screening the novel: tom darlington
TRANSCRIPT
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 1/37
Chapter One: Introduction
Literary adaptations have been a staple part of filmmaking since the introduction of
the talkies and researchers even have noted screen adaptations as early as 1899. Mark
Duguid writing for the BFI associated screen online website notes that the first known
Shakespeare adaptation occurred in 1899. Although due to the crudeness of
equipment and filmmaking technique, the film consisted of a few unrelated scenes
strung together, rather than paying attention to the narrative as a whole. Duguid
suggests that the joy for the audience lay in seeing scenes from a favourite play being
brought to life (Duguid, n.d, para 2). This may seem alien to a current film audience
as we have ourselves become almost oblivious to the wonders of the cinematic
process. A cinematic audience in 1899 would have still been getting to grips with
cinema and filmmaking, and to see a favourite play, by someone such as Shakespeare,
would have been a phenomenal event. Ultimately it could be said all film is adapted
from some form of written language, directors having a screen play or script to use as
their basis, unless a film is totally improvised. However film makers have constantly
raided the works of well established authors and first time writers alike, and
transferred the literary works of such authors to the screen. Because of the sheer
quantity of films which use literature as their source, film adaptation and the means
by which people transfer novels to the screen has become a significant field within the
arena of film studies. Critics such as George Bluestone have written at length about
the nature of literary adaptation, considering the mistakes which have been made by
filmmakers and the problems which should be considered when deciding to adapt a
novel, play or other literary source for the screen. Screening the Novel by Robert
Giddings, Keith Selby and Chris Wensley uses much of Bluestone’s work, as well as
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 2/37
works by many other distinguished critics to provide a comprehensive outline of the
nature of adapting.
Issues which are constant throughout the works of most writers when dealing with
adaptation studies are the notions of authorship, can the original author still have such
a claim to the filmed version of his text? Fidelity to the source material in terms of
content, does a filmmaker transfer the necessary and proper amount of information
from the source text to his film? Authenticity to the source, does a filmmaker produce
a film which is of suitable tone and does the film maintain the ideas and meaning of
its source? The ideas of authorship, fidelity and authenticity with regards to source
material will be examined in two case studies. I have chosen to use A Clockwork
Orange by Anthony Burgess, first published in 1962, and its cinematic realisation A
Clockwork Orange directed by Stanley Kubrick, and released in 1971. The second
study is the 1991 novel by Bret Easton Ellis American Psycho and the screen version
released in 2000, American Psycho directed and co written by Mary Harron. Nearly
thirty years separates the release of each book, and as a result there are a great amount
of differences between the two. Each text does however have similar thematic
narrative strands, and both novels clearly try and address social issues.
A Clockwork Orange focuses on Alex and his group of friends or his
“droogs”(Burgess,2000, p.3) as he refers to them. The story sees the central
protagonist and his accomplices commit crime after crime until Alex is betrayed by
his gang, and is arrested. Alex goes to prison and after two years he takes part in a
scheme which promises to get him reformed and ready for release in advance of his
sentence ending. Alex is released as promised, confirming that the scheme is a
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 3/37
complete success. He is no longer capable of committing crimes, not because he
believes they are wrong but because the conditioning he has undergone now prevents
him from carrying out any acts which may be deemed immoral. Burgess tries to
convey the message to his readers that, perhaps a man without free choice is not a
man at all. This is perhaps the most prominent message to come from the book,
although as a whole the book acts as a social commentary. Many of the events which
take place in the story are inspired by events in Burgess’ own life, and as such the
book has autobiographical elements. Burgess served in the army and as a result he
spent a lot of his time abroad. Whilst serving in Gibraltar in 1944, his first wife Lynn
was beaten and robbed in London by four G.I deserters. This detail is clearly
reminiscent of the rape scene within the book, where Alex and his gang rape the wife
of an author after they force entry into their house. Living in Hove, Sussex and newly
back from service in Malaya and Brunei, Burgess became aware of the emergence of
coffee bars, popular music and teenage gangs. Living on the south coast of England
he witnessed the on going battle between the Mods and the Rockers which was placed
right on his door step and elements of this gang warfare come through in his novel.
The book is set in the near future (sometime in the 1970s) when gang violence has
escalated to problematic levels. Although set in the future, the book definitely was
trying to address problems which Burgess saw as affecting the time and society in
which the book was written.
As opposed to Burgess writing A Clockwork Orange in the 60s and setting it in the
70’s, Bret Easton Ellis wrote American Psycho in the 90’s and the narrative is set a
decade earlier. As with A Clockwork Orange, American Psycho is a social
commentary, albeit more satirical than the work produced by Burgess. Easton Ellis
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 4/37
chooses as his target the financial sector of New York and the lives of the people who
work at the epicentre of this world, Wall Street. The central protagonist is Patrick
Bateman, a wealthy 27 year old who works on Wall Street. Whilst Burgess criticised
the growing despondence of youth culture in 60s Britain, Easton Ellis studies the
brutal consumerism of the 80s in America. His central protagonist describes people
not by how they look but instead by what they wear, “he is wearing a linen suit by
Canali Milano, a cotton shirt by Ike Behar, a silk tie by Bill Blass and cap toed leather
lace ups from Brooks Brothers” (Easton Ellis, 1991, p.29).He also describes which
restaurants and bars they eat in and what jobs they do, preferring these details to
descriptions of physical appearance or personality. The book studies Bateman and his
decline into madness, episodes of uncontrollable and malicious violence in which he
kills, often brutally whoever he sees fit. Bateman on one hand could be described as a
poster boy for American values, he is handsome, intelligent, charming and earning
large amounts of money, yet he also exemplifies the darker side of not just American
society, but society in general. He kills people without prejudice, abuses women both
sexually and violently and has contempt for anyone who does not fit in with his ideals
of a good or more importantly, successful life. This side of his life is kept secret and
his peers are unaware of the crimes he commits. As Bateman public face slowly slips
away, he finds it harder to conceal what he does from those he works with and the
people he mixes with. Although Easton Ellis has not drawn on personal experience in
the way Burgess has in order to write American Psycho, in the sense that he was a
witness or victim to events taking place in his work, there is an amount of auto
biography in his work. Easton Ellis grew up in California in extremely affluent
environment. Jane Bane suggests his novels are “scathing satires of the glamorous
world he observed from the inside” (Bane, 2003, para 1). In American Psycho he
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 5/37
highlights the extreme wealth, consumerism and ultimately the superficiality of
America, and specifically the affluent middle upper classes during the Neo
Conservative Reagen era.
Although both texts are now dated in terms of the generations on which they focus
they both remain pertinent today. With regards to A Clockwork Orange, society is still
troubled by teen gangs causing problems on the streets, people who act out side of the
norms of society. Consumerism and superficiality still exist just as much today as they
did during the 80s, and is a world wide issue rather than being specific to Wall Street,
and as a result a modern audience would still find American Psycho relevant today.
Both texts have also proven to be controversial, though in different ways. Burgess’s
novella went widely unnoticed upon release, and it was only when American director
Stanley Kubrick adapted it for the screen in 1971 that many people became aware of
the book. It was not however Burgess’ original text that caused such controversy, it
was the film which caused problems. After a number of copy cat incidents in addition
to growing attention from the press, Kubrick decided to withdraw distribution in the
U.K with the co operation of Warner Bros, effectively banning his own work. The
film would not be shown legally in Britain in cinemas until after the director’s death.
American Psycho however worked in reverse. The book caused much outrage upon
release, with feminist readers such as Linda S Kauffman noting that “The National
Organization of Women organized boycotts not just of the novel, but also of products
that appear in the novel” (Kauffman, 2000, p.41). The book was viewed as being sick
and portraying women in a negative light. The film conversely caused little
controversy, due to the film’s director being Mary Harron, a woman. Harron and the
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 6/37
way she chooses to portray Bateman, reduces the character to a humorous cartoon of a
man, whom the director will not allow an audience to take seriously. Both the original
novel and the film of American Psycho are black comedies, yet Harron chooses to
emphasise the comedic elements of Bateman’s character making him almost
ridiculous. As a woman, it could be argued Harron is trying to discredit his
misogynistic behaviour by not allowing an audience to fear him but instead laugh out
loud at the actions he carries out through out the film.
Both novels and the films which have been made using them as source material are
highly pertinent in terms of their use in adaptation studies. They share similar themes,
yet both writers, and subsequently both directors handle these themes in very different
ways. Methods of adaptation as outlined by critics working in the field shall be
explored and then applied to the each text in two case studies. The transferral of
authorship from novelist to director will be considered, can as Bluestone suggests the
film maker be considered “an author in his own right”(Bluestone, 1968, p.62)?
These case studies shall explore the methods used in adapting the two selected novels
to the screen. The films chosen will be looked at in terms of their production history,
the processes involved in adapting each novel for the screen, and the finished product.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 7/37
Chapter Two: Adaptation
John Orr in the book Cinema and fiction notes that “from 1930 onwards cinema and
fiction have always closely intertwined, not only in the United States but throughout
Europe and the rest of the world.” (Orr , 1992, p.1) This book is one of many which
tackle adaptation as a field of study within the greater field of film studies. The study
of adaptation has matured into a large field of study with critics now approaching
“adaptation as an art” (Horton and Magretta, 1981, p.1). George Bluestone in his book
Novels into Film remarks that “the moment the film went from the animation of stills
to telling a story, it was inevitable that fiction would become the ore to be minted by
story departments” (Bluestone, 1968, p.2).
Many of the critics, who have written on the subject, note that adaptation of a literary
text is usually preformed for either one of two reasons, either as a “commercial
process, a kind of industrial recycling which turns one product (a best selling book)
into another (a box office success)” (Horton and Magretta, p.4). Conversely
Independent American and European directors adapt not for financial gain, but
because of a “serious engagement with the source” (Horton and Magretta, p.4)
To a certain extent a stigma has developed around cinematic versions of literary texts,
Horton and Magretta suggesting “most adaptation studies have shown, rather
disdainfully, how great books become inferior movies… Hollywood has been
notoriously crass and shameless in its commercial exploitation of serious artists and
their work” (Horton and Magretta, p.1). This view is further substantiated by
Bluestone. He states that “in film criticism it has always been easy to recognize how a
poor film destroys a superior novel” (Bluestone, p.62) examples of films doing this
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 8/37
are so plentiful it is pointless to single out a specific film. Theatrical practitioner
Bertolt Brecht furthered the debate by suggesting of literary adaptation in cinema that
“we put ourselves in the position of a man who lets his laundry be washed in a dirty
gutter and then complains that it has been ruined” (Giddings et al, 1990, p.3) Brecht
could be of this opinion because “next to television, Film is the youngest of the arts”
(Bluestone, p. VII) and therefore Film is deemed an unqualified medium for literature
to be transferred. A number of critics have written on the short comings of film in
comparison to literature. Many critics agree that the “novel has three tenses, the film
only one” (Giddings et al, p15), if a medium is limited to one tense it is therefore
inadequate as a story teller. Although films can show what has happened and what
will happen via flashback and flash-forward, these still take place in the present. A
novel can talk about the past and future of the text whilst remaining in the present, by
simply changing its language. This means a reader can suspect what is going to
happen or be informed by past events without having it spelt out explicitly. This
feature of the novel means a rich and detailed text is presented to the reader, who in
turn gains a sense of an entire universe existing within the novel, a sense which is
lacking in filmic texts. The book Screening the Novel written by Robert Giddings,
Keith Selby and Chris Wensley considers another strength of the novel over cinema,
“cinema can show someone in pain, but not in ‘pain’; it can show a women and a
child but not convey the word ‘mother’” (Giddings et al, p20). Because the novel uses
language rather than images, it can be a lot more effective at conveying emotions and
relationships to those who fully understand its conventions. Cinema although easier to
read and gain information from, is perhaps not as adept at conveying such emotional
information to its audience as literature. Cinema relies on an audience’s cine-literacy ,
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 9/37
the ability to decipher semiotic coding to gain meaning from the images which are
presented to them on screen , whether those images have explicit or implicit meaning.
Bluestone considers the ways in which the different media convey meaning and
suggests that perhaps the novel undergoes a mutation when transferred to screen and
therefore no adaptation will ever do its source material justice. In a chapter regarding
the limits of the novel and the film, Bluestone says what occurs “when the filmist
undertakes the adaptation of a novel, given the inevitable mutation, is that he does not
convert the novel at all. What he adapts is a kind of paraphrase of the novel – the
novel viewed as raw material. He looks not to the organic novel, whose language is
inseparable from its theme, but to characters and to incidents which have somehow
detached themselves from language”(Bluestone,p.62) If a “filmist” is not actually
adapting the work of an author, who is the author of the film which is being
produced? Bluestone suggests that “in the fullest sense of the word, the filmist
becomes not a translator for an established author, but a new author in his own right”
(Bluestone, p. 62).
The nature of adaptation therefore is problematic, a number of highly important
factors should be considered whilst attempting to evaluate adaptations. George
Bluestone considers the difference in audience attitude toward the two text formats,
“values and attitudes of small middle class reading public might be incomprehensible
to mass film public, and the passing of time between novel and subsequent film will
intensify this” (Giddings et al, p.2). The difference could therefore said to be the ways
in which each type of text works “the viewer of the film, unlike the solitary reader, is
involved in a collective experience, in which the action presses relentlessly on; there
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 10/37
is no opportunity for pause or recap” (Giddings et al , p4). So the way each text is
consumed should be considered, it is also suggested in the book Screening the Novel
that conditions of production are similarly important to understanding adaptation, “
we should be aware of the differences in the contexts of production and consumption
before we begin the comparison of each text” (Giddings et al, p3). Bluestone
compounds this by highlighting what he sees as the differences between the media
forms “ an art whose limits depend on a moving image, mass audience and industrial
production is bound to differ from an art whose limits depend on language, a limited
audience and individual creation” (Bluestone, p.64).
Another element to critical readings of adaptations is the way the films derived from
literature are actually reviewed. Perhaps these films are rated not on their own merit
but in fact how faithful they are to the source material, “criticism of films using
novels as a source will frequently centre on their ‘fidelity’ to the events of the novel,
not on their artistic integrity. References are constantly made to ‘what is left out; or
‘changed’ instead of what is there” (Giddings et al, p.9-10) The Film Industry and the
films it produces are subject to many restraints which the writer or producer of
literature is not confined by. For an author to create a vast futuristic landscape , all he
needs to do is think about the details then write what his mind envisages. For a
filmmaker to then take that image and transfer it to celluloid is a far greater task. A
Filmmaker is constrained by a schedule which must be adhered to, and perhaps most
importantly a budget. If a scene being adapted from a novel is either too expensive or
too time consuming to re create it will be evaluated as to whether or not it is
absolutely necessary to the narrative.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 11/37
Because this is by no means a new trend within cinema, critics have also noticed
certain styles of adaptation emerge, and to a certain extent what must be considered
the politics of adaptation. Michael Klein and Gillian Parker highlight what they
consider to be the three different styles or categories of adapting a novel for the
screen. The first type “films of novels, attempt to give the impression of being
faithful, that is, literal translations” (Giddings et al, p. 11). There are countless
examples which could be used to showcase this method of adaptation; a recent
example would be the film Fight Club (Dir. David Fincher, 1999) from the book of
the same name by Chuck Palahnuik. Fincher’s film remains extremely faithful to the
original text omitting only certain scenes or details, possibly because of production
restraints as mentioned earlier, and the difference between the two versions is
minimal. The second mode of adaptation is identified thus “retains the core of the
structure of the narrative significantly re-interpreting, or in some cases de constructing
the source text”. Films which adhere to this method are still relatively faithful to its
source text but challenge or adapt elements for a new meaning or suit a new audience.
“ Romeo + Juliet ” (Dir. Baz Luhrmann, 1996) can be seen as doing this, based on the
play by William Shakespeare, it moves the action from the 1400’s to the modern day,
yet retains the original language and dialogue. Instead of horses and swords used in
the play, the film utilises guns and cars bringing the text into the modern era. Finally
Klein and Parker outline their third method of adaptation, in which a film “regards the
source merely as raw material, as simply the occasion for an original work”.
Apocalypse Now (Dir. Francis Ford Coppola, 1979) , based on the novel Heart of
Darkness by Joseph Conrad exemplifies this mode of adaptation. The films narrative
is only loosely based on that of Heart Of Darkness, and instead of being set in the
Belgian Congo, Coppola sets his film during the Vietnam War. Coppola has used
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 12/37
Heart of Darkness as the occasion to write a film which explored the validity of
America’s involvement in a conflict many felt did not involve them.
Critics have also concluded that when analysing the source text before adaptation
takes place, the bound motifs and free motifs must be recognised. The writers Luhr
and Lehman describe each motif like this, “Bound motifs; cannot be omitted without
disturbing the chronological chain of events” whilst “free motifs; may be omitted in
summary” (Giddings et al, p.2). Luhr and Lehman then point out that an adaptation
will often include all the bound motifs but omit free motifs even though they may
possibly be crucial to the impact of the original text.
If making adaptations or what John Orr calls “picture books” (Orr, p.1) is so
problematic artistically then why has it been a major trend in Hollywood since the
dawn of sound? Thomas H. Guback in his article Hollywood’s International Market
notes the American Supreme court ruled that the “exhibition of motion pictures is a
business pure and simple, originated and conducted for profit” (Guback, 1985, p.
463). The appeal of adapting literature for the Hollywood movie producer is money.
These texts not only have a story already established and formulated but they also
bring with them an established fan base. Established fan bases mean that a guaranteed
audience is already there for the film on release before hardly any publicity or
promotion has occurred. An extremely relevant and contemporary example would be
The Da Vinci Code (Ron Howard) which is due for release in 2006. The book has sold
hundreds of millions of copies worldwide since its release in 2003 it has become one
of the most popular books of the last few years and now there are not many people
who are not aware this book exists, if they have not in fact read it. When the film
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 13/37
eventually is released it will already be familiar to millions by virtue of the fact they
have read the novel, an audience is already going to be waiting. This factor is also
highlighted by Harmony H. Wu. Wu, in the book Defining cult movies she talks about
the Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Peter Jackson, films adapted from the books by J.R.R
Tolkien. “ Even a year before the release of the first film, there was more buzz around
these films than any other … much of this excitement and box office power is driven
by the rabid fans of Tolkien’s Rings books” (Wu, 2003, p. 84). Also noted by Wu is
the amount of literature written by fans about the trilogy on the internet which
detailed all elements of the productions in some cases years in advance of production.
This kind of publicity cannot be bought, and only arises when a text is truly revered.
A Producer looking to get the money to make a series such as the Lord of the Rings
would have his life made infinitely easier by the existing fan base which almost
guarantees recovering the films cost, leading to profit.
It is impossible to deny either that this formula does in fact work. Upon researching
figures for the biggest opening weekends in U.S Box office history, six of the top ten
films on the list have been adapted from either novels or comics. The comic book
conversion acting in a similar manner to that of literary adaptation, and conversions of
this type could be viewed as a modernist type of literary adaptation. Films in the top
ten include all of the Harry Potter films, both the Spiderman movie outings and the
fifth instalment of the Star Wars series and The Passion of the Christ (Dir. Mel
Gibson, 2004) which was subject to much controversy as it dealt with the life of
Jesus Christ and is arguably based on one of the most famous books of all time, the
Christian Bible. (‘All time box office’, n.d)
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 14/37
Literature can therefore be said to be a rich and valuable source of material for
filmmakers. Independent and art house filmmakers adapt literature to reflect personal
ideologies and also as an opportunity for critiquing contemporary social and political
change. Hollywood and other mainstream commercial film makers use literary
adaptation as a means of capitalising on an audience’s familiarity with a given text in
order to try for maximum financial success with their films. This success is driven by
exploiting various fans and their affection for existing materials. The comic book
movie phenomena of recent years being a prime example, with many major studios
owning rights to produce cinematic versions of established comic books. Sony
owning the rights to the tremendously successful Spiderman franchise, Fox producing
the X-Men movies and Universal pictures with its version of the Incredible Hulk .
However profitable and useful adaptation can be for filmmakers it is a process which
is not without problems. Audiences, especially when familiar with the source text,
will judge adaptations on what has been omitted rather than what is actually in front
of them, and as such reviews of the films can suffer. Other problems such as what to
include and how to transfer information from novels have also been highlighted by
critics working in the area of study. Although it is clearly a risk for film makers to
make adaptations from literature, it is a practice not likely to end soon as the rewards
can often be great.
This idea that authorship is transferred from novelist to director is relevant when
discussing the transferral from novel to film in the case of American Psycho and A
Clockwork Orange, and many writers have considered notions of authorship
regarding both screen versions. A Clockwork Orange differs greatly on the screen to
the way it appears in the novel in terms of tone. Geoffrey Wagner notes emphatically
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 15/37
that Burgess clearly sets the tone for his novella in his specific choice of language,
“his invented language was phonetically raw and harsh, suitable to the theme;
Kubrick’s images, on the other hand were generally smooth and graceful” (Wagner,
1975, p.308) Kubrick changing the tone of the text could therefore be said to have
made his own unique piece. Both these texts also prove useful when considering
content in adaptation, as the two selected films represent different trains of thought
with regards to the material that should be transferred from page to screen. Over the
two case studies the arguments which have been outlined here will be assessed.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 16/37
Chapter Three: Case Study; A Clockwork Orange
“What’s it going to be then eh?”(Burgess, 2000, p.3). This is the bold and “punkily
defiant question” (Morrison, 2000, p.xx) which opens A Clockwork Orange , firmly
setting the tone for the rest of his story. The narrative traces the activities of Alex, a
teenager who like many other youths in the novel is a member of a gang. The gang act
as they choose, disregarding the rules which society imposes on them. They rob, beat
and rape whomever they see fit. This disregard for the establishment is reminiscent of
the punk movement in Britain of the late 70s and early 80’s. Although Burgess wrote
his novella in the 60s and was inspired by the on-going battles between the Mod and
Rocker gangs, his portrayal of disenfranchised youth and their attitudes has transpired
to be truly prophetic.
Burgess’ use or in fact creation of language in A Clockwork Orange is one of the
novels most intriguing features. As Burgess was focussing on the idea of an emergent
youth sub-culture, he wanted to use the slang of such groups, but as Morrison
highlights “the danger in using the idiom of Mods and Rockers was that it would be
outdated by the time the novel was published, let alone a generation later” (Morrison,
p.xvi). In order to side step this problem, Burgess created his own teen vernacular,
entitled Nadsat. Nadsat derived from “the Russian suffix for teen”(Morrison, p.ix) is a
hybrid of Russian, English and American slang. A new language ensured that his
work would be as relevant to audiences thirty years after publication, as it was to an
audience reading the novel the week after publication.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 17/37
Kevin Jackson notes that the very first time the book was put on screen was in the
May of 1962 “the producers of the BBC current affairs program Tonight brought
Burgess to the studio to be interviewed by Derek Hart and dramatised part of the
book’s first chapter” (Jackson,1999, p.26). Stanley Kubrick released his cinematic
vision of Burgess’ source text almost a decade later in 1971, and it is Kubrick’s film
which has become famous the world over.
Before Kubrick became interested in the production, several other parties were keen
on transferring the novel to the screen. An unlikely party interested in making the film
were British Rock ‘n’ Roll group The Rolling Stones. The group wanted to star and
also compose and perform the music for the film, photographer Michael Cooper was
to direct. The Rolling Stones eventually pulled out due to a lack of time, presumably
because of commitments to other, less unfamiliar projects. The interest shown by The
Rolling Stones is highly interesting, because like Alex and his “three droogs”
(Burgess, p.3) the band were considered to be renegades acting not within the rules of
society but completely of their own free will, self satisfying any primal urges or
desires they had. Mick Jagger and his band were the antithesis of the Beatles’, who
maintained a clean cut image. The Stones unashamedly and openly used drugs, had
sexual relations with many women and were considered the bad boys of Rock ‘n’
Roll. Parallels can be drawn between the ways in which The Rolling Stones behaved
with actions the gangs in A Clockwork Orange, in the narrative. Perhaps the Stones
noticed the viability of such a comparison, or perhaps wanted to do a film which
would further enhance their notoriety. Kevin Jackson in an article on the history of the
film notes that others interested were “Ken Russell, who took a serious interest in the
project for a while before turning to Aldous Huxley and The Devils” (Jackson, p.26).
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 18/37
Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange arrived in cinemas in the winter of 1971.
Starring as Alex the films, “humble narrator” (Burgess, p.139), was Malcolm
McDowell. The rest of the “droogs” consisted of James Marcus as Georgie, Michael
Tarn as Pete, and Warren Clarke as Dim. Both McDowell and Clarke were relatively
unrecognised actors, and since appearing in A Clockwork Orange have gone on to
become firmly established actors. Upon release, the film received mixed reviews with
some critics launching fierce attacks on the piece, Leslie Halliwell in his Halliwell’s
Film Guide 6th Edition was particularly scathing. Halliwell said of the film that it was
“repulsive… it is pretentious and nasty rubbish for sick minds who do not mind
jazzed up images and incoherent sound” (Anderson, p.43). As well as a number of
reviews similar to Halliwell’s, there have been reviews written which herald the film
as a work of genius, a masterpiece. Ephriam Katz in The Film Encyclopedia suggests
that Kubrick’s film is “a striking, visually brilliant film that provides a chilling, near
nihilistic vision of a world dominated by anarchic, vicious violence… a perverse
world of tomorrow which some say mirrors Kubrick’s view of the world today”
(Anderson, p.43). Today, the film is widely regarded as a classic although this opinion
of the film was no doubt helped by the fact that Kubrick prevented A Clockwork
Orange from being shown in the U.K on any format after the films initial run.
Following increasing pressure from the press, outspoken members of the public and
Kubrick’s “fears of attacks on his family” (Jackson, p. 27), Kubrick effectively
censored himself, decreeing the film would not be shown in the United Kingdom until
after his death. This decision created a cult following for the film, “British fans of
Kubrick were forced to watch A Clockwork Orange on grainy exhausted prints at
fleapit cinemas in Paris, Amsterdam and New York” (Bradshaw, 2000). Bradshaw
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 19/37
suggests this cult status came about because “for decades, Kubrick’s brilliantly
scabrous fable of “ultra violence” has existed only as a fascinating rumour”
(Bradshaw, 2000). The film once again went back into cinemas after a twenty seven
year absence, following Kubrick’s death in 1999. The formal elements of the film
mean A Clockwork Orange is very much a Kubrick film; it sits well in the director’s
body of work. Directorial traits such as long tracking shots, clinical shot framing and
even classical music feature heavily in A Clockwork Orange as they do in Kubrick’s
previous films, and the films he would make such as 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968),
Barry Lyndon (1975), and The Shining (1980). When the film fell foul to public
outcry, it was Burgess the novel’s author who was wheeled out to defend the film and
explain the origins of the violence to which people where so opposed, as “Kubrick
himself could not or would not justify his film” (Bradshaw, 2000). When preparing
his production, Kubrick had looked at many scripts which he cast aside and decided
eventually to write one himself. One submitted to the director was written by Burgess
himself, this factor combined with the choice to use Burgess as the films defender
means a comparison of the two works is extremely interesting, as the relationship
between Kubrick and Burgess was clearly a strange one. This estranged relationship is
also shared by the two texts which they individually produced.
The novella consists of twenty one chapters in all, split equally over three sections.
Blake Morrison writing in his introduction to the Penguin Classics publication of A
Clockwork Orange suggests this division of the chapters is an “implicit allusion to
Shakespeare’s seven ages of man” (Morrison, p. xx). The novel concludes with Alex
reaching maturity at the age of twenty one, and finally renouncing violence at the end
of the twenty first chapter. The structure which Burgess fashions his narrative on is
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 20/37
essential to the novel. Morrison considers “ A Clockwork Orange to be the most
carefully constructed of novels” (Morrison, p. xx) and this is due to the careful
progression of Alex with relation to the chapters of the novella. This intended and
carefully planned structure was not adhered to in Kubrick’s adaptation of the novel,
and here in lays the first problem when dealing with the transferral of the novella to
the screen. Kubrick did not read the original version of Burgess’ text, but instead the
U.S version. This version omits the final chapter in which Alex renounces violence,
instead finishing at the end of the twentieth chapter with Alex saying “I was cured
alright”(Burgess, p.132), insinuating that he will return “to his old tolchocking
ways”(Morrison, p. xx). Morrison notes that the U.S publishers, W.W Norton had
“declined to publish the book unless the affirmative ending – in which Alex on
reaching maturity, renounces violence- was dropped”(Morrison, p. xvii). The removal
of this ending shows what Morrison suggests is a rare and uncharacteristic “American
need for pessimism”(Morrison, p. xvii). Stanley Kubrick and other critics have
suggested that Burgess’ original ending was far too optimistic and that in fact the U.S
ending is far more effective being “tougher and more realistic” (Morrison, p. xxi).
With his ending Burgess was considering the decline of generations to come, and as
such his original ending is just as pessimistic as that of the ending published in the
U.S edition. Burgess aimed to imply that although Alex has renounced violence he
would be unable to prevent his offspring and furthermore his bloodline from acting in
the same way to him, a cycle of adolescent violence would be established, a point
missed by his U.S publishers. In the final two pages of the novel Alex proclaims that
when his own son is old enough he will explain what he did as a teenager, but that this
may not be enough to stop him that his son would
“not understand or not want to understand and would do all the veshches I had done,yes perhaps even killing some poor starry forella … and I would not be able to really
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 21/37
stop him. And nor would he be able to stop his own son, brothers, and so it would ittyon to like the end of the world, round and round and round”(Burgess, p.140-141).
Although Alex is clearly intelligent, and this is displayed throughout the narrative of
both the film and novel, it is only the novel which allows him to grow morally, and
perhaps most importantly allow him to mature. It is in the final chapter which he not
only renounces his past but becomes aware of society and its needs, he adopts the tone
of an adult truly concerned with what lies ahead for the children he will bring into the
world. Kubrick denies Alex this moral growth in his film, instead allowing the
character to return to his old ways, having not learnt anything or changing after the
events he experiences throughout the narrative.
As well as preventing a moral growth in Alex, Kubrick removes any weakness in his
narrator, weakness which was present in Burgess’s portrayal of the narratives central
protagonist. Alex in Kubrick’s version appears to be a number of years older than he
is in the original novel. When Alex is told that he has in fact killed “the old ptitsa who
had all the kots and koshkas” (Burgess, p.56) he realises that he will be going to
prison for murder he proclaims “that was everything. I’d done the lot, now. and me
still only fifteen” ( Burgess, p.56). As a result of this age, Alex actually cries on a few
occasions through out the story, something which the Alex of Kubrick’s film does not
do. By having Alex growing up during the length of the narrative, Burgess ensures
that his reader’s can be more sympathetic towards Alex. Alex’s age means that he fits
perfectly into the cycle of youth violence of which he himself fears in the final pages
of the novel. At the time he commits the crimes he is too young to see the error of his
ways. He has been thrown down this path not necessarily because he is wholly evil,
but because the society Alex is a part of does not look after its young and as reaction
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 22/37
society’s youth rebel against the rules which they are told to live by. Alex in the film
does not cry and most importantly at the end of the film does not show that he has
matured or grown. An audience cannot feel sympathetic for a murderer and rapist if
he is old enough to know that his actions are wrong, if he does not show any form of
redemption even after being punished. As a result an audience watching A Clockwork
Orange have a true anti hero, with whom it is very hard to sympathize with.
The alteration of Alex as a character, and also the removing of the final chapter from
his screen play mean that Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange is an enormously
different text to Burgess’ original. However one of the novels most important and
endearing features is untouched by Kubrick. Burgess’ constructed teen vernacular,
Nadsat, survives the transition from page to screen unscathed, bizarre and as obscure
on the screen as it was on the page. Burgess created a language which has many
strangely beautiful words in it, words which were designed to create a sense of unity
for the people who use it in the book. The language is used to exclude those who do
not speak it, in the case of the novel, to exclude adults and the people who run the
country such as teachers, police men and government officials. Words such as ‘horror
show’ which is used by Alex in the same way the word ‘wicked’ is used today , as in
referring to something that is good. ‘Gulliver’ is a human head, a term Blake
Morrison suggests is a passing nod to Jonathan Swift (Morrison, p.x) ‘Tolchock,’ to
hit someone, ‘glazzies’ which mean the eyes, ‘millicents’ refers to law enforcers and
the rather childish ‘guttiwuts’ is used to talk about the stomach. These are only some
examples of the colourful and utterly charming language which Burgess created. The
inclusion of the language in the film is highly peculiar considering the studio behind
its production. Warner Brothers are, and have always been, one of major forces in the
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 23/37
film industry and consistently produces films which are geared towards achieving
huge success at the box office. Nadsat, as an encoded language, is therefore not
openly accessible to a wide audience, and getting to understand what Alex and his
gang are talking about requires patience. However the language’s inclusion could be
more to do with Kubrick and the studio’s faith in their director rather than a shocking
lapse in their business strategy. Kevin Jackson notes that the film was shot almost
directly from the book, with Kubrick walking on set announcing a page number then
spend the following time working out what he wanted to use (Jackson, p27).
Although the book is as violent as the film, the language which Burgess uses to
describe these violent acts means that the imagery conveyed to a reader is softer and
less brutal than the actual acts are. The problem which the film faces is that it is
forced to show the actions of the characters, and as such is far more brutal than the
book. For example ‘tolchocking someone on the Gulliver,’ is a far more pleasant
image than watching someone’s head being hit. Criticism levelled at the film because
of its violent content, notes the way in which Kubrick chose to shoot these violent
sections. Rather than choosing to portray the violence in a gritty and abrasive way, the
fights and beatings in the film are shot with grace and beauty. Two scenes within the
film which illustrate this grace are the scene in which Alex and his droogs fight “Billy
Boy and his five droogs” (Burgess, p.13) in the old theatre, and the other when Alex
quashes a possible mutiny within his gang and attacks his own friends. In the film
these scenes are shot in a way that is reminiscent of a ballet, choreographed with
bright and uplifting music in accompaniment.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 24/37
A Clockwork Orange can be seen as a very close translation of the original novel. It
follows the same narrative structure, and events occur in the correct chronological
order. Although certain scenes are left out of the film, the content is very similar. The
voice of the narrator is still present in the film, with Alex providing a voice over, and
as he does in the book he still allies himself with the audience, often prefacing details
by saying “O my Brothers” (Burgess, p.57).However, the way in which Kubrick has
changed elements of the story mean that, as Bluestone suggests, he becomes the
author of a new piece of work. Kubrick’s choice to iron out any weaknesses in Alex
and cull the final chapter of the novel from his film meant that the tone and impact the
film has is greatly different to that of the book. This change of tone combined with the
formal elements, which are very much in keeping with the rest of Kubrick’s work,
mean that Kubrick is established as this pieces author.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 25/37
Chapter Four: Case Study; American Psycho
American Psycho was first published in 1991, and was Bret Easton Ellis’ third novel.
The novel traces the activities of Patrick Bateman, “a yuppie stockbroker/serial killer
with yuppie – and cannibalistic – tastes” (Kauffman, p.41). The novel paints a portrait
of the world and more specifically society which Bateman inhabits. Like Burgess and
A Clockwork Orange, Easton Ellis uses his novel as an opportunity to comment on
society, but specifically the world occupied by the rich and affluent living in New
York during the late 80s. The novel’s central protagonist and his friends inhabit a
world in which the dollar and consumerism reign supreme. Patrick Bateman describes
his peers and those he interacts with not by character traits or physical appearance but
by what suits or clothes they wear. A person is not worthwhile in Bateman’s eyes
unless they have been educated at an established institution, wear tasteful clothes, and
eat at the correct and usually exclusive restaurants. His friends are essentially versions
of himself each sharing the same persona; his environment is one of identikit
personalities. The central characters of the novel aspire to physical perfection,
enormous wealth and all that goes with such wealth. Bateman becomes aware of this
notion himself and suggests “there is an idea of a Patrick Bateman…but there is no
real me…myself is fabricated” (Easton Ellis, p.362) As a result of these shared
personalities which are constructed with the aid of GQ magazine and other style
‘bibles’, Bateman is consistently mistaken for other people by his peers and even his
lawyer when he confesses to killing a pantheon of people and committing various
atrocities.
As with A Clockwork Orange, American Psycho can be considered a critique of the
period around which it was written. Fourteen years on from its publication however,
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 26/37
the novel remains as pertinent as ever. A modern audience can still identify with the
novel’s themes of violence, greed and image obsession which is highlighted today
perfectly by magazines such as Heat, OK! and Hello. Due to readily available credit
provided by companies today, people do now not even need to be in the same social
context as Bateman and his friends to enjoy expensive products. The brutal
consumerism of the late 80s is just as relevant to people reading the book in today’s
climate. Kauffman highlights the main themes within the novel as “the craven
addiction to sex and commodities, the convergence of consumerism and psychosis in
alienating urban environments”(Kauffman, p.41), these themes mean that the novel is
just as relevant to a contemporary audience as it was upon publication.
Unlike A Clockwork Orange, it was Easton Ellis’ novel which caused huge
controversy and not Mary Harron’s American Psycho, released in 2000. Jeff Stipe
notes that “Literary critics and feminist groups savaged the novel”(Stipe, 1999, p.8),
because of the horrifically detailed portrayals of sex and violence, which often take
place at the same time. After completing a finished version of the novel, Easton Ellis’
publishers Simon and Shuster, “reneged on (his) contract just a month before the book
was scheduled to arrive in bookshops” (Kauffman, p. 41). The book was eventually
published by Vintage books and “within two months of the book hitting the shelves in
April 1991 more than 100,000 copies had been sold” (Stipe, p.8). One possible reason
for such interest is that the story is told from Bateman’s controversial point of view,
and as a result an audience is inexorably linked to the hideous events of the novel.
Although still horrific, it is possible that these acts had they been placed within the
third person would have had less gravitas and therefore been easier for an audience to
deal with. The reason feminist groups and critics despised the novel so much is easy
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 27/37
to understand. The murders which Easton Ellis creates most horrifically and
descriptively are of Bateman’s female victims. Bateman’s attempts at eating his
female victims, his decision to mutilate their dead bodies and at one point unleash a
starved rat on one of his victims are described in all their terrifying glory. Conversely
Bateman’s male victims are disposed of quickly. This disproportionate balance of
female victimization was certain to enrage feminist readers. The choice of first person
narration caused massive problems for people who misread the novel. Kauffman
highlights that one critic even “assumed that Ellis and Bateman were interchangeable”
(Kauffman, p. 41), on the basis of this assumption perhaps readers believed that in
fact Easton Ellis condoned the actions of his psychopathic creation.
As with A Clockwork Orange, Easton Ellis’ story made neither a quick or easy
journey to screen. Jeff Stipe in an article on the film notes “the film version of
American Psycho (had) been an ‘impossible project” in Hollywood almost since the
book was published”(Stipe, p.8). Director Mary Harron began transforming the novel
in 1996 and two years later the script she was ready. Lions Gate films were producing
the project and “announced at Cannes 1998 that (Leonardo) DiCaprio had agreed to
star in the film” (Stipe, p.9). Mary Harron did not agree with the studio’s decision to
have Leonardo DiCaprio as Patrick Bateman saying in interview with Guardian
reporter Nisha Gopolan, “Leonardo wasn’t remotely right for the part… there’s
something very boyish about him. He’s not credible as one of those tough Wall street
guys”(Gopolan, 2000, para 5). Harron’s opinion must also have been influenced by
the actor’s role in the film Titanic (Director James Cameron, 1997). The film
exponentially increased DiCaprio’s fan base, with hundreds of teenagers pinning
pictures of him on their walls, as Harron says “I did not want to deal with someone
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 28/37
who had a 13 yr old fan base. They shouldn’t see the movie”(Gopolan, para 5). As the
young star became involved with the project Harron was removed by Lions Gate as
“she did not appear on DiCaprio’s list of purported list of Directors”(Stipe, p.9).
Oliver Stone became involved with the project after Harron’s departure and “began to
chip away at Harron’s script, preparing to re-write it all together” (Gopolan, para 10).
The progress being made on the project declined however when DiCaprio and Stone
found it hard to agree on the nature of the film. Gopolan notes how some of the
problems DiCaprio highlighted hadn’t even been an issue when he started work on
American Psycho and eventually “bolted off to make The Beach”(Gopolan, para 11).
Oliver Stone eventually also left the project, and Lions Gate reinstated Harron as the
films director. She was also allowed her first choice actor for Bateman, British actor
Christian Bale, on the condition “that her budget would not exceed $10m and that she
would cast recognisable talent… in the supporting roles”(Gopolan, para 13). Once the
production began again, more problems were faced. In an attempt to replicate the
details of the novel, the film makers were denied the use of products by their
manufacturers. Gopolan notes how many of the brand names the production gained
permission to use actually came from European fashion houses rather than American
ones, brand like “Ralph Lauren and Calvin Klein didn’t want to be associated with
something so horrible”(Gopolan, para 17). Talking to Jeff Stipe, Harron recognises
that the film is a period piece, as it focuses on a by gone era, and as a result the
costume of the film is extremely important in creating a realistic vision of the source
text. American Psycho was eventually released in 2000.
For a source text such as American Psycho, which portrays such vile and despicable
crimes against women, it is highly pertinent that a woman chose to try and adapt the
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 29/37
text for the screen. Even when the studio dropped her in favour of other directors she
was still passionate about her vision of the novel; of her removal from the film Harron
said “I wanted the Movie back”(Gopolan, para 12). In terms of authorship, Harron’s
gender is highly pertinent, as is her previous film. I Shot Andy Warhol , made in 1996,
was a biopic focusing on “Valerie Solanas, author of the SCUM (Society for cutting
up men) Manifesto”(Kauffman, p.44). Under Harron’s direction, Bateman becomes a
ridiculous cartoon character, no longer the menacing psychopath that Easton Ellis’
penned. In the scenes of the film where Bateman is having sex, instead of focussing
on his partner, he instead prefers to stare at himself in the mirrors on his wall. He is
not making love to a women, he is making love with himself, something which an
audience may find extremely amusing. Through rearranging key speeches from the
novel, Harron also manages to ridicule Bateman’s killings. A whole chapter is
dedicated to the band Huey Lewis and the News, as the story is drawing to an end and
Bateman is becoming less stable. Harron however rearranges the chronology of the
story and has Bateman give his analysis of the band’s work whilst killing his arch
rival Paul Owen. The speech is extremely detailed and Christian Bale enhances it by
prancing around his victim, at times dancing. An audience are too busy laughing at
the actor to appreciate the full extent of this macabre situation. Harron through a
variety of techniques dilutes Bateman, instead of emphasising the violence of the
film; the British director chooses to draw on the novel’s scathing satire of New York
society.
Throughout American Psycho, Harron not only manages to change the way Bateman
is received by an audience, but also manages to drown out his voice. The novel uses a
first person narrative to detail the events which occur. The voice of this narrator is the
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 30/37
story’s protagonist, Patrick Bateman. Although the film still follows Bateman, he is
denied the opportunity of a voice over for the majority of the film, only being granted
one at the beginning in order to describe his vigorous beauty regime. Unlike Kubrick
and his vision of A Clockwork Orange, in which he retains the voice over of his
central character Alex, the audience are never allowed to ally themselves with
Bateman in Harron’s American Psycho . Harron, who’s previous film was “a
sympathetic portrait” (Stipe, p.8) of a violent feminist, has clearly attempted to correct
some of what she thought were shortcomings in the original text. In denying the
audience voice over narration, Bateman and his internal mental activities are kept
private. Harron does not wish the character to become a hero in the film, as he with
represents everything the feminist movement has tried to stop. This change means that
she manages to become an author in her own right, building on the material Easton
Ellis left her and offering the characters a new direction.
Unlike A Clockwork Orange a great deal of the source material has been excluded
from the screen play. However, a film maker is constrained by a number of limitations
which a novelist is simply not effected by. Superficially it is to understand why so
much has been omitted from Harron’s film. At 318 pages, Easton Ellis’ novel is dense
with activity and for a film maker with budget and time constraints it is simply too
much. Harron however juggles sections of the novel which are interesting, amusing or
integral to the story and places them at different points in the film. Scenes have also
been omitted which are overly violent or disgusting, and only a handful of the
murders in the novel remain in the film. Two possibilities can be suggested as to why
these scenes have been omitted. Censorship is perhaps the most obvious, one chapter
in the novel describes Bateman killing a child at the zoo, in another Bateman crucifies
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 31/37
one of his female victims. A film which portrayed these horrific events would
certainly run into censorship issues, and could possibly risk being banned. For a
commercial film studio, whose primary concern is financial success, this would not be
an option. The second reason for these omissions is Mary Harron herself. Instead of
dwelling on the horrific acts of the novel she instead emphasises the dark humour and
satire of the story, trying to completely avoid the superfluous violence. The acts
which are omitted from her screenplay are mentioned within the narrative of the film,
yet have little effect, as they are not shown. Harron chooses to emphasise the novels
social commentary and satirical elements rather than dwell on the violent content.
Literary adaptation can be performed in a manor of ways each with a different result.
In the case of American Psycho, Mary Harron has taken the source text and
manipulated that material to serve a personal purpose. As a woman, with a history of
feminist interest, Harron manipulates Bateman into a joke, rather than the dangerous
Psychopath that roams the pages of Easton Ellis’ novel. As the film’s director and co-
writer, Harron removes Easton Ellis as author and establishes herself in the role.
Although the film works well in capturing the time period in which the novel is set
and also manages to reproduce the satirical elements of the book, it fails not
unintentionally, at conveying the turbulent psyche of the story’s central protagonist.
Bateman is not a character with which a female would identify with, and Harron
realised this. Harron possibly wishes the audience to forget Bateman in the same way
his colleagues do.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 32/37
Chapter Five: Conclusion.
Over the course of the two case studies it can be seen that different directors choose to
adapt from literature in different ways. Perhaps more significantly it has been shown
what sort of effect this transition has upon the material being used.
Through changing elements of a novel, in even a small way, the tone or impact of the
resulting film can be greatly different to that of the source material. In the case of A
Clockwork Orange, Stanley Kubrick’s choice to remove the intended ending and also
his decision to moderate the character of Alex, means that an audience cannot
sympathise with the protagonist in the way the novel’s reader can. In Kubrick’s film,
Alex never redeems himself as he never progresses morally or spiritually in the way
he does in Burgess’ novel. Burgess, by allowing his creation to morally mature and
renounce violence places the character within an established cycle of youth violence,
which the protagonist himself highlights in the novel’s final chapter. The Alex of
Kubrick’s tale however ends the film in way which suggests he will in fact return to
his old pattern of behaviour. Alex in the film could perhaps be called inherently evil,
whilst in the novel perhaps Alex is a confused and mislead adolescent. However
Kubrick still wishes an audience to ally themselves with the films central protagonist,
as Alex still narrates the film via voice over, and much of the dialogue from the
original text is retained. As in the novel Alex calls to the audience by saying “O My
brothers”(Burgess, p.5), with this device he compromises the audiences distance from
his actions and makes people feel involved with his life.
Although the language and events of the novel are kept on the whole in tact,
Kubrick’s authoritative decision to remove the last chapter greatly changes the
resulting piece and as such it is a totally independent, new text.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 33/37
The same can be said in the case of American Psycho . Although in contrast to A
Clockwork Orange a great deal of the novel is left out of the film, and what remains is
rearranged in terms of chronology. However in this case study, a female director has
taken a source text which is brutal in its attitude to women, and her interpretation
deconstructs the gender relations of the novel. By building the central female
characters of the novel into well developed characters in the film, the tone of the
novel is changed, resulting in a film which works differently. Harron also chooses to
ridicule the central protagonist by turning him into a laughing stock. The misogynistic
predator who stalks the pages of Bret Easton Ellis’s novel no longer remains; instead
the audience are left with a man who cannot be taken seriously. He is no longer a
source of fear but a source of amusement and his decline into uncontrollable madness
is not perturbing but pitifully hilarious. What was once a novel that feminist critics
despised has now become a film which could be enjoyed to a greater extent by female
viewers.
Through the case studies it could also be suggested however that film is simply not a
suitable medium for literal translation. Filmmakers are constrained in a way which
novelists would find strange and alien. Directors must work within the confines of the
budget and this will dictate what directors can achieve. Novelists in terms of content
however, are only limited as their imaginations. An explosion or plane crash costs the
novelist nothing to pen, yet for a film maker orchestrating such a scene can be
expensive and logistically difficult.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 34/37
Novels also communicate readers in a different manner to films and their audience. A
novel can offer back a character’s history and often elaborate on certain aspects of the
narrative, because prose is used to convey the story. A director’s primary tools are
sight and sound, and all the content of a novel transferred to the screen, both textual
and sub-textual must be conveyed with these devices. It is therefore to be expected
that when adapting from page to screen, that something will be lost in translation.
If it is a problematic process then why have so many directors always relied heavily
on literature for material? The answer is undoubtedly money; a film maker can take
an established text with its existent fan base, transfer it to the screen in the hope the
novel’s fans will come and see the finished product. It could also be suggested that
instead of analysing the changes which occur when a text is transferred from page to
screen, a more accepting attitude could be employed. Critics, scholars and even fans
should perhaps accept the differences between the two mediums, rather than how
truthful the film remains to its source text. The film maker offers their vision of a text,
and will also assimilate features and themes they identify with from the novel, it
therefore to be accepted that with such input the director becomes author for this new
text. Although characters and story lines may remain the same, they are merely
shadows of the original work being cast onto another author’s blank canvas.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 35/37
Bibliography
All Time Box Office (n.d) Retrieved February 19, 2005 from Box Office Mojo
Website: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/
Anderson, C.W. (1985). Science Fiction Films of the Seventies, Jefferson, North
Carolina; London; McFarland
Annesley, J. (1998). Blank Fictions: Consumerism, Culture and the Contemporary
American Novel, London; Pluto Press
Balio, T., ed, (1985) The American Film Industry, Madison, Wisconsin; London;
University of Wisconsin Press
Bane, J. (2003). The Novels of Bret Easton Ellis. Retrieved March 12, 2005, from
B.B.C website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A1036315
Bluestone, G. (1957). Novels into Film, Berkeley; London; University of California
Press
Bradshaw, P. (2000). The Old Ultra-Violence. Retrieved March 18, 2005 from
Guardian Newspaper, Film Guardian Website:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/Feature_Story/feature_story/0,4120,142566,00.html
Burgess, A. (2000) A Clockwork Orange, London; New York; Penguin Classics
Chapman, J. (1999) A Bit of the Old Ultra Violence; A Clockwork Orange in I.Q
Hunter, ed, British Science Fiction Cinema (pp. 128-137). London; Routledge
Duguid, M. (n.d). Literary Adaptation. Retrieved January 10, 2005 from Screen
Online Website: http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/444951/
Easton Ellis, B. (1991). American Psycho London; Picador
Feldmann, H. (1976). Kubrick and His Discontents. Film Quarterly , 30(1), 12-19
French, P. (2000). You Looking at Me? Retrieved March 18, 2005 from Guardian
Newspaper, Film Guardian Website:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/Feature_Story/feature_story/0,4120,141472,00.html
Giddings, R. and Selby, K. and Wensley, C. (1990). Screening the Novel: The Theory
and Practice of Literary Dramatization, Basingstoke; Macmillan
Gopolan, N. (2000). American Psycho: The Story Behind the Film. Retrieved March
12, 2005 from Guardian Newspaper, Film Guardian Website:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/Feature_Story/feature_story/0,4120,150245,00.html
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 36/37
Guback, T.H. (1985). Hollywood’s International Market in T. Balio, ed, The
American Film Industry (pp.463-486). Madison, Wisconsin; London; University of
Wisconsin Press
Horton, A. and Magretta, J. (1981). Introduction in A. Horton and J. Magretta, eds,
Modern European Filmmakers and the Art of Adaptation (pp.1-5) New York;
Frederick Ungar Publications
Hunter, I.Q., ed, (1999) British Science Fiction Cinema, London; Routledge
Jackson, K. (1999). A Short Lexicon of Nadsat. Sight and Sound, 9(9), 24-27
James, N. (2000) Sick City Boy. Sight and Sound, 10(5), 22-24
Jancovich, M. and Reboll, A.L. and Stringer, J. and Willis, A., eds, (2003) Defining
Cult Movies , Manchester; New York; University of Manchester Press.
Kauffman, L.S. (2000). American Psycho [review of the motion picture American
Psycho]. Film Quarterly , 54(2) 41-45
Leigh, D. (2001). Murder Most Horrid . Retrieved March 12, 2005 from Guardian
Newspaper, Film Guardian Website:
http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,4120,477979,00.html
McEwan, I. (1998). Enduring Love London; Vintage
Morrison, B. (2000). Introduction in A. Burgess A Clockwork Orange (pp.vii-xxiv)
London; Penguin Classics
Orr, J. (1992). Cinema and Fiction: New Modes of Adapting, 1950-1990, Edinburgh;
University of Edinburgh Press
Palahnuik, C. (1997). Fight Club, London; Vintage
Rayns, T. (2000) American Psycho [review of the motion picture American Psycho].
Sight and Sound , 10(5), 42
Stipe, J. (1999). Blood Symbol. Sight and Sound, 9(7), 8-10
Wagner, G. (1975). The Novel and The Cinema. Rutherford; Madison; Teaneck;
Farleigh Dickinson University Press; London; Tantivy Press.
Walker, A. (1999). Stanley Kubrick, Director. London; Weidenfeld & Nicolson
Welsh, I. (2003). Trainspotting . London; Vintage
Wu, H.H. (2003). Trading in horror, cult and matricide: Peter Jackson’s phenomenal
bad taste and New Zealand fantasies of inter/national cinematic success in M.
Jancovich and A.L Reboll and J. Stringer and A. Willis, eds, Defining Cult Movies
(pp.84-108). Manchester; New York; University of Manchester Press.
8/4/2019 Screening The Novel: Tom Darlington
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/screening-the-novel-tom-darlington 37/37
Filmography
Boyle, D. (Director). (1996). Trainspotting [Motion Picture]. United Kingdom:
Channel Four Films.
Coppola, F.F. (Director). (1979). Apocalypse Now [Motion Picture]. United States:
Zoetrope Studios.
Fincher, D. (Director). (1999). Fight Club [Motion Picture]. United States: Fox 2000
Pictures
Harron, M. (Director). (2000) American Psycho [Motion Picture]. United States:
Lions Gate Films
Kubrick, S. (Director). (1964). Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying
And Love The Bomb [Motion Picture]. United Kingdom: Hawk Films ltd.
Kubrick, S. (Director). (1968). 2001: A Space Odyssey [Motion Picture]. United
States: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
Kubrick, S. (Director). (1971). A Clockwork Orange [Motion Picture]. United States;
Great Britain : Warner Brothers/ Hawk Films ltd.
Kubrick, S. (Director). (1980). The Shining [Motion Picture]. United States; Great
Britain: Warner Bros/ Hawk Films ltd.
Luhrmann, B. (Director). (1996). Romeo + Juliet [Motion Picture].United States: 20th
Century Fox
Michell, R. (Director). (2004). Enduring Love [Motion Picture]. United Kingdom:
Film Four/ UK Film Council