Mr. Durden
Active member
I'm in the mist of adapting a short story into a short film.
I was hoping to get some suggestions? And/or tips? On this process.
I was hoping to get some suggestions? And/or tips? On this process.
Adapting a short story.
- Thread starter Mr. Durden
- Start date
500Cuts
Member
There are many approaches, but what works for me is to list out the "scenes" that happen in the story. That is to say the significant moments that identify the central plot. Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" is a good example. It starts with a lady in the kitchen. Then she's reminded the drawing is today. Then she stalls leaving the house while people walk by her window.
While not actual movie scenes, these are the key points in the story. Just make a list and get rid of anything that doesn't feed the story.
Then there's the dialog. Movies don't need as much dialog as books. Scrap any internal monologue type stuff, and figure out how to get those elements onscreen. In "The Lottery," the main woman thinks about the stuff she needs to do, while the knee-jerk reaction is to have her say out loud, "Oh, I have to do the laundry." It's better to skip that and keep her fussing around in the kitchen. Or have her rushing around trying to fold shirts until she's urged to leave by her husband.
Finally, there's the timing. The text of a book plays out at the spead of the reader, but in a script/movie, you have to control the screen time. We want to get to the meat quickly and get out before people get bored. The adage is: "In late, out early." "The Lottery" is already like this, which helps, but when making it into a script, we'd scrap all the buildup and keep it in our kitchen scene, then get to the town square asap. That's the "in late" part. When the movie starts, the story is already rolling.
In the town square, we'd draw things out a little bit. The tension is here, not back at the house. So the name is drawn, and it's our main character. Then the rocks start coming. And the movie is over. This is the "out early." We don't want some extra scene with people talking about poor mrs. johnson. We just end the movie as the rocks come raining in and Mrs. Johnson pleads that her laundry isn't done.
Does that help? Short films are about a single moment of change, and anything over 7 minutes is probably too long. There are some great 15 minute films, but not many.
Co.
While not actual movie scenes, these are the key points in the story. Just make a list and get rid of anything that doesn't feed the story.
Then there's the dialog. Movies don't need as much dialog as books. Scrap any internal monologue type stuff, and figure out how to get those elements onscreen. In "The Lottery," the main woman thinks about the stuff she needs to do, while the knee-jerk reaction is to have her say out loud, "Oh, I have to do the laundry." It's better to skip that and keep her fussing around in the kitchen. Or have her rushing around trying to fold shirts until she's urged to leave by her husband.
Finally, there's the timing. The text of a book plays out at the spead of the reader, but in a script/movie, you have to control the screen time. We want to get to the meat quickly and get out before people get bored. The adage is: "In late, out early." "The Lottery" is already like this, which helps, but when making it into a script, we'd scrap all the buildup and keep it in our kitchen scene, then get to the town square asap. That's the "in late" part. When the movie starts, the story is already rolling.
In the town square, we'd draw things out a little bit. The tension is here, not back at the house. So the name is drawn, and it's our main character. Then the rocks start coming. And the movie is over. This is the "out early." We don't want some extra scene with people talking about poor mrs. johnson. We just end the movie as the rocks come raining in and Mrs. Johnson pleads that her laundry isn't done.
Does that help? Short films are about a single moment of change, and anything over 7 minutes is probably too long. There are some great 15 minute films, but not many.
Co.
Mr. Durden
Active member
Thanks for the information.
It helped quite a bit.
The short story is on the longer side.
So I'd assume it'll be close to 15 minutes, I think.
I always seem to go back to having a narrator explain some portions in the story that are small tid bits of nformation that I think would help with the development of the characters. But, once I heard that narration shows the limitations of the filmmaker. I was hoping you can give me your opinion on that?
It helped quite a bit.
The short story is on the longer side.
So I'd assume it'll be close to 15 minutes, I think.
I always seem to go back to having a narrator explain some portions in the story that are small tid bits of nformation that I think would help with the development of the characters. But, once I heard that narration shows the limitations of the filmmaker. I was hoping you can give me your opinion on that?
Nathan.Buxton
Well-known member
What kind of tid bits are they? If you don't want to use a narrator than the best way is to show the tid bits instead. Visualize them. You could have to resort to a character actually revealing them, but disguise that by action... make the information secondary to the scene, and make it a scene where there is a turn in the plot... it'll be harder to recognize the planted info.
500Cuts
Member
Narration usually weakens a film because it takes the viewer out of the film's environment and makes them passive viewers. Sometimes those pieces of information you think you really need can actually be cut. Try it without and see if the context of the character's actions imply similar information.