of his most popular films. Wild at Heart (1990), Twin Peaks: Fire Walk

with Me (1992), Lost Highway (1997), and Mulholland Dr (2001) were all films where Lynch as

a director was given free reign, and proved that paying audiences were interested in seeing that

freedom. At the time of his first major release Eraserhead (1977), North American audiences

were consuming largely commercial films such as Star Wars, Saturday Night Fever, and Close

Encounters of the Third Kind. These films all had narrative storytelling elements that were

straight-forward, featuring characters that were relatable and stories that could be easily

van Vugt 11

consumed by audiences. When Lynch released Eraserhead, he received praise for bringing

surrealism and alternative cinema to an audience that may have not even realize they were

interested. Lynch creates films that bend the notions of what is acceptable in film as his films

deal with much more intense subjects such as rape, personal identity and loss of control. These

are subjects that were only beginning to be discussed and developed within film in the late 70s.

Eric Wilson notes that Lynchs Eraserhead aggressively attacks the conventions of the

physical world; at the same time, he [questions] those very assaults (31). This is a common

theme in his films. Lynch is able to bring up uncomfortable topics while addressing and

commenting on those topics at the same time.

Eraserhead was then followed up the equally disturbing film Elephant Man (1980) which

told the story of Joseph Merrick the real Elephant Man. Even in this story based on historical

events, Lynch adapts and alters the story slightly. Much like the case of Harry Potter, new

information by Peter Ford and Michael Howell in their book The True History of the Elephant

Man (1980) was released just shortly after the film was finished, which gave much more

information about the story of Joseph Merrick. Most importantly the novel gives the distinction

of his name Joseph, instead of John which Lynch used throughout his screenplay and film.

Other minor details were changed as well, which gives The Elephant Man the commentary

division as the intention of the director changed details unwittingly.

Martha Nochimson describes Lynch as leading her into an augmented understanding of

reality, meaning, and order in cinema (3). David Lynch often speaks on concepts of creativity

and how our lives reflect our position on a film. Nochimson notes that Lynchs vision of

making meaning is with the freedom to respond through the subconscious, by playfully losing

control instead of stridently taking charge (5). This reference to the subconscious is an

van Vugt 12

important one. The majority of Lynchs films have a subconscious twist to them whether its

through the workings of memory and identity in relation to trauma (Mactaggart 95) or the

utilization of dreamlike shots in slow motion (Kaleta 92), Lynch uses the familiar yet unknown

to his advantage. As an audience, we watch his films and are unsure as to whether or not the

events taking place on the screen are actually happening within the diegetic world, or whether

they are only happening within the mind of one of the characters. The worlds Lynch crafts are so

similar to our own that these events could possibly happen, and are so bizarre that it requires us

to take a deeper look at our own world.

Lynch creates these alternative worlds (Clark 67) that sometimes force characters

within the world they are living in out of their complacency. In Twin Peaks (1990) and Twin

Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992), Lynch overtly creates this alternative world through the

establishment of the Black Lodge and Red Room duality. Within the forest of Twin Peaks lies a

supernatural pathway to another world where logical events do not occur. In true dream-like

fashion, Lynch creates characters who speak in code such as The Man from Another Place (a

dwarf whose backwards speaking language is reversed for viewers and who often breaks into

dance) as well as The Giant are both established as characters who live within this alternative

world that are not necessarily restricted to stay within their respective world. The Giant inhabits

the body of an elderly waiter at a hotel Agent Cooper is staying in, but also appears to him as

The Giant within Coopers world to provide him with additional clues for solving a case. In Twin

Peaks: Fire Walk with Me Lynch has a character who is stuck in the Black Lodge (Phillip

Jeffries played by David Bowie) appear in the real world to deliver an ominous message, as

scenes showing characters from within the Black Lodge are superimposed over his monologue.

Showing that these boundaries can be crossed and interlinked with one another is helpful for

van Vugt 13

understanding how Lynchs worlds work in conjunction with one another but also as opposites

that can breach their respective worlds.

We are unsure of our dreams and whether what is happening in them is true or false, and

Lynch is able to capitalize on that notion in his films. Scenes in Wild at Heart (1990) make you

wonder if what you are watching is actually happening diegetically or outside of the diegesis of

the film. The diegetic world refers to the events happening within the film whereas non-diegetic

refers to anything outside the world of the film soundtracks or inner-monologues/narrations,

but distancing oneself from the events that are taking place on screen is necessary in Lynchs

work. In one such scene in Wild at Heart, Lula and Sailor the two main characters in the film

find themselves at a trailer park filled with obese naked women, and a cast of bizarre characters

that provide a monologue in complete absurdity through the ranting and ravings of the character

of 00 Spool (played by the late Jack Nance, who was featured in every film Lynch directed).

There is also an important reflection that Nochimson details in that quotation and it is in

reference to how individuals make their own meaning in film. Knowing that an audience brings

in their own understanding and meaning into a film screening allows for extrapolation on the

original works that are created, giving deeper meaning to the adapted work. Previous works that

have come before the adapted work such as the original novel or written work lend

preconceived notions of meaning. Character personalities that the reader is familiar with are

transposed on the big screen, bringing with them everything that has come before and after that

moment in time in the film. Adaptations often come with descriptive details about specific

characters, and if a director has chosen something different it often comes under the scrutiny of

the audience of the original work. Lynch himself completely changed the character of Lula in

Wild at Heart, casting Laura Dern in the place of a more voluptuously described brunette in

van Vugt 14

Giffords original novel.

Lynchs use of dream-like logic (Mactaggart 27) is a necessary concept to discuss as it

is something that surrealistic artists often touch upon in their work. Lynch creates worlds in

which impossible things happen. These instances within his films are sometimes fleeting but

characters rarely question them, as if they happen within what is possible in the story. These

subtle logical changes happen in every single one of his films, some more prominent than others.

Bluestones argument against the originality of cinema goes against what Lynch is able to

accomplish. By saying film captures photographic images of physical reality (Bluestone vii),

there is a blatant disregard for the ability to capture an unreality or a surrealistic reality where

physical spaces interact with ideas that cannot take place within the real world. In Twin Peaks

(1991), Lynch is successful in his depiction of a small town setting but gives every character a

certain quirk that allows for numerous interpretations. Whether that is a spontaneous howling, or

The Man from Another Place speaking backwards in the Black Lodge, Lynch is able to alter

perceptions of what is acceptable and twist them slightly to his advantage, renegotiating concepts

of normality.

Where does this leave originality in adaptation? If someone has been chosen to adapt a

particular work, then there must be some intention to give up some creative control. Greg

Jenkins notes that some individuals insist that an adapted film should adhere as closely as

feasible to its source (7), this is an expectation in adaptation that is used loosely as most

adapters treat original materials with [...] unconscionable laxity (Jenkins 13). Filmmakers are

able to change the focus of the material at hand, and can alter our perceptions of the original

storyline.

van Vugt 15

Lynchs Wild at Heart (1990) drew inspiration from a novel by Barry Gifford entitled

Wild at Heart: The Story of Sailor and Lula, which was also published in 1990. Upon securing

screenplay rights to the film adaptation, Lynch was able to take the events published by Gifford

and create a surrealist visual interpretation of the film. In undertaking an adaptation, Lynch is

translating a book into a Lynch film (Kaleta 159), which is specific only to the director

himself. With this description come necessary pre-determined notions of filmmaking. He is

making his film vision of a book; [not] the novel to the screen (Kaleta 159). For this reason,

Lynch is able to create a film that does not have to adhere closely to the original work, but it

ended up coming close. David Hughes notes that although Lynchs adaptation was mostly

sometimes slavishly faithful to Giffords novel, he made several departures and inventions,

both in the plotting and in the characterization (141). In order to adapt this story to a visual

medium, Lynch had made everything that was bright a little brighter and everything black a

little blacker (Chion 124) but more importantly made careful considerations to tie characters in

for an audience to understand including a character conceived for film that was not in the novel

by Gifford. The character of Mr. Reindeer was constructed as a plot device in the film to link

various plots together (Hughes 141) (Chion 126). Occasionally the addition of dialogue, or entire

characters are necessary to create in order to translate to film what is easier to read on the page.

In adapting to a visual medium, Lynch is able to visualize the internal struggles of the

characters created by Gifford. In the novel Wild at Heart: The Story of Sailor and Lula, there is a

scene where Sailor and Lula drive at night, where Sailor reveals to Lula that he witnessed her

fathers murder. In the film adaptation, David Lynch builds with the tension of the scene, laying

over an intense soundtrack, but also an added visualization that was not available within the

context of the novel. After Sailor informs Lula of this important plot point, she looks over her

van Vugt 16

shoulder and imagines her destructive mother as the Wicked Witch from The Wizard of Oz,

complete with broomstick and costume. This is a nod to underlying thematic devices within the

film that Lynch has added as context in relation to the wonderment and surrealist nature of the

relationship and character development established by Giffords characters (Wilson 98). The

scene then expands on a notion from Giffords original novel Lula and Sailor pass by a car

accident. In the novel, the car accident was implied, but never expanded upon (Chion 127).

Lynch takes this opportunity to showcase the accident in full detail, even to the extent of

showing the dead bodies and allowing an injured young woman to collapse and die in Sailors

arms. Lynch creates this scene in true surrealist fashion; the non-sequitur lines written give a

sense of hallucination and dream-like qualities that were not present in Giffords novel (Wilson

99). One of the most important distinctions in making this film was that Gifford had the original

intent to write the book as a series without a definitive conclusion at the time Lynch secured the

rights. Lynch wanted to make a standalone film and had to use an extension of meaning making

in his adaptation to create a happy ending. By allowing Sailor and Lula the chance to come

together at the end of the film, he does what the novel does not and ends with this extension of

the concepts presented within the novel, turning the film into an independent work that adds to

the original novel, but also as something that can be seen outside of Giffords original story.

Lynchs Wild at Heart comes with many changes to the original story as well as additional

scenes and characters, which makes this adaptation a commentary that makes many changes

while maintaining the same storyline and character development that Gifford originally intended.

Another of Lynchs films, Lost Highway (1997), was a collaboration with Wild at Hearts

novelist Barry Gifford. Loosely based on Giffords novel Night People, Lynch drew inspiration

from the symbolism of Giffords description of a lost highway (Hughes 206) among a few

van Vugt 17

choice lines of dialogue within the novel and demanded that Gifford work with him on a

screenplay. This work of adaptation can be seen as an extremely loose analogy as seen by

Geoffrey Wagner. It is hard to even classify this film as an adaptation as all. Despite using the

original novel of Night People to his advantage for inspiration, Lost Highway can be seen as a

completed work independent from the context of the original novel. There is an abundance of

creativity that went into this adaptation, as Lynch and Gifford also drew on some inspirations

from Kafkas The Metamorphosis (1915) about a man who wakes up as an insect (Hughes ix). In

the case of Lost Highway, this idea has been transformed into waking up as a completely

different person. The mind and spirit of the individual who inhabits the body is completely the

same, but the outer appearance has changed entirely. This basic level of adaptation shows that

inspiration from even the most basic of concepts can lead to an original work. If it were not for

the adaptation that Lynch worked on of Wild at Heart, he would not have heard of Giffords

latest novel and thus drew inspirations from some concepts that were not his own.

It is also important to discuss sound when discussing Lynchs work. Using music and

sound in film is important to complete the film inserting overdubbed dialogue, sound effects

and a score is essential to tonally assessing the film. If one was to play happy music over a scene

of a man dying, the context of the scene would be completely different than if sad music had

played. There is also an important distinction of using diegetic and non-diegetic sound to a

world. If music is playing non-diegetically, then it is playing within the world of the film

(usually a radio or jukebox), whereas if music is playing diegetically, it is assumed that the

characters within the film cannot hear it. This can lead to greater suspense and allow for a build

up of anticipation in many scenes. Having worked closely with Angelo Badalamenti since Blue

Velvet (1986), Lynch and Badalamenti have created a synthesized score that adds to the

van Vugt 18

atmosphere of the films. In Blue Velvet, Lynch is able to utilize music and sound effects, but

commits to silence for the many scenes within the films. This adds to the narrative reality of the

film (Kaleta 93) by not over complicating the diegesis of the film. If a scene in the world within

the film should be silent, Lynch is able to allow that silence to speak for itself without

overcomplicating the work. This narrative reality is also exemplified when used in context

with the film. Using the song Blue Velvet within the film on numerous occasions gives the

song additional context in relation to the actions going on. The first time it is presented is in a

nostalgic manner, and each additional time the context changes due to events that are currently

transpiring (Kaleta 93-95).

David Lynch connects his audience to the work he is creating through what Allister

Mactaggart describes as the viewer being sutured between the diegetic world of the film and the

spectatorial position of distance and desire (31). In these films, Lynch creates such disturbingly

realistic portrayals of human corruption (Blue Velvet (1986) and Wild at Heart (1990)) and

surrealistic moments of cinematic behaviours (Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (1992) and

Inland Empire (2006)) that an audience has no choice but forcefully distance themselves from

the desires of the characters on the screen, or risk losing everything in moments of surrealistic

dream-logic.

ADAPTATION THROUGH TRANSPOSITION

Looking at the original story that an adaptation is based on helps make the assessment of

the adapted work easier. Many comparative essays have been written on Kubrick, Coppola,

Spielberg and Hitchcock, but there has been relatively little analysis given to modern works such

as Memento (2000), No Country for Old Men (2007), or Adaptation (2002). Of recent authors,

Cormac McCarthy has been receiving a lot of attention within the last few years for his novel No

van Vugt 19

Country for Old Men. After being adapted by the Coen Brothers, nominated for eight Academy

Awards, four Golden Globes, the Palme dOr and countless other awards from across the globe,

it was clear that works of adaptation can stand on their own. This also led to popularity for

McCarthy as his book The Road was also adapted into a feature film by John Hillcoat in 2009,

with additional adapted works currently in production. The way McCarthy writes No Country for

Old Men can be considered choppy (Robinson 2007) and lacks the polished presentation of the

finished film directed by the Coen brothers. Both are bracing thrillers capable of creating

suspense and tension throughout the story, but the novel is able to achieve something that the

film cannot and that is the concept of speaking directly to the reader.

In the novel No Country for Old Men, Cormac McCarthy speaks directly to the reader

the characters in the novel do not hear this dialogue and it is created for the purpose of delivering

information to whomever is reading the story. This can lead to insight as to how a particular

character feels, or important back story. McCarthys novel begins with Sheriff Bell discussing

the effects of law enforcement on his life (Robinson 2007). This is done as a direct note to the

reader, but speaking to an audience directly breaks the fourth wall in film. This separation of

action from the audience (Wisegeek.com) is what makes it difficult in adapting so many novels

to film. Characters often think to themselves or have hidden motivations that they discuss with

the reader as a character. These interactions are kept from other characters in the novel, and

without voice over in the novel to support the thoughts of the characters in the film; ways of

adapting these thoughts and emotions is much more difficult in film. In the film version of No

Country for Old Men, these opinions and thoughts are delivered instead by interactions with

other characters. Instead of interludes throughout the novel, disrupting the plot and focus of the

task at hand, the Coen brothers wrote his thoughts in as dialogue to be delivered so the audiences

van Vugt 20

will understand what he is going through at the time. With only a minor change to the

presentation of the storyline originally written by McCarthy, this adaptation can be seen as a

transposition which adheres very closely to the novel. This adds to the authenticity and

credibility to the Coen brothers for being able to write something that can successfully be seen as

one of the more straight forward adaptations to be brought to film in a long time.

One of the most intriguing adaptations comes from the brain of screenwriter-turned-

director Charlie Kaufman. Having written some of the most surrealistic works in the past decade:

Being John Malkovich (1999), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) and Synecdoche,

New York (2008), Charlie Kaufmans greatest work of adaptation was a film called Adaptation

(2002). Based on the novel The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean, Adaptation is a film that does

what No Country for Old Men does not, alter the presentation of the original work. This

categorizes the film as an analogy, which works with the original novel by Orlean but breaks off

from the original intent of the story. In Adaptation, Kaufman establishes the main protagonist of

the story as being himself Charlie Kaufman, who has to write an adapted screenplay of

Orleans The Orchid Thief. In doing so, the character of Kaufman ends up meeting the central

characters he is writing about in the screenplay and even determines there is an illicit love affair

going on between Susan Orlean and the criminal main character of her own novel. This

complicates the matters of the storyline though, as toward the end of the story, the character of

Kaufman begins to write his screenplay as the character of Charlie Kaufman thus created a

closed loop of events, portraying himself within the fictional world as a known fictional

character. This means the adapted work that the viewer has been watching up until this point is a

known work of fiction that the author Kaufman is able to address and point out. He is knowingly

writing about untrue events and altering the original work while addressing it on screen. All of

van Vugt 21

this confusion is addressed in an article by Lars Sderlund, clarifies that parts of the fictional

screenplay were written by two characters specializing in two specific genres of storytelling

(111).

Kaufman is able to create a film that is both aware of the world within the confines of the

screenplay (through the interactions of specific characters and character motivation throughout

the film) and aware of the world outside of the film. This dual awareness is able to address that

audiences are watching the film about real people, but also the fact that the film is not a true

story, but merely based on real people. This is one of the most complicated examples of how

little a film adaptation needs to draw on the original work to create something new and original

in and of itself. By using the idea of writing an adaptation of a singular novel as just a basis for

this screenplay, Charlie Kaufman is able to create something absolutely bizarre that can stand

apart from the original novel by Orlean, but also add additional interpretations and meaning to it.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

It can be seen from the examples above that working closely with a script or an original

work is not necessary to create a film that is considered an adaptation. Drawing inspiration from

written works and creating an original film such as Charlie Kaufmans Adaptation allow

adaptations to stand on their own, apart from the original. The characters and the situations from

within the original story can benefit or add to the new plot, but creating a new story out of

something that has already been established can be challenging for directors. Extending the

meaning of original works by creating a filmic interpretation of the source material, directors can

manipulate the way audiences view the work.

There is also a clear distinction between the auteur approach that David Lynch takes in

his work creating surreal films that exist on the level of subconscious dreams and imagination

van Vugt 22

and the more structured approach that the Coen brothers take in No Country for Old Men. These

are seemingly opposite levels of adaptation. Lynchs use of alternative cinema lends itself to

varied levels of interpretation in adaptation, while the Coen brothers implement techniques that

are derived from traditional Hollywood narratives. Some of these works are merely inspired by

literature; becoming analogies (such as David Lynchs Lost Highway) and others are

transpositions which exist as a visual counterpart to the original written work straying away

from crucial changes to the original plot (such as the Coen brothers No Country for Old Men).

James Naremores book on film adaptation says it the best: movies do not debase their literary

sources; instead, they metamorphose novels into another medium that has its own formal or

narratological possibilities (6). Being able to distinguish the differences between these two

mediums and their ability to tell a story marks the separation of adaptation and the original work.

Recognizing films innate formal qualities and by extention the means by which film determines

narrative is at the core of what directors do: negotiate adaptation. Through film, the different

levels of adaptation and the respective styles of the director come together to allow audiences to

view a world that previous could only be imagined by the reader.

van Vugt 23

Bibliography

Adaptation. Dir. Spike Jonze. Columbia Pictures, 2002. Film.

Bazin, Andr. In Defense of Mixed Cinema. Film And/As Literature, ed. John Harrington.

New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. Print.

Bluestone, George. Novels into Film. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1957. Print.

Blue Velvet. Dir. David Lynch. Paramount Pictures, 1986. Film.

Cartmell, Deborah and Imelda Whelehan. Screen Adaptation: Impure Cinema. New York:

Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Print.

The Celebrity 100 - #9 J.K. Rowling. Forbes. N.p., 2008. Web. 24 June 2011. Web.

Chion, Michel. David Lynch. London: The British Film Institute, 1995. Print.

Clark, Matthew. David Lynch: Momentary Consequences for a Fire Walking Identity: An Inquiry

into the Fantastic/Symptomatic Self and its Components.2003. Print.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Dir. Steven Spielberg. Columbia Pictures, 1977. Film.

Dark Knight, The. Dir. Christopher Nolan. Warner Bros, 2008. Film.

Denzin, N.K. Blue Velvet: Postmodern Contradictions. Theory, Culture and Society. 05:02

(1988): 461. Print.

Elephant Man, The. Dir. David Lynch. Paramount Pictures, 1980. Film.

Eraserhead. Dir. David Lynch. Libra Films, 1977. Film.

Gaines, Dixon. Friday Box Office: Accio Moolah! Harry Potter Has $65 Million Night.

Movieline. N.p., 2010. Web. 24 June 2011. Web.

Geiger, Jeffrey and R.L. Rutsky. Film Analysis: A Norton Reader. London: W.W. Norton &

Company, 2005. Print.

Gifford, Barry. Night People. New York: Grove Press, 1992. Print.

Gifford, Barry. Wild at Heart: The Story of Sailor and Lula. New York: Grove Press, 1990.

Print.

Harrington, John. Film And/As Literature. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. Print.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I. Dir. David Yates. Warner Brothers Pictures, 2010.

Film.

van Vugt 24

Housel, Rebecca. From Camera Lens To Critical Lens: A Collection Of Best Essays On Film

Adaptation. Ed. Rebecca Housel. UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2006. Print.

Howell, Michael and Peter Ford. The True History of the Elephant Man. UK: Allison & Busby,

1980. Print.

Hughes, David. The Complete Lynch. London: Virgin Publishing Ltd., 2001. Print.

Inland Empire. Dir. David Lynch. Rhino Entertainment, 2006. Film.

Jenkins, Greg. Stanley Kubrick and the Art of Adaptation. North Carolina: McFarland &

Company Inc., 1997. Print.

Kafka, Franz. The Metamorphosis. New York: Bantam Dell, 2004. Print.

Kaleta, Kenneth. David Lynch. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1993. Print.

Konigsberg, Ira. The Complete Film Dictionary, Second Edition. New York: Penguin Putnam

Inc., 1998. Print.

Leitch, Thomas. Film Adaptations and Its Discontents. Maryland: John Hopkins UP, 2007. Print.

Lost Highway. Dir. David Lynch. October Films, 1997. Film.

Memento. Dir. Christopher Nolan. Summit Entertainment, 2000. Film.

Moullet, Luc. Jean-Luc Goddard. Cahiers du Cinema, ed. Toby Mussman. New York: E.P.

Dutton & Co., Inc., 1968. Print.

Mactaggart, Allister. The Film Paintings of David Lynch: Challenging Film Theory. Bristol:

Intellect, 2010. Print.

McCarthy, Cormac. No Country for Old Men. Toronto: Random House, 2005. Print.

Mulholland Dr. Dir. David Lynch . Universal Pictures, 2001. Film.

No Country for Old Men. Dir. Joel and Ethan Coen. Miramax Films, 2007. Film.

Nochimson, Martha. The Passion of David Lynch: Wild at Heart in Hollywood. Texas: Texas

UP, 1997. Print.

Olsen, Greg. David Lynch: Beautiful Dark. Maryland: Scarecrow Press, 2008. Print

Psycho. Dir. Alfred Hitchcock. Paramount Pictures, 1960. Film.

Rich, Katey. 10 Big Differences Between The Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Book and

Movie. Cinemablend. N.p., 2010. 24 June 2011. Web.

van Vugt 25

Rich, Katey. Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 2 Shatters Midnight Box Office

Record with $43.5 Million. Cinemablen. N.p., 2011. Web. 28 July 2011.

.

Robinson, Tasha. Book vs. Film. No Country for Old Men. The A.V. Club. N.p., 2007. Web.

24 June 2011. Web.

Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Canada: Scholastic Inc, 2007. Print.

Saturday Night Fever. Dir. John Badham. Paramount Pictures, 1977. Film.

Sayad, Cecilia. Mutant Authors and Cross-Pollinated Texts in Charlie Kaufmans Adaptation.

From Camera Lens To Critical Lens: A Collection Of Best Essays On Film Adaptation.

Ed. Rebecca Housel. UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2006. Print.

Seger, Linda. The Art of Adaptation: Turning Fact and Fiction into Film. New York: Henry

Holy and Company Inc., 1992. Print.

Sderlund, Lars. Unrequited Adaptation: Charlie Kaufman and The Orchid Thief. From

Camera Lens To Critical Lens: A Collection Of Best Essays On Film Adaptation. Ed.

Rebecca Housel. UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2006. Print.

Sklar, Robert. Film: An International History of the Medium. New York: Times Mirror

Company, 1993. Print.

Strangers on a Train. Dir. Alfred Hitchcock. Warner Bros., 1951. Film.

Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope. Dir. George Lucas. 20th Century Fox, 1977. Film.

The Trouble with Harry. Dir. Alfred Hitchcock. Paramount Pictures, 1955. Film.

Tunney, Jordan. Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1. Fanboyz.net. 18

November 2010. Web. 15 June 2011.

Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me. Dir. David Lynch. New Line Cinema, 1992. Film.

What is the Fourth Wall? Wisegeek.com. N.p. Web. 24 June 2011. Web.

Wild At Heart. Dir. David Lynch. The Samuel Goldwyn Company, 1990. Film.

Wilson, Eric. The Strange World of David Lynch: Transcendental Irony from Eraserhead to

Mulholland Dr.. New York: The Continuum International PUB Group Inc., 2007. Print.

The Wizard of Oz. Dir. Victor Fleming. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1939. Film.