Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

Fwd: Re: Journey and Journey 2

From: <rfbagby~at~aol.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 06:17:43 -0500 (EST)
To: jvf~at~gilead.org.il

Adaption between media is neither a new controversy nor an unproductive
one. (If this Forum had been contemporary with Melies, how many of us
would've approved of the liberties taken in VOYAGE DANS LA LUNE, let
alone IMPOSSIBLE JOURNEY or CONQUEST OF THE POLE?)
Neither are authors innocent parties standing apart from it all.
Verne's stage adaptions of 80 DAYS and CAPT. GRANT make plot changes
 from the novels for staging purposes (and JOURNEY TO THE IMPOSSIBLE
would've probably caused an uproar from anyone else.) Certainly Verne's
son, heir, and collaborator Michel was no textual fundamentalist in the
silent films he was involved in the production of.
Edgar Rice Burroughs is an even clearer case, in part because he was
more openly commercial about his own output. While privately
disapproving of almost every screen Tarzan (and involved in various
attempts to film the character 'right', without a box office success),
in public he endorsed every movie Lord of the Jungle from Elmo Lincoln
through Johnny Weismuller, while making deals for studios to use his
other titles as they wished (the Republic serial JUNGLE GIRL thus got
to claim an ERB 'source' though its plot, characters, and setting
differ completely from that actual novel.)
So we cannot expect to resolve the issue, and I am content to observe
the films in their own right.
Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: wbutcher <wbutcher~at~netvigator.com>
To: 'Jules Verne Forum' <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
Sent: Tue, Feb 21, 2012 1:22 am
Subject: Re: Journey and Journey 2

Hi Raymond, I never thought of proposing a hard-and-fast rule of the
sort you enounce below (please do read my message again). As you may
know, I have worked with three extremely successful writers whose books
have been made into films, and so have considerable knowledge of the
problem of film adaptations from the point of view of the writer. Where
I have a slightly different perspective is the basis of comparison. It
might be interersting to compare adaptations of Verne to those of a
number of other literary authors – Austen, Shakespeare, Stendhal, Poe,
Twain, William Boyd? – to investigate the “special treatment” that he
has received. Bill From: owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il
[mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il] On Behalf Of Raymond Macon
Sent: 21 February 2012 12:26
To: 'Jules Verne Forum'
Subject: Re: Journey and Journey 2

 Hello Bill, Don’t make the mistake of thinking that a work’s currency
is a sure guarantee that its storyline and characterization will be
respected in any film version.  One author who can testify to the
contrary is Ursula K. LeGuin, whose Earthsea books were made into a
mini-series by the Sci-Fi channel.  Despite the fact that LeGuin was
signed on as a “consultant”, the version that was produced bore only a
passing resemblance to the novels.  LeGuin was outraged but hardly
surprised, knowing how the movie business works.   It comes down to how
much respect the filmmaker has for the author and his or her work.  If
there is a genuine regard for both, then we will get films that can be
outstanding in their own right and be viewed as complementary to the
original books.  If such regard is lacking, as is so often the case
with Verne-themed movies, then we get schlock. Raymond From:
owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il [mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il] On Behalf Of
wbutcher
Sent: Monday, 20 February, 2012 19:32
To: 'Jules Verne Forum'
Subject: Re: Journey and Journey 2

 Bonjour, To Tolkien, I would add CS Lewis, where the adaptations have
been relatively respectful. You’re right that the age of the books may
have something to do with the disgraceful treatment. But it may not be
social pressure as much as financial and legal reality, in the sense
that being still in copyright must restrain to a certain extent
film-makers who want to purloin only the title and the novelist’s
reputation. Bill From: owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il
[mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il] On Behalf Of Raymond Macon
Sent: 21 February 2012 10:05
To: 'Jules Verne Forum'
Subject: Re: Journey and Journey 2

 Hello Art et al, Hollywood knows that more than one hundred years
after his death the name Jules Verne still strikes a chord with
contemporary moviegoers.  That is why they shamelessly produce inferior
drivel and ripoff films that only have their titles in common with
Verne’s original works.  This latest incarnation of The Mysterious
Island is a case in point.  The movie has done moderately well in
American theaters and as long as this is the case we will continue to
see Verne’s name shamelessly exploited. But Jules Verne isn’t the only
classical writer to be so abused.  H.G. Wells has suffered the same
mistreatment as has Edgar Rice Burroughs.  Lately, only J.R.R. Tolkien
has fared well at the hands of his movie interpreters.  Tolkien had the
advantage of a readership that could still remember his life and times
and had actually read his work.  So the filmmakers knew they would be
held to a high standard and if they tampered too much with the original
books the wrath of Tolkien fandom would be too much to bear.  So they
stayed fairly close to the Tolkien text and made a fortune to boot. 
 Verne, Wells and Burroughs do not have that kind of a following. 
Their readers are people like us who, while no less devoted than
Tolkien’s readers, are somewhat fewer in number.  Furthermore, these
authors have faded from living memory, Burroughs’ death being the
latest and that was in 1950.  So moviemakers have taken considerable
liberties with their novels and characters feeling—rightly—that most of
the people who have heard their names have not bothered to read the
books.  So they will cite Verne or Wells in the movies’ titles or
promotions knowing that the viewers only want to see some kind of
fantastic adventure that these names will invoke and not a visual
re-telling of the original story. Every great writer’s work has
undergone this.  If the filmmaker is truly concerned with creating
great art, then he or she will pay due respect to the original vision. 
If, on the other hand, the goal is simply to make money, then vision
will be damned.  A counterfeit is produced with the expectation that
the movie-going public is as unconcerned with verisimilitude and
integrity as the filmmaker.  Time and experience have shown that
cynicism to be realistic, more’s the pity. I understand that a Journey
3 is being contemplated “based” on Verne’s From the Earth to the Moon. 
Seeing how well the first film did and the second is doing at the box
office, this should come as no real surprise.  Since Verne’s works are
now in the public domain, nobody can stand in the way of such
productions.  But just because there are those in the entertainment
industry who have no respect for Verne’s canon, that does not mean all
is lost.  This Forum is but one of many organs in existence to keep the
flame of Verne scholarship and readership alive and which have worked
tirelessly to acquaint a new generation with the rewarding experience
of reading him.  We should take great comfort and pride in that.  For
it seems to me that long after the memory of some of these ripoff
movies has faded from the public consciousness, the books of Jules
Verne will live on, and for that we can take pride in the part we have
played to make it so. Raymond From: owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il
[mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il] On Behalf Of wbutcher
Sent: Monday, 20 February, 2012 17:55
To: 'Jules Verne Forum'
Subject: Re: Journey and Journey 2

 Dear Art, Yet another Hollywood film, then, where the book is
travestied. Is it just me, or are they getting worse? Can’t the
descendants sue given that their moral rights have been trampled
on? The idea that the Voyages are real was first introduced in Hatteras
and Journey, via the citing of the title of the book within the novel.
In both cases the idea is absent from the original manuscript; for
Journey, it appears in the margin, and so may have been influenced, if
not more, by Hetzel’s reading of the manuscript. As you say so
pertinently, yet another irony... Best wishes Bill From:
owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il [mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il] On Behalf Of
aevans2 tds.net
Sent: 20 February 2012 23:11
To: Jules Verne Forum
Subject: Journey and Journey 2 Dear Vernian friends,

This weekend I went to see the film Journey 2: The Mysterious Island
with Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson and the young actor named Josh
Hutcherson who appeared in Journey to the Center of the Earth in 3D
with Brendan Fraser.  It was mildly entertaining but, of course, has
nothing to do with Verne (although the volcano spitting out gold
reminded me of The Golden Volcano).

One important feature shared by both films, however, is the notion that
the events in Verne's novels *really happened* and were not just
fiction.  This is the supposed secret shared by most "Vernians" around
the world.  So the films' protagonists (ironically) follow in the
footsteps of Lidenbrock, Axel, Cyrus Smith, Nemo et al. and, during the
course of their many adventures, confirm the real existence of these
original Vernian characters. 

In one way, this notion is a useful gimmick to avoid direct comparisons
between the films and Verne's novels (which would be very unflattering
to the films).  But I also found it fascinating as a
verisimilitude-building device.  And I remember Verne doing exactly the
same thing in _Le Sphinx des glaces_ (The Ice Sphinx).  In this novel
Edgar Allan Poe's Arthur Gordon Pym is treated as a *real* person whose
adventures at the South Pole *really happened* according to Captain Len
Guy.  Yet another irony.

Best,
Art
Received on Tue 21 Feb 2012 - 13:18:03 IST

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2012/02/21 13:00:03 $$