Francis
Lawrence, the director of I Am Legend, made
his film significantly different than the novel by Richard Matheson (nothing
like how Alex Proyas changed I, Robot
though). For example, the infected in
the film were only similar to humans in form. They had turned into blood hungry
monsters with increased strength, decreased brain function and no sense of
society. The vampires in the book, however, create a new society and interact
extensively with Robert Neville. Another major difference is the way in which
Robert Neville is depicted. In the film, he is seen as a courageous man who
desperately wants to cure the infected as to restore the human race – a strong,
brave man of action. Matheson describes Robert Neville to be a much more flawed
man. He struggles with depression and alcoholism. He only decides to look for a
cure half way through the novel, rather than a man focused on his goal from the
beginning. These changes were made because the film would not have been as
attractive if the original version was used. Action is not only easy to create
on film, it is also much more interesting to the viewers. While the first movie
possessed intricate social dynamics, it lacked in action. By having the
infected humans turn into monsters, it was easier to hate them. By making
Robert Neville strong and courageous, he was easier to love. Simply put, the intricacies
found in the book make it unique but would cause the film to be unsatisfactory.
I really like your observation of the difference in the way the two Nevilles from the book and the film approach their search for finding the cure and how such difference is a necessary evil for the film to be a financial success. This, if I do say so myself, reflects that the audience, specifically those who come to a theater to watch a sci-fi movie, are visual creatures and expect no action-free stretches. That is to say, although one person may enjoy the ornate decoration of a novel with intricate plots and subplots, that very same person would respond more positively to a streamline story arc filled with adrenaline rush of the movie adaptation of the very same sci-fi novel.
ReplyDeleteHow this is so would be due to, I argue, two interdependent reasons. First is the constraints of these two different media in which the same story is told, i.e written versus filmed. One person may have the patience to read a long, complex book over an extended period of time (They simply have to pick up where they left off, hassle-free). Yet, relatively speaking, when going the movie, that same person will be irritated, if not offended, if he or she has to do the same thing in a singular setting. For instance, a regular person, who is not priorly exposed to a well-known sci-fi novel based on which the film is adapted, would not normally have the patience and the willingness to spend more money going to the theater to watch the same movie again in the hope that acquiring the full meaning of the story would be financially compensatory. This difference in media alone would not a deal-breaker for most genres, if you can imagine (dark comedy film, avant-garde film, etc). But coupled with the contemporary stigma of sci-fi movies, i.e the popular expectations of a visually bombarding and breath-taking experience, it is definitely decisive. How this stigma comes to be is an excellent question. And although I do believe that asking this question is completely relevant, if not pivotal to the whole novel - adaptation movie ordeal, sadly I think discussing it would start to trail away from our main topic here. So let's leave it to some other time.
Also, I agree with you that in the novel, Neville's struggle with depression and alcoholism undermines, or rather tampers with the pure "legend" imagery he gives off to the reader. Many of those who like the novel better, however, would argue that the decision to portray Neville in such a way would make the character be more realistic and therefore downplays the realism of the movie adaptation. But there is no sufficient evidence to claim that the struggle of Neville portrayed by Will Smith was any less real and less gut wrenching (He did, after all talk to mannequins as if they were humans).
Sorry for the long post.