From thought to paper, from paper to screen

For anyone that's really talked to me about what I really think about mediums - be it film, photography, sculpture, painting, etc - I'll usually tell them about my initial formalist impressions of the piece but if they really get to me I'll tell them I'm really interested in the process. What is the 'process'?

Simply put, its the pathways to reaching the final product - film, photograph, sculpture, painting, etc. Its no secret - all final products of mental capacity are a result from the smidgen of a simple idea. Take for example a film (not that I know how it really works): its starts as a story, in some cases turns into a book others into a scrīpt; from the scrīpt a film. Its transformation or metamorphosis from a idea to a film isn't really that simple, its probably as complex as a caterpillar to a butterfly but if you take a step back its really what it looks like.

I've always been a fan of the process ever since I was a kid taking things apart. Sometimes its that simple - A to B, B to C. Other times its more complex say like how a banker does their job or how buildings gets made.

So why am I thinking about this? For a long time now I've been reading books that became movies, usually reading the book before the movie. A fine example of this (even though its really recent) is . Better book than the nearly three hour movie but why? Is it the choices made or the lack of choices made? What about a Tom Clancy classic, - definitely a better movie than the book. Or what about books that are completely different from the movie or vice versa? Say for example Stephen King's / For any of the mentioned above I think it has something to do with the adaptability - can one medium translate to another and be seamless at the same time? Yes and no.

Take for example the most direct book into movie I've read know, Nick Hornby's . Its a completely good and watchable movie, definitely a good book. But its completely the same, nearly scene to scene chapter to chapter and its even in sequence. by Michael Chabon, was made into a near mirror image of a film starring Michael Douglas and Tobey Maguire. I'm glad they removed a scene from the book in the film adaptation. But are books meant to be shown on the screen? Many will argue that its the greatest form of capitalization. I wouldn't blame them. There aren't mainly Da Vinci's in our time, renaissance men or women if you will. Writing is one part of the equation whilst film making is another. There are very few that are masters in both realm let alone masters in many field as the Da Vinci's in those times were.

Lets not too far ahead of my thoughts, I have plenty of them on these sort of transitions. Let's assume that I will write another one of these, notably in the form of .