Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

Re: Journey and Journey 2

From: JER Mastro <jermastro~at~gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 07:01:18 -0500
To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~gilead.org.il>

A quick anecdote, for what it's worth...

I recently asked my AP French class to read Mysterious Island in the
French. While the technological struggle was lost on them - I had to
teach them about fire and making glass and Alfred Nobel and such -
what really gave them fits were the references Verne makes to his
other books. You know, that verisimilitude used by Verne when Ayrton
and Nemo are introduced and we who have read the other books are
reminded we know these two characters. While half of them knew who
Nemo was (a la League of Extraordinary Gentlemen), nobody knew Ayrton,
but they understood the concept of cross-referencing stories. Whether
the movie is faithful to Verne's novel or not, I've been able to use
the various ways Verne, his "brand name" and the references the kids
already know without knowing they know them to get the kids (all about
17 yrs old) to think somewhat critically about how you put together a
story and what makes it good. I don't think any of them are Verne
fans now, but they can at least appreciate his effort.

Julia

On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:17 AM, <rfbagby~at~aol.com> wrote:
> 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 - 14:01:34 IST

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2012/02/21 15:00:05 $$