Some of my favorite and least favorite movies are based on books, short stories, magazine articles, and poems. In the screenwriting world, these are referred as IP or intellectual property. Wordsrated.com, a non-commercial, international research data and analytics group, published an online article, entitled, “Impact of Book Publishing on Film Industry,” on February 23, 2023. The study of movies from 1968 to 2002 indicated that, in total, “books provided 35% of the source material of English-language movies. …novels and other fiction made up a total of 33%. Non-fiction books made up 2%.”
Securing film rights to any intellectual property involves a lengthy negotiating process regarding the legal aspects, foreseeable product placement or rights to other potential adapted works from the source material. For sure, movies based on books can be a lucrative business. Consider anything related to the Harry Potter franchise and we’re talking not only 500 million books sold but over $1 billion in profits for just one movie, not to mention a theme park! Harry Potter is an exceptional example, but one wonders how the new “Barbie” movie will impact sales of Mattel toys. Also, if “Barbie”proves to be a major hit by summer’s end, there’s a high probability that more iconic toys will be dusted off or leap from their store shelves for limelight moments in the television and film industry. But, it’s way beyond my limited knowledge for a discussion of copyright laws, contractual obligations, or other factors regarding securing IP film rights. My fascination remains with why millions are sunk into a movie adapted from IP when there’s no guarantee that the readers and audiences, in general, will fill the theatres or pay for streaming services, especially if advance movie reviews are tepid.
Let’s face it. Every movie release is a crapshoot to some degree. The obvious reason for a book-to-movie adaptation is the likeliness of a built-in audience. And it doesn’t have to be a recently published novel, biography, or short story. For instance, “Forrest Gump” is based on a rather obscure book published in 1986 and the movie adaption debuted July 6, 1994 with over 7% of its overall revenue secured in the opening weekend! But, since the novel was little known, it was a safe bet to make major departures from the original story. And that was a really smart move! For instance, in the novel, Forrest was a chess champion, an astronaut who explored space with an orangutan and, spoiler alert, didn’t end up with Jennie, his childhood sweetheart. But the stars aligned, especially with the star quality of Tom Hanks at the time, to make the film a national treasure and a bona fide hit. And then there’s the opposite end of the spectrum with Michael Chrichton’s 1975 novel “Eaters of the Dead” that was adapted into a film released in 1999 called “The 13th Warrier” that was a bona fide box office bomb. The film lost millions based on gross worldwide intake of $61 million and a production and marketing budget of over $160 million. That’s the kind of math no one could predict or they wouldn’t have developed it in the first place. Hence, the unpredictable audience factor. Sometimes I wonder if the studios know they have a clunker on their hands and move forward with a release hoping for the best.
If the recently released “Barbie” takes off, I’m wondering if there will be a battleground between Marvel and Mattel! Even so, most of Mattel toys fit into the reality tv category, like Hot Wheels and products that have become fodder for game shows. And, of course, Marvel has a cache of comic book heroes. But that won’t stop Mattel for competing in the film industry with development of films based on Chatty Cathy, and, yes, Hot Wheels. But one wonders: Who’s the intended audience for these bygone toys and merchandise, like Chatty Cathy?
Books rely very much on the reader’s imagination, so, in that sense, it’s visual on a personal level. The movie in the reader’s head may not always match the interpreted version on the screen. But the key factor is always story! If the characters are nuanced, the production quality a good thematic match, and the subtext simmering below the plot, audiences may forgive the movie’s departure from the beloved source material. A popular or classic novel can be reinvented as a popular or classic movie. Examples easily come to mind: “Gone with the Wind,” “The Godfather,” “The Green Mile,” “The Outsiders,” “The Wizard of Oz” and many more. And the obscure novel can be made into a great film, like “Forrest Gump.” And then there’s the popular but mediocre bestselling novel like “Bridges Over Madison County” that actually was improved upon in the movie starring Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep.
No doubt, every cinephile has a book-to-movie adaptation in their personal list of favorites. It seems inevitable with so many films based on IP ever since the first recorded one, “Cinderella,” made by French director Georges Méliès in 1899. And the sentiment that “the book is better than the movie” still rings true for many adaptations. But, every now and then, there’s a Forrest Gump that recreates a legendary movie character. Whether confined to the pages of a book or the images on a screen, character rules! Happy reading and watching!