Reading Film (Fall 2011)

a qwriting blog for ENG 110

Reading Film (Fall 2011) header image

Bazin Response

September 6th, 2011 by Erickson Bryan · 4 Comments · ¶4 Bazin

To be honest Bazin’s essay “Adaptation, or the Cinema as Digest” was a challenging piece to read and to respond is challenging for me. Bazin’s essay appears to me that he is trying to make us choose which is better cinema or the original literature itself. Bazin is giving his point of view of adaptation and is supporting why he agrees and disagrees with digests and adaptations.

Truthfully I would have to agree with Bazin because he defends both sides literature and cinema. Two different feelings we receive when we watch a film and read the actual literature. You could never really get the same feeling out of a cinema as you can from the literature. Literatures creates an image in your head which can make you see the literature in a different way. Translating a literature in to a film is kind of hard to be honest because the film has to be cut. Details are always left out in films which makes the cinema usually sucks.

Cinema should give off the same image as the book. Its very hard to perform a detailed movie without making it boring. For an example the film “M” has to be one of the worst films ever because they described every step on how to figure out how to catch the killer. Bazin would disagree with a lot of films being produced because film producers don’t usually read the literature as we see by the films. These film producers often switch things up and cut out details to try and make their films more interesting The film producers don’t really take the time out to understand who the characters.

Bazin’s argument is very interesting but we have to understand the enjoyments are in literature but our time is different from Bazin. People tend to just look at a cinema then to open up a book. The film makers include their own versions to the literature to try and make more money. Bazin wouldn’t quite understand that because at the time it probably wasn’t all about money instead of the art.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


4 Comments so far ↓

  • Kevin L. Ferguson

    Wait, what’s wrong with boring movies? Isn’t being bored an emotion just like being excited? I ask because there is a theory of literature that says that novels are basically written so that they keep interrupting themselves–instead of just saying “they lived happily ever” or “the butler did it,” we have to read through 300 pages because the point of novels is the journey, not just the final answer. I think that’s what “M” is about, but maybe in terms of your comments, what you would advise is that filmmakers pick shorter novels (or even short stories) to adapt?

  • Erickson Bryan

    Yes thats exactly what i mean why try to make a movie out of a book that requires so much detail?

  • nlobello824

    I also agree I feel a novel with extensive detail should not be made into a film if these vital details cannot all be expressed throughout.

  • martinvukaj

    On the point about Bazin defending both cinema and literature, i also agree. Truthfully, Bazin presents enough evidence for both sides that he really lets the reader choose what side to be on when it comes to which would be the better work. Bazin thoughtfully wrote out the essay so that his opinion isnt overshadowing the real argument but i feel as if his true opinion is revealed. For more explanation, go to my response.

You must log in to post a comment.