Are movies based on books always a success?

The transference of novels to movies is perhaps one of the oldest sources of screenplays, with the very first printed book ever, The Bible, being the source of film many times. The huge volume of novels that have been created is reason enough for books and similar texts to be used as the foundation of many movies, but are films and television able to accurately represent the written word?

Novels, texts and books providing the script for movies range from works of fiction to autobiographies to plays to non-fiction historical accounts to comic books with the creative licence of the director and screenwriter being able to determined how close to the books any movies will remain.

Perhaps one of the most popular phrases used when considering movies based on novels is "The book is far better than the movie" with a level of doubt associated to the process of a movies interpretation of a novel. This is evident in a great many films with novel sources, including the notorious "A Clockwork Orange" written by Anthony Burgess and recreated to the screen by Stanley Kubrick. Generating countless discussions and debates, the movie and Kubrick's interpretation was supported by Burgess, which was based on the American transalation of the novel. However there was a crucial omission from Burgess' novel to film, which removed Burgess's British version of the narrative which created a far bleaker conclusion without Burgess' original reform plot twist, in standard Kubrick style.

While just one example, of which there are hundreds, this subject of books and movies and the issue of representation is often a basis of discussion with a wide opinion being that each medium can boast its own pros and cons.

To begin with, time is an obvious issue with movies only demanding a few hours while books can be a real investment|the question of time and the investment of the reader or audience is a factor. Movies are a relatively small commitment, being around two hours while books can take days or weeks to read. Notably, movies have the benefit for fast entertainment where the viewer only wants to spend a few hours on a particular story. However, the issue of adapting boks and novels to film there will normally be alterations to the original storywhich makes it suitable for the film format. While the trilogy of "The Lord of the Rings" had a duration time of more than 10 hours, significant storylines and characters were cut from famous novels by J.R.R. Tolkien that were regarded as unnecessary for the movies progression.If this is the case, does this mean that a movie based on a novel is actually the directors or screenwriters interpretation of a text, not the actual text put to screen itself?

Additionally,the reading of books forces the reader to visualise the characters and world to their own choice and explains the innermost thoughts of characters, movies put these images to screen, whether it is how the reader saw them or not. While this can present a major benefit for some, there is certainly cases where audiences dispute with the casting of certain characters, which will impact on the overall success of the adaptation.

Naturally, the question of cutting text and storylines from books is not always the case as with many children's books, graphic novels and comic books actually being filled out for the screen adaptations. In reality, one of the most highly anticipated movies for 2009 is based on a 48-page children's book called "Where the Wild Things Are" that has sold over 19 million copies worldwide according to HarperCollins.

The element to consider of the qualities of movies and their literary sources is a question that won't date with new films being adapted and produced every year. Actually, the amount of movies in production with a literary source is increasing as computer graphics and special effects are being expanded, which means books that use to contain imagery beyond reality are now able to be created.

So the consideration of whether books to movies adaptations are successful or not is one that may not have an answer. Both mediums are broadly audience based, meaning that it is more an issue of whether the individual finds a particular film or novel enjoyable, instead of grading the whole process a success or not.