Popular, widely-read novels are often adapted for films. Some movies like The Shawshank Redemption are not much different from the original novel, but the movie version of Forrest Gump was a completely different work from the book. Some scenes are omitted and new scenes are added because the movie maker has to effectively convey the theme in about two or three hours. From my perspective, Eric Roth, the screen writer, skillfully made an adaptation despite such restrictions.
The novel and the movie are two different works with two different themes. What we feel after reading the book and watching the movie are very different. They try to convey different messages; the colder, more cynical novel focuses on the “realism” while the film emphasizes the “accidentality.”
We can easily find the difference between the two works from the narrator’s, Forrest’s tone. Tom Hanks, the man who played Forrest Gump in the movie, is described as a morally upright and innocent man. But in the novel, we remember that he is dissatisfied with the world around him and curses a lot. Eric Roth, in the film, wants to tell a story of an individual who overcomes whatever he accidentally encounters and becomes successful. The protagonist should be someone who always does his best in any situation, so it was better for Eric to change Forrest' character.
Watching the movie, we easily find that some scenes from the novel are just cut. It is because the film’s theme is different from the novel’s. Forrest in the novel receives a perfect score in an advanced physics class while his IQ is only less than 80. He shows talents in wrestling and chess as well. But in the movie, such parts are simply omitted. Those who notably lack intelligence compared to normal people show autistic behaviors: they are extremely good at some specific areas like chess or simple calculation. It is a common characteristic of a retarded child to be obsessed with a specific field, so Winston Groom who tried to emphasize the reality included such parts. But in the film, why do we need them?
Let’s now talk about some elements that are added when the novel is adapted to the film. In the movie, Forrest is always successful. Eric made Forrest crippled while Forrest in the novel was perfectly healthy from the childhood. It was because Eric wanted to include the scene that Forrest breaks apart the braces and overcomes the hardship. Forrest saves Lieutenant Dan’s life and even graduates college in the movie. These new scenes are added because in the movie, Eric wanted to focus on the successful life of an individual who constantly does his best about the things he accidentally faces.
Also, some dramatic elements are added in the movie. Lieutenant Dan’s legs are suddenly cut, and Jenny dies in the film. These parts make the work more dramatic thereby emphasizes the hardship Forrest accidentally encounters.
I personally love the movie more than the novel. I like the drama more than the cynical reality. I can easily find the main point in the movie, but I can hardly grasp the theme in the novel. I believe Eric Roth, changing the narrator’s tone, excluding some original parts, and including some new parts, successfully does his job of making a great adaptation.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기