Surpassing the novel?

“The book was superior.” In any discussion regarding a film interpretation, someone is guaranteed to utter this. However, certain novels were simply destined for adaptation, and some adaptations convey new and fascinating insights about the original work. As Oscar season approaches — featuring numerous Best Picture contenders drawn from literature, such as “Conclave,” “Nickel Boys,” and “A Complete Unknown” — we solicited insights from Harvard faculty and staff regarding their top selections.

---

Allan suggested two renowned works that are beloved both in print and on screen.

“I adore Stephen King’s 1987 chilling novel ‘Misery,’ which features a rather straightforward storyline: Best-selling romance author Paul Sheldon is imprisoned by his ‘No. 1 admirer’ Annie Wilkes, who insists he write a book exclusively for her. And by the way, Annie is also a murderer! But what I truly appreciate about the book is that it serves as a profound exploration of the nature of being a writer. I’ve read it multiple times and taught it here at Harvard, and while it’s a thrilling read — though certainly not for the faint-hearted — there’s far more beneath the surface. Stephen King penned this after experiencing a string of bestsellers in the 1980s (and that success continues), making the conflict between Paul and Annie a deep investigation of fame, achievement, and its effects on literature. The 1990 adaptation featuring James Caan and Kathy Bates, who won an Oscar for Best Actress, remains a faithful representation, yet it misses some of the deeper understanding about writing and reading in its transition from page to film.”

“My other selection is a novel that partly revolves around the film industry. As a fan of film noir, I found immense pleasure in James Ellroy’s 1990 book ‘L.A. Confidential,’ which serves as a gritty tribute to the moral decay of 1950s Los Angeles concealed beneath Hollywood’s allure. To be candid, in the realm of crime fiction, the novel contains numerous unpleasant and shocking elements within its intricate — and at times, overwhelming — storyline. There are undoubtedly no true heroes, as it centers on the corruption embedded in the police force, yet it stands as a marvel of character development. The 1997 movie, which received a Best Picture nomination (I believe it should have triumphed over ‘Titanic’), is among the finest adaptations of a book I’ve ever encountered. While it substantially revises the storyline to render it more accessible for cinema, it perfectly captures the essence and characters of Ellroy’s Los Angeles. For a narrative so deeply about the facades of Hollywood, the adaptation creates its own interpretation while retaining the core elements.”

---

Miller has been diligently exploring the mystery/thriller “Jack Reacher” series, focusing on an ex-military police officer who roams across the U.S. “with merely the garments on his back and a toothbrush in his pocket.”

“The mysteries in the series are frequently of only nominal interest,” Miller remarked. “What I have valued instead are the gradual evolutions in Child’s style and thematic focus from one book to the next. In one installment, Reacher’s fascination with coffee sparks a paragraph-long tribute to…a patron’s cup of coffee. Another publication contemplates the mindset of a motorist who would halt for a hitchhiker as formidable as Reacher. A third examines the evolutionary biological benefits that render our protagonist such a brutal fighter. It’s popular literature, brimming with cliché phrases and scenarios — each time Reacher enters a vehicle, he ‘adjusts the seat back’ to accommodate his substantial physique — yet typically carried out with finesse and enthusiasm.

“It’s no surprise that the series has motivated two motion pictures featuring Tom Cruise (controversially, given Cruise’s smaller physical stature) and now a third season of streaming entertainment on Amazon Prime. Whether on the big or small screen, the fundamentally melodramatic form of Child’s narratives — a Manichean perspective, archetypal characters and situations — becomes more pronounced than in the comparatively meandering novels and short stories. Yet regardless of whether it’s depicted on screen or in print, the series and the character embody many of the delights of mainstream entertainment: vividly portrayed heroes and villains; dynamic, suspenseful storytelling; and a writer persistently exploring the boundaries of his successful formula.”

---

Puchner asserts that there’s nothing particularly remarkable about the 1952 semi-autobiographical novel penned by Grey during his imprisonment, which chronicles a Jewish gang from New York’s Lower East Side during the Prohibition era. It’s the adaptation that truly shines.

“What is remarkable is how two Italians, director Sergio Leone and composer Ennio Morricone, reimagined this work into a masterpiece, the 1984 film ‘Once Upon a Time in America.’ They recognized that film is essentially an operatic medium, propelled by the interaction of visual imagery and music on a grand scale, with dialogue and performance taking a backseat. Years prior, they had pioneered this operatic style in film with the Western genre, producing their early classic, ‘Once Upon a Time in the West’ (1968), where visuals and music share equal importance. The dialogue in that film is around 15 pages long, a mere fraction of a typical screenplay.”

---

Levine remarked that he typically feels movie adaptations miss certain elements in translation. “The Hollywood belief that if it succeeds as a book, it will undoubtedly succeed as a film appears profoundly misguided. The adaptations I’ve truly appreciated are the ones that either rejuvenate mediocre novels, or those that diverge so significantly that they cast the novel in a new perspective. A prime example of the latter is Mary Harron’s interpretation of Bret Easton Ellis’ ‘American Psycho,’ which takes Ellis’ unrelentingly bleak narrative and intertwines its elements of humor into something exceptionally vibrant and rich. (Predictably, Ellis despised it).”

---

Gravely proposed a short story in lieu of a book, deeming Oates’ 1966 work “exquisite.”

“Utilizing just a few pages to illustrate the angst-filled suburban existence of a teenage Connie, the majority of the short story is devoted to a captivating confrontation between the girl and an unfamiliar individual whose disturbing menace gradually escalates into a chilling nightmare,” she expressed.

Filmmaker Joyce Chopra adapted the story into the 1985 film “Smooth Talk.”

“Chopra expands the tension, elaborating on Connie — portrayed by Laura Dern, who even Oates acknowledged was ‘strikingly perfect’ — and her emotional journey. Dern portrays Connie’s emergence from suburban girlhood like a tall, beautiful fledgling — eager, contradictory, self-absorbed, and fearful. The film also enriches the roles of each family member and their unique interactions. Even the perpetually half-renovated house in the middle of nowhere — briefly alluded to — transforms into a significant, vital presence. More dramatically, Chopra modifies and adds complexity to Oates’ seemingly fatal conclusion to an offscreen, unnamed horror that Connie endures.

“While preserving the idiosyncrasies, the dread, and the stark symbolism present in Oates’ narrative, Chopra molds it into a work of immersive realism, enabling audiences to connect with Connie and subconsciously cheer for her before the alarming events unfold. In the film’s format, the original conclusion would have overshadowed the film and become its focal point; however, by allowing Connie’s tale to proceed — in a poignant final scene of lost youth — all the intertwined emotions, reactions, and relationships linger and drift towards countless potential futures for viewers to contemplate. There is no precise replication when transitioning literature to film, but there is an art to taking perfect prose and nurturing it within a fitting cinematic framework, as Chopra delicately accomplished with Oates’ narrative.”