Writers and screenwriters have found common ground in the following statement: adapting a novel into a feature film is a double-edged blade. On one hand, the literary purists (particularly the fans of said novel) will expect adherence to the original story. On the other hand, production companies and movie audiences will expect the source material to be compressed into a digestible format. And even if you’ve ticked all the boxes, chances are there will still be viewers/readers voicing displeasure regarding the end result.

Taking a story from the pages of a book and trimming (or, in some cases, chopping) it into a film that works is no walk in the park. In many cases, the writers work hand in hand with the screenwriters to make sure the essence of the story is not lost along the way. In a few rare instances, the writers don’t get involved and simply sell the film and TV rights to the highest bidder. James Patterson is usually situated among the latter, and it shows. His books are exquisite thriller pieces. The adaptations, however, are less than stellar. Usually, the author will retain credit as an executive producer: it’s one thing to help pen the screenplay and back away from the project, and a whole other thing to stick around and make sure that the production and post-production processes run smoothly, without butchering the source material. Screenwriters can attest to the fact that major changes can be slipped into the story even in the middle of principal photography.

‘FIGHT CLUB’ (1999), ©FOX 2000 PICTURES

Not all adaptations work. Some books simply aren’t meant to be made for the silver screen. I have a hard time seeing anyone take on John Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’ without getting cancelled halfway into pre-production or fumbling the gargantuan task of transferring the poetry into a screenplay that producers simply cannot put down. The same goes for H.P. Lovecraft’s ‘At the Mountains of Madness’, which is a superb horror masterpiece—to this day, Guillermo del Toro has yet to succeed in getting the project off the ground, mostly due to studio intervention or even budgetary concerns. There are stories that do not belong in the world of cinema.

But of those that do… Well, I could talk about them for hours. I’ll settle on five that truly stand out for me, not only as masterful adaptations but also as splendid feature films that took the original story to a whole new level.

‘Stand by Me’

Written by Raynold Gideon and directed by Rob Reiner, ‘Stand by Me’ (1986) is one of the best coming-of-age stories to ever grace the silver screen. It was based on Stephen King’s novella, aptly titled ‘The Body’ and included in his 1982 ‘Different Seasons’ collection of short tales.

The film was critically acclaimed, its screenplay was nominated for an Oscar, and it is widely remembered as one of the most wholesome, strange and nostalgic creations out of Hollywood. It is, to this day, an adaptation worthy of praise, and it stands well enough on its own. ‘The Body’ is slightly better, though, mainly because there were precious parts of it that didn’t survive into the movie.

‘STAND BY ME’ (1986), ©COLUMBIA PICTURES

One memorable scene is when Gordie sees the deer on the train tracks. It is a pure moment that generates some powerful thoughts from adult Gordon as he reminisces about that particular discovery. ‘The most important things are the hardest to say, because words diminish them. It’s hard to make strangers care about the good things in your life’, Stephen King writes in ‘The Body’. Throughout the book, Mr King drops plenty of thoughts and ideas that not only make it a great read, they also make us think about the way our actions can affect the rest of our lives.

‘The Body’ and ‘Stand by Me’ are each exquisite and memorable works that are worth revisiting more than once, but the difference persists in the depth that can be reached in the book—a depth which most films simply fail to capture.

‘True Grit’

Charles Portis’ novel was adapted twice since its publishing as a serial in The Saturday Evening Post, back in 1968. There aren’t many writers who can display a humour as dry as Mr Portis’s in ‘True Grit’, not to mention his other works. If you don’t pay attention, it might fly right over your head. The book is an astounding work of fiction, but the aforementioned sly humour slipped through the cracks with its first adaptation.

In 1969, Henry Hathaway took on the complicated task of telling Mattie Ross’ story for the cinema. Unfortunately, he didn’t quite capture the essence of the book. Marguerite Roberts’ screenplay didn’t retain the jokes despite her devotion to the source material, and Mr Hathaway simply couldn’t pinpoint the snippets of humour that the original writer had injected into the tale. The result, despite starring John Wayne—who also got an Academy Award for his performance, falls rather flat.

‘True Grit’ (1969) is more of a throwback to the westerns of the ‘50s than anything else. A wonderful movie that is worth watching and re-watching, of course, as Mr Wayne is his usual gritty self, and Kim Darby brilliantly plays Mattie Ross, the hard-headed revenge seeker.

‘TRUE GRIT’ (2010), ©PARAMOUNT PICTURES

‘True Grit’ (2010), written and directed by Joel and Ethan Coen, is a slightly different and more complex affair. Starring Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon and Josh Brolin, this second adaptation of Mr Portis’s novel is remarkable, though it also fails to capture the original’s spirit. The writing is sterling, to say the least, and the Coens are masters of their craft, but something still doesn’t stick.

Both versions were true to the novel in different ways and always a pleasure to watch, but neither is able to bring forth what makes ‘True Grit’ special and impossible to put down.

‘The Big Sleep’

Raymond Chandler is the uncontested champion of noir crime. His books are works of literary art and have changed the way in which we think of detective stories. ‘The Big Sleep’, considered a masterpiece of its genre, is noted for its complexity and the way in which its characters double-cross each other. Most recently, it was included in Time magazine’s ‘List of the 100 Best Novels’.

So, naturally, expectations for its movie version were high. In 1946, Howard Hawks, better known for ‘Scarface’ (1932), ‘Bringing Up Baby’ (1938), and ‘His Girl Friday’ (1940), took Raymond Chandler’s book to a different level. ‘The Big Sleep’ (1946) brought Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall together on the silver screen. Their sizzling dynamic is downright mesmerizing and impossible to forget.

‘THE BIG SLEEP’ (1946), ©WARNER BROS.

William Faulkner and Leigh Brackett penned the script, doing justice to Mr Chandler’s original work. In fact, the author was so pleased with the film, he once noted that Hawks’ version shows ‘what can be done with this sort of story by a director with the gift of atmosphere and the requisite touch of hidden sadism.’ Truth be told, the mixture of highly commercial genre and sharply individual intelligence delivers an endless fascination, which is why Howard Hawks’ vision was compatible with Raymond Chandler’s writing. In this case, the book and the adaptation are equally tremendous, each carrying their own artistic glory for slightly different reasons.

The former is intense and hardboiled, an incisive study of human nature, while the latter is rife with timeless magnetism, most of it due to the enhancement of Lauren Bacall’s character, Vivian.

‘The Big Sleep’ (1978) was Robert Mitchum’s take on Mr Chandler’s novel, starring Robert Mitchum and Sarah Miles. It was nowhere near as good as Hawks’ version, mainly because the story was transplanted into England and most of the story’s original nuance was lost along the way. Despite its many redeeming qualities, the second adaptation fails to even approach the first’s degree of excellence.

‘No Country for Old Men’

Cormac McCarthy is one of the world’s greatest writers, at least in my humble opinion. His hallucinating narrative style put his fifth novel, ‘Blood Meridian’, on Time magazine’s list of the 100 best English-language books in 2005. ‘All the Pretty Horses’ earned him a National Book Award, and ‘The Road’ won the Pulitzer Prize in 2007. ‘No Country for Old Men’ stands apart from the other nine titles he has so graciously given us, mainly because it was originally written as a screenplay and thus carries a simpler style.

Joel and Ethan Coen also stand apart for their ability to transform marvellous books into equally marvellous works of cinema. With ‘No Country for Old Men’ (2007), their adaptation of Mr McCarthy’s violently beautiful novel, the story is given a distinctive tang. Usually, the process of cropping a book for the screen leads to leaving a lot out from the source material, mainly due to the structural incompatibility between the two mediums.

‘NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN’ (2007), ©PARAMOUNT VANTAGE/MIRAMAX

But with ‘No Country for Old Men’, the exact opposite happened. The Coen Brothers change very little. The beat and the tone, the twists and the turns—everything that made the book so enthralling is faithfully and splendidly conveyed in the movie. Featuring first-class performances from Tommy Lee Jones, Josh Brolin, and Javier Bardem, ‘No County for Old Men’ won four Academy Awards, including the grand prize for Best Motion Picture of the Year, all well deserved.

‘Jojo Rabbit’

There were plenty of other household names that would’ve looked just as nice alongside the above. Edith Wharton’s ‘The Age of Innocence’ and Chuck Palahniuk’s ‘Fight Club’ come to mind. But given Taika Waititi’s historic Academy Award win this year, I decided that ‘Jojo Rabbit’ (2019) deserves to sit amongst the giants of incredibly good book-to-screen gems.

Adaptation is, by its nature, a transformative process. Changes must be made in order for the story to work on the big screen. Most readers will judge an adaptation by its fidelity to the original, which isn’t always a good avenue of objective critique. It’s actually deeply subjective. But Mr Waititi’s accomplishment with Christine Leunens’ ‘Caging Skies’ manages to stand out without galvanizing or upsetting fans of the book.

‘JOJO RABBIT’ (2019), ©TSG ENTERTAINMENT

Even though the U.S. version’s jacket describes Ms Leunens’ work as ‘darkly comic’, it’s actually difficult to consider ‘Caging Skies’ funny in any way. It is bleak and heart-breaking, and certainly not what is brought to life through Mr Waititi’s screenwriting, or the outstanding performances of Scarlett Johansson, Sam Rockwell, Rebel Wilson, or Roman Griffin Davis. Hell, Taika Waititi’s half-witted Hitler proves the impossible—that a Nazi story can be made into a deliciously weird but triumphant comedy.

At its core and despite its WWII setting, ‘Jojo Rabbit’ is a whimsical coming-of-age tale that follows a deeply indoctrinated Nazi boy as he begins to understand that the world he’s been brainwashed into believing is right is, in fact, horribly wrong. ‘Jojo Rabbit’ merely follows a similar path to ‘Caging Skies’ in broad strokes, at most. It has left behind significant parts of the book, focusing more on wrapping the tragedies of that era in delicious layers of ridicule. The end result, however, is a cinematic masterpiece and vivid satire that will leave us smiling and with a shattered heart, all at once.

From that fateful moment back in 1895, when the Lumière brothers screened the first motion picture of laborers leaving their factory in Paris, mankind has constantly ascended in its cinematic pursuit. Year after year, beginning with Thomas Edison’s Kinetoscope and ending with today’s iMax and 3D technologies, we find ourselves not only still making new tales for the screen, but also reinventing the old ones.

Remakes are as old as cinema itself, if one looks back in time. Directors are always eager to take others’ stories and add their own vision and artistic execution to them. But the endeavour itself has always been a double-edged blade, and in some cases, blood was metaphorically spilled. Industry people and viewers alike agree, to this day, that sometimes a remake simply isn’t welcome. That the original director’s version was the best form in which that particular story could be told. That there is no amount of new technology and visual pizzazz that can replace the often gritty, if not ancient appeal of an original production.

The Good

There have been some successful reboots. In fact, the new versions outdid the originals and are loved by critics and audiences alike. 

John Carpenter’s ‘The Thing’ (1982), for example, starring Kurt Russell and Wilford Brimley, is not only a cult classic these days, but also an illustrious adaptation of Howard Hawks’ ‘The Thing from Another World’ (1951). While Hawks went on to be better known as the recipient of an Honorary Academy Award for his cinematic contribution, giving us timeless classics such as ‘Gentlemen Prefer Blondes’ (1953), ‘Scarface’ (1932), ‘Bringing Up Baby’ (1938), and ‘Rio Bravo’ (1959), he is less remembered for what later became Carpenter’s horror masterpiece.

©UNIVERSAL PICTURES

‘The Thing’, much like Ennio Morricone’s score, was not immediately loved. In fact, Mr Morricone earned himself a Razzie nomination for his work on the movie. Not long afterwards, however, the brilliance of John Carpenter shone through, as did the music, and ‘The Thing’ became a titan of the goosebump-inducing genre. 

Joel and Ethan Coen’s ‘True Grit’ (2010) remake of Henry Hathaway’s 1969 epic starring John Wayne, was a resounding success. It racked up ten Academy Award nominations, and a BAFTA award for Best Cinematography. The latter was not unexpected for Roger Deakins, also known for ‘Skyfall’ (2012), ‘Blade Runner 2049’ (2017), and ‘Fargo’ (1996), as his work on ‘True Grit’ is used to this day as an example for exquisite cinematography. And who could possibly forget Jeff Bridges’ startling performance, right?

Another excellent rendition of a previously made movie was Martin Scorsese’s ‘Cape Fear’ (1991), which gave us a chilling Robert de Niro terrorizing Nick Nolte and Jessica Lange’s characters. The original of 1962 saw Robert Mitchum’s Max Cady going after Gregory Peck and Polly Bergens’ Sam and Peggy Bowden, respectively—each memorable in their own way.

©AMBLIN ENTERTAINMENT

The 2007 version of ‘3:10 to Yuma’ also garnered applause. James Mangold did a fantastic job with Halsted Welles’ original script from 1957. The cinematography, along with the sharp editing and finer treatment of certain key scenes from the story, make the second version slightly better, though both Russell Crowe and Glenn Ford’s Ben Wade are just as hypnotizing.

And let us not forget about ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ (2004), directed by Jonathan Demme and starring Denzel Washington and a very young and ridiculously talented Liev Schreiber. The original from 1962 had Frank Sinatra and Laurence Harvey playing Raymond Shaw and Ben Marco, respectively. Even now, both productions yield an equal amount of appreciation, as staples of drama and suspense.

The list might go on, but five should do the trick in getting the positive point across. Now, let us move on to the unavoidable negative.

The Bad

A more recent disaster would certainly be ‘Flatliners’ (2017), directed by Niels Arden Oplev. It stars Ellen Page, Nina Dobrev, and Diego Luna. It even gives us a Kiefer Sutherland cameo that doesn’t do anything to enhance the story. Unlike the previous examples, where each of the directors offered a fresh take and a somewhat different vision from the originals, ‘Flatliners’ falls horribly flat.

©COLUMBIA PICTURES

The first one from 1990 had depth and originality. Joel Schumacher made the most out of Peter Filardi’s screenplay, and Kiefer Sutherland, Kevin Bacon, Oliver Platt, and Julia Roberts—all fresh-faced emerging talents at the time, knocked their performances out of the park. ‘Flatliners’ (1990) was substantive and profound, exploring a realm beyond death which we’ve only theorized on. It was daring and provocative for its time. The idea behind a successful remake is to bring something new and different to the table. 

‘Footloose’ (2011), directed by Craig Brewer, dared to take on a legend. It is one of those movies that no one even asked for, since nobody could really replace Kevin Bacon and his feverish dance moves from the 1984 version. In Brewer’s defence, the storyline itself made more sense then than it does now. After all, taking a city teenager and having him shake up a small town where rock music and dancing are banned is a tad unbelievable for this day and age. It made much more sense in the 1980s, for some reason, back when Kenny Loggins’ chart-topping hits made so many hearts beat faster.

There was a certain style to Kevin Bacon’s acting and dancing, too, that made him and the movie absolutely unique. ‘Footloose’ deserved to be left alone, at best, and if anyone did take it on, a bold new take would’ve been advised. Since none of those things happened, we now have one more reboot to toss into the slush pile or have as an option for in-flight viewing.

©PARAMOUNT PICTURES/COURTESY EVERETT

Gus Van Sant is best known for impeccable works such as ‘Milk’ (2008), starring Sean Penn as iconic gay rights activist Harvey Milk; ‘My Own Private Idaho’ (1991), which brought Keanu Reeves and River Phoenix as two hustler friends whose journey of self-discovery begins to affect their relationship; and ‘Elephant’ (2003), a film that stunned audiences with its graceful rendition of life before a mass shooting and earned Van Sant a Palme D’Or at the Cannes Film Festival. 

He is also known for his 1998 remake of ‘Psycho’, and not in a good way. Vince Vaughn, Anne Heche, and Julianne Moore were enlisted to bring his version of Joseph Stefano’s screenplay to life, but the entire affair left viewers scrunching their noses. For a director with such artistic sensitivity, one would’ve expected more but, truth be told, trying to do better than Alfred Hitchcock was an endeavour doomed to fail from the start. And as talented as Vince Vaughn might be, he is no Anthony Perkins, just like Anne Heche is no Janet Leigh. Some things are just better left untouched.

Neil LaBute must’ve had high hopes for his version of ‘The Wicker Man’ (2006). Using Anthony Schaffer’s screenplay from the 1973 original starring Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee, Mr LaBute chose Nicholas Cage as his protagonist. Some of the harsher critics might say this was his undoing, but the overall production lagged considerably behind Robin Hardy’s directorial masterpiece.

©GREAT AMERICAN FILMS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP/VESTRON PICTURES

But of the many remakes that have flopped over the years, few have been as resoundingly bad as ‘Dirty Dancing’ (2017), directed by Wayne Blair. While no one dares dispute Abigail Breslin or Sarah Hyland’s thespian gifts, Blair’s persistence of redoing a film that was already flawless was frowned upon.

The classic and impossible-to-redo ‘Dirty Dancing’ of 1987 was written by Eleanor Bergstein, and it was an instant hit. It had a gorgeous Patrick Swayze flashing his provocative dance moves and brooding, steely blue eyes. It had an ingenue Jennifer Grey and a doting father in Jerry Orbach. It had some of the greatest songs that were ever written, and it had a formula that has been almost impossible to reproduce elsewhere without getting eyerolls from the audience.

The Ones No One Should Ever Touch

Not every great movie can be reimagined successfully. Slapping a coat of bright new paint on an old car does not change the car’s make or model, nor does it make the car drive better or faster. Sometimes, a vintage beauty should remain a vintage beauty. To emphasize this, it’s time to look at five movies that really, really, really should never be remade.

©COLUMBIA PICTURES

Rob Reiner’s ‘Stand by Me’ (1986) brings Wil Wheaton, River Phoenix, Corey Feldman, and Jerry O’Connell as four friends who go on a search for the body of a missing boy outside the small town of Castlerock, Oregon. Along the way, they come to learn more about themselves, eventually learning to stand up for what is right. It’s a wonderful and maybe a little bit troubling coming-of-age story based on Stephen King’s novella ‘The Body’, originally published in ‘Different Seasons’ back in 1982, and it is basically impossible to reimagine as anything else than what it already is.

Even with its high nostalgia appeal and preteen protagonists, ‘Stand by Me’ was never meant to be a children’s movie. However, it did tap into our inner kids, and its entire brilliance stands solely on the shoulders of its unapologetic realism. It wasn’t easy to pull off a story like this the first time around, and there’s serious doubt it could ever be… repurposed.

©PARAMOUNT PICTURES/LUCASFILM

‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ (1981), based on a story by George Lucas and directed by Steven Spielberg, is probably one of the best Indiana Jones movies ever made. It has Harrison Ford running around on behalf of the US government to retrieve the fabled Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis get to it. It has heart-pounding adventure and sassy one-liners, ancient artefacts and the lovely Karen Allen playing Indy’s love interest, Marion. 

Roger Ebert said it’s ‘an out-of-body experience, a movie of glorious imagination and breakneck speed that grabs you in the first shot, hurtles you through a series of incredible adventures, and deposits you back in reality two hours later—breathless, dizzy, wrung-out, and with a silly grin on your face.’ So far, no one has managed to give ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ a more accurate description than Mr Ebert. Most importantly, it is one of those movies that will never work again. Its adventurous blueprint is one-of-a-kind.

©WARNER BROS.

‘Casablanca’ (1941), directed by Michael Curtiz, is definitely one of the ‘untouchables’ of the cinematic universe. Ingrid Bergman and Humphrey Bogart, giants of Hollywood’s Golden Age, both shine on the silver screen with their ardent performances. It’s a marvellous feat signed by the same man who gave us ‘The Adventures of Robin Hood’ (1938) and ‘The Comancheros’ (1961), and it won three Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Writing/Screenplay.

A poignant and emotional war drama, ‘Casablanca’ cannot be rebooted in any way. The effect of Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman’s onscreen chemistry cannot be copied, regardless of how much talent or experience any proposed actors might have. It’s simply impossible to do more or better than what Michael Curtiz achieved. The closest anyone ever got to bringing ‘Casablanca’ back was with a prequel for television from 1983 featuring Hector Elizondo. The fact that it was a short-lived production should not surprise anyone at this point.

©ALLSTAR/MGM

Directed by Victor Fleming and graced by George Cukor’s influence, ‘The Wizard of Oz’ (1939) sees Judy Garland as Dorothy, who gets swept up in a tornado with her dog, Toto, and ends up in the dazzling, dangerous, and colourful world of Oz. We all know the story, and yet we can never get enough of it. Based on Frank L. Baum’s critically acclaimed novels, ‘The Wizard of Oz’ is an everlasting tale of wonder, magic, and courage, as seen through the eyes of a sweet girl with ruby slippers and three downright memorable, yet unexpected friends.

While there have been other versions imagined for television, along with some sequels and prequels for Broadway and the big screen, no one has yet plucked up the courage to take on the movie itself. The world has vaguely accepted Sam Raimi’s ‘Oz the Great and Powerful’ (2013) and Matthew Arnold and Josh Friedman’s ‘Emerald City’ (2016) TV series, though neither made much of a splash. At best, we’re left with Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth’s unforgettable songs from ‘Wicked’. One can only hope that’s all there will be, and that Judy Garland will be the only Dorothy we’ll ever know.

©ACT III COMMUNICATIONS/BUTTERCUP FILMS LTD./THE PRINCESS BRIDE LTD.

With rumours of Sony Pictures Entertainment being in talks for a ‘Princess Bride’ (1987) reboot, it is only appropriate to address what is clearly an issue for too many people. Written by William Goldman and directed by Rob Reiner—worth noting here that Mr Reiner has given us at least two cinematic gemstones that shouldn’t be remade and therefore must be forever cherished, ‘The Princess Bride’ stars Robin Wright, Cary Elwes, and Mandy Patinkin. It also offers truly charming performances by Christopher Guest, Peter Falk, and Carol Kane, among others. 

It’s the heart-warming tale of a farmer-turned-pirate who faces many obstacles in order to be reunited with his one true love. ‘The Princess Bride’ is also, perhaps, the closest we’ll ever get to a veritable movie fairy tale—charming, amusing, wholesome and, at times, adorably ridiculous. Given Sony Pictures Entertainment Chief Executive Tony Vinciquerra’s recent statements, the fans have had some strong reactions, though none have been more convincing than Cary Elwes’, who tweeted: ‘There’s a shortage of perfect movies in this world. It would be a pity to damage this one.’

While ‘The Princess Bride’ was not a box-office hit, it did become a beloved cult classic. And in an age where everyone is trying to remake something, it has become rather exhausting to see perfectly good works of art taken apart and wrapped up in something shiny and glittery that basically kills the very thing that made them unique, in the first place.

There have been excellent remakes, yes. Surely, there will be more. But there are movies that simply must not be touched, for they are perfect just the way they are. It would be a pity to try to do better when we know, deep down, that we cannot.