Me Before You: Book vs Film

Me Before You was such a successful novel that when it was announced that an adaptation was in the works, fans of the book were caught between hesitation and excitement. Even when the book's author, Jojo Moyes, was announced as the screenwriter, there were doubts. Because, when a book is that loved, you don't want it messed with. 

Fortunately, Moyes has proven with this screenplay that she is not just a brilliant novelist but also a great screenwriter, with a spot-on understanding of what works on screen and how to compact her story successfully into a feature film.

If it wasn't integral to the story then it wasn't included in the film. Did Will need to have a sister in order for us to appreciate the issues faced by his family? No. We had his parents for that. Do we need the tension at Lou's house, the sibling rivalry and animosity, or the claustrophobic nature of her home in order to appreciate the family? No. They can be packed into the small house and still be loving and supportive.

Though there are some minor character traits and side plots which are forgotten, the major one that may surprise fans of the book is the total absence of a particular maze and all the events which took place. Now it might seem like a whopping great omission but having revisited the story I can see why it was left out. There is no question that this was of huge importance in the book. It explains Lou and it allows Will to be the one who makes her face up this key moment in her life and start to move forward from it. Yet in the film there simply isn't time. Other elements would needed to have been cut in order to properly go into what happened in that maze or else it would have been thrown in almost as an afterthought. Either option just didn't seem to work. Moyes herself even tweeted a fan, explaining that they tried to fit it in but just couldn't figure out a way to do it properly. The people are still going in the same direction. We're just spared some of the specifics.

The casting is so impressive. Very unlike her Khaleesi role, Emilia Clarke IS Lou. She's cute and adorable and chatty and a little bit bonkers – in the best kind of way. Sam Claflin similarly takes on Will, an extremely complex character, with apparent ease. The supporting cast, from Janet McTeer to Charles Dance, are all equally awesome to watch. And this brilliant ensemble are guided through the story by director Thea Sharrock, who displays the same genius command of storytelling as Moyes. The whole team have really come together here to tell this much beloved story.

It's a delight to see that, after some authors who probably should have been consulted on their adaptations and weren't (and some who shouldn't have but were!), authors are finally being acknowledged for their talents, not ignored. We are in a new era now when authors of great books are afforded not just the courtesy of being consulted on the adaptations of their own stories but the opportunity to write the script themselves. Gillian Flynn did it with Gone Girl, Emma Donoghue did it with Room, and now Jojo Moyes has done a phenomenal job with Me Before You.

So get your bumble bee tights on and go and see this absolute treasure. Then go home and re-read the book!

Book – 5
Film – 4

Book vs Film Club: time to get gobblefunking about The BFG

Many of us were raised on the delights of a Roald Dahl novel (or five). Fans of The BFG, in particular, no doubt still remember the snozzcumbers, the tea with the Queen, that giant hand reaching in and grabbing Sophie, the many dreams in jars...

But The BFG is no longer consigned to our childhood memories. Now, my fellow human beans, there is a new adaptation for us to enjoy! And from Steven Spielberg, no less.

The Book vs Film Club was created for just such splitzwiggled events! The idea (in case you’re new to this!) is to read the book then see the film and – you guessed it – discuss both book and film and see which came out on top.

The BFG is due in cinemas in July so if you want to join in with all the gobblefunking then get over to Twitter (@bookvsfilmclub or #BookVsFilmClub) or Facebook and make yourself known.

And get reading!

The Martian: Book vs Film

Based on the novel by Andy Weir, The Martian is a film about one man’s fight for survival after he is mistakenly presumed dead by his fellow astronauts and left behind on Mars. He has a large amount of food and other supplies but not nearly enough to last him the years it will take before another space ship is scheduled to arrive back on the planet. Knowing this, Mark Watney must get to work and ‘science the shit’ out of a planet where nothing grows and his only ‘company’ is the abundance of disco music left by his commander, Melissa Lewis.

Andy Weir's phenomenal book is a great mixture of peril and laughter, as Watney is a man who uses humour to cope with stress. He is self-deprecating and witty and stops the book from ever being too miserable. Yet there is also A LOT of science in the book that many reader's have found slows the reading process down dramatically.

The film adaptation of The Martian is riddled with drama and peril, just like the novel. Will he manage to grow enough food? Will he manage to make water? Will another storm arrive to finish him off after he somehow survived the last one? Will he ever make contact with the people back home at NASA who believe him to be dead? These dramas make for a tense viewing experience that could have proven too much for some viewers – were it not for the fantastic sense of humour our hero Watney brings in the face of adversity. None of that humour is lost.

Watney leads the entire story and in that is its greatest treasure. He is bold, taking insane risks because there is no other way. When something fails, he gets back up and tries again. He does what he has to in order to survive, and that includes finding things to laugh at. Matt Damon does a phenomenal job of capturing the many sides to this brilliantly complex character, meaning that audiences will quickly come to love him and support him – and hope against hope that he finds a way home. Screenwriter Drew Goddard has understood the importance of Watney, allowing time in the screenplay for the viewer to really understand who he is and what drives him forward. This could so easily have been lost in the adaptation process because, of course, the book has plenty of time to explore it but the film does not.

The ensemble cast assembled for the film – including Jessica Chastain, Jeff Bridges and Chiwetel Ejiofor – are also a thing of wonder. There are all sorts of actors involved, of different age, gender, nationality and race. But the brilliance is that this is not done to be a gimic of any kind. There is no political correctness here, just a representation of the wider world in which we live – something many would argue is seriously lacking in cinema today. There are numerous relationships explored throughout the film – that of family, friends, work colleagues, etc. – but these are secondary to the goal at hand: get Mark Watney home.

Throw all of this against a Ridley Scott backdrop and you have something spectacular. There is an established human heart to this story but the Mars landscapes, the shots of his fellow astronauts travelling home without him, and the impact their stories have on the people back on Earth, throw this story out to a wider, more cinematic, film experience. Watney’s world becomes that much bigger as the film progresses, transforming this solitary story of survival into a wider tale of human connection and helping someone in need when all seems lost.

The Martian is a flawless adaptation that captures all the humour and drama of the novel. It trims down the science part of the novel and makes everything just a little bit 'nicer' but apart from that it works superbly well. The cast are fantastically honest in their performances, and Ridley Scott and Drew Goddard make for an exciting filmmaking team who clearly understand how to combine great character development with stunning scope. The film is best savoured on a large screen and, with the added 3D, it becomes truly immersive. This is a cinematic delight you’ll want to experience over and over.

Book: 5/5
Film: 5/5

The Book Thief book vs film

With a book as beloved as Markus Zusak's The Book Thief, an adaptation was always going to be a challenge. The story, narrated by death himself, follows a young girl as she arrives in a small town in Germany to live with her new foster parents – as WW2 looms.

The casting, first of all, is sublime, with Geoffrey Rush in particular on hand to warm and break your heart in equal measure. Hans is an adorable, loving father to Liesel but he is also incredibly brave and compassionate - traits which often lead him into trouble. Rush personifies this duality flawlessly, showing both the softer and more courageous elements to the character. Emily Watson does a brilliant job of showing the really harsh side to mother Rosa along with the caring, big-hearted side not everyone gets to see. She shouts and scowls a lot but there is love there too.

Young Sophie Nélisse shines as Liesel, showing the maturity the role requires, much like Liesel herself. You feel her pain and her joy and her struggle to stay close to people when she has been abandoned by those she holds dearest in the world. Nélisse captures this maturity alongside the innocence of youth and the desperation for human connection – all traits which make Liesel such a compelling character.
 

Though the story is undoubtedly Liesel’s, there is time to look further afield, at Kristallnacht, the climate of fear and supremacy, and the propaganda. Knowing the extent of the atrocities of the Holocaust only makes these scenes all the more tragic and real and there is something so horrifying about seeing it through the eyes not just of Liesel but of her school friends. While some struggle to come to terms with the society in which they live, hiding their true feelings for fear of inviting danger, others relish it and become genuinely terrifying. Perhaps to cope with the 12A certificate, much of the horror itself is left out, with the concentration camps ignored and not much seen of the Jews being marched through the town. The film largely hides away from the atrocities of war, only facing it when it lands on its doorstep – much like the characters themselves.

The overwhelming theme of words and their power is there in the film much like it is in the book, from Liesel’s struggle to learn to read to Max’s thoughts on books and writing. Words are everywhere, from the books Liesel reads with her papa, to the speeches made at rallies. They are powerful and important and hard to ignore. Words are life, Liesel, after all.

The biggest difference between book and film seems to be the general order of things. What is explained early on in the book is left to shock you later in the film. Though much of the story is cut to fit into the film's running time, some elements of it are developed further in the film, leaving certain revelations more obvious for viewers - the relationships between Liesel and Rudy, and Liesel and Ilsa, especially. The cuts, overall, make sense, but the additions add little. There is a sense that things are being spelled out for viewers rather than having things left to find out on their own. One scene in particular simply was not necessary. There was the feeling that it was trying to force the audience to cry – which is ridiculous for a film which already has such emotional subject matter.

The real challenge here was to convert the tone of the novel onto the big screen, to make it joyous, heartbreaking and beautiful all at the same time. Overall, The Book Thief film manages to capture the heartache and humour of the Zusak novel but loses much of the magic and poetic beauty of the original. The narration, the part of the book which gave The Book Thief its magic, is only really there for the opening and closing sequences of the film. Without it, the film lacks that magic that the book manages. It’s possible that the film makers realised they would not be able to match the original in this aspect and so opted to make the focus more on Liesel's story. To be honest, I'm not sure any voice could have made the narrator work as well as it did in the book. Not even Morgan Freeman!

When viewed as an adaptation, there are holes. The overall lack of narration and absence of the beautiful images from the book are sorely missed. However, as a standalone film, it is truly beautiful to watch with a breathtaking cast and stunning shots throughout. Heaven Street really does come to life on the big screen.

I only wonder how much of the emotion I felt was thanks to the film and not thanks to the memories of the book the film triggered.

Film – 3.5/5
Book – 5/5

Did the adaptation work for you? Share your thoughts on either the book or film on Twitter using #bookvsfilmclub and join the debate.

12 Years a Slave book vs film

Solomon Northup was a free man living with his wife and two children when he was tricked into touring with a musical group, drugged and sold into slavery. Twelve years later, he was freed. But this is only a tiny part of his incredible story, as told by the man himself in his powerful and eloquent memoir 12 Years a Slave, now a major feature film.

The book is incredibly complex, as Northup details all the people he meets along the way and even the daily work the slaves were forced to endure. He talks about the violence and the horror of his life as a slave but does not fail to mention the good he sees, be it in the compassionate Master Ford or his fellow slaves who give him hope to carry on living.

Master Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch) comes across very differently in both mediums. In the novel, Solomon goes to great lengths to explain to the reader how good and how smart Ford was. He was a decent man born into a world where slavery was the norm. Effectively, he didn’t know any better. Solomon clearly has great respect for him and explains that while some thought the way he treated his slaves showed weakness, Solomon insists that it served to make all of his slaves so desperate to please him. They didn’t fear him so much as revere him. In the film, he is shown to be a kind owner, impressed by Solomon’s initiative and hard work. However, the additional scene where Solomon tries to tell him the truth about his identity makes Ford quickly unlikable and weak. He has a debt to be paid and does not want to hear what Solomon has to say. In reality (or in the memoir at least) Solomon is never brave enough to tell him the truth.

Other than the story of Solomon (Chiwetel Ejiofor) himself, it is the horrific story of Patsey (played in the film by newcomer Lupita Nyong'o) which draws the most heartbreak. As the object of Master Epps's (Michael Fassbender) attention, she is assaulted by him frequently but because his wife sees the desire he feels for her, she gets abused by her too. Though he attempts to help on occasion, the most tragic part of the whole story is that nobody can do anything to really stop the abuse. This is, after all, a true account of slavery. There is no happy ending here. That the true horror of what Patsey endures is shown in unsettling detail is a true testament to Steve McQueen’s bravery as a filmmaker.

A lot of the story is cut but this is essential as there are so many players in Solomon’s story there would be no way of including them all. The key players are rightly pushed to centre stage while the others become extraneous. The book feels like twelve years whereas the film passes by without the feel of such a lot of time passing. There is only one addition which baffled me and that is the strange sexual opening which seems entirely out of place in this story.

Both interpretations are heartbreaking, shocking and emotional. The greatest travesty and upset in both though is not so much what happens to Northup during those twelve years but what comes after. He is, after all, still a man of colour in a world where they are not deemed equal to white people.

Film – 5/5

Book – 5/5

Bridget Jones's Diary book vs film

Alcohol units - 0 (it's Monday!), cigarettes - 0, calories - no idea, years it took me to read Helen Fielding's hilarious Bridget Jones's Diary - far too many!

Every now and then I do things backwards and see the film before reading the book. In the case of delving into Bridget Jones's Diary, I watched the film, the sequel and the entire 90s series of Pride and Prejudice over and over long before finally purchasing the book and seeing what all the fuss was about.

From the opening page, Bridget Jones is a brilliantly 'real' character unlike any I had ever read and the result is a book which is easy, fun and adorable to read. Unlike recent first person stories which have infuriating inner monologues, Bridget is so hilarious and so honest that even when she is moping you want to hug not hit her as she dwells on issues with family, work and of course - her love life.
 
What a marvellous creation!

For me, the book is an incredibly witty insight into the pressures of life in your thirties and being single - and I cannot figure out why it took me so many years to read the thing! Except perhaps that I needed to be in my thirties to fully appreciate it. 

The only let down in the book was that her happy ending involved a guy which - after a book so consumed with trying to be happy all on your own - seemed a little ridiculous. Though I hear the sequel deals with that 'happy ending' rather well...

The film, on the other hand, is a great, silly and enjoyable film which places much more emphasis on the comedic battle between Daniel and Mark - who are both vying for her attention - than the book does. It doesn't forget its star, however, and does a brilliant job of portraying an erratic, on-edge and entirely loveable Bridget Jones. 

Played by Renée Zellweger, who famously had to gain weight for the part, the film follows her ups and downs with great fun and sincerity. The mad and totally loyal friends are always on hand, as are the interfering mother and doting father. The mad boss, the embarrasment, the constant attention paid to dieting and alcohol consumption is also relentless.

Though Mark does not appear quite so often in the novel, I don't think anyone could fault the inclusion of Colin Firth and Hugh Grant and that infamous fight sequence. The only part I take issue with is why they altered Bridget's mother storyline which was far more interesting in the novel - unless they had always planned on taking a certain Mark element and plonking it in the middle of the film sequel.

Book - 4/5

Film - 3/5

Catching Fire: Book vs Film

*contains some spoilers*

My love of The Hunger Games is not exactly a secret but my enthusiasm for the books means that the films have a far higher bar to reach than others might. Fortunately, the filmmakers behind the first and second film in the series have done such a superb job at adapting Suzanne Collins's incredible novels that I doubt many fans will be disappointed.

Catching Fire sees Katniss and Peeta begin their victory tour and realise that the charade does not end when the tour does. As they struggle to convince President Snow they are actually in love, the lives of all those they hold dear are under threat.

All the major things you could hope to see are there in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Two new additions in the book who immediately became fan favourites - Johanna and Finnick - are captured superbly on screen by Jena Malone and Sam Claflin. Malone is hilarious and twisted and pulls off her spectacular lift scene with apparent ease. Claflin similarly appears to take portraying Finnick in his stride, providing both the charm, heart and cheekiness that Finnick requires - and that sugar cube scene.

There are of course going to be omissions but I find it is more a question of the feel of the piece - and of course the inclusion of pivotal scenes that define the characters. One big omission is that Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) doesn't get the backstory I so loved reading about in the novel. However, he remains a pivotal character in the story and the hilarious way Katniss wakes him at the start is still there for the fans to enjoy.

Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) undergoes one of the more notable transformations for the adaptation - for one thing, he can swim! It was a conscious decision by filmmakers to make Peeta a little less pathetic and 'nice' and it seems to have worked. The bond he shares with Katniss is unaltered and, though they don't really make too much of it, we do see them sleep by each other's side in order to keep the nightmares at bay.

Liam Hemsworth fans might be delighted to hear that he does get his shirt off - though it's not really the sexy scene many fans might have hoped for. His wounded portrayal of Gale, however, will no doubt still send many hearts aflutter.

Overall, the film remains beautifully true to the source text but is strong enough to stand on its own two feet and will appeal to both fans of the book and those new to the stories.

Book and film - 5 FOBLES

Austenland: Book vs Film Club

Shannon Hale’s 'Austenland' is about one woman’s obsession with Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice and – to be precise – Colin Firth’s portrayal of Mr Darcy.

This short and easy-to-read novel is an absolute delight to read (and easy to carry on the commute!). The characters are hilarious, especially Jane herself, and the comedy in throwing a modern day American woman into an Austenesque retreat in the English countryside is non-stop. Jane is endearing, despite her ridiculously outdated ideas of love and romance, and it’s easy to warm to her.

It really is the perfect, enjoyable read for any Austen fan – especially anyone who fell in love with Firth's Mr Darcy. Your face will ache from smiling.

The film adaptation takes a much more slapstick approach to the story and takes the whole setting to more theatrical depths, with the emphasis more on gags than witty banter. 

It does provide plenty of laughs but the Austenland story is very specific in its appeal. If you love Austen and are in the mood for something silly it might just work for you. It is, though, incredibly indulgent and the humour (especially in the film) is very tongue in cheek – so much so that many may find it more patronising and insulting than clever and witty. It is a story designed to be taken as it was intended: silly escapist fun. 

Ultimately, as the subject of the book vs film club, there were mixed – and extreme – reactions to Austenland in both formats but the difference in opinion certainly made for a more fun discussion than Gatsby, which everyone seemed in agreement over.

Film - 3/5
Book - 4/5

Sumptuous new stills from Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby

As if I wasn't excited enough about the impending The Great Gatsby adaptation release (which I'll be seeing with some fellow book vs film devotees who are all currently reading the book!)... these images have made me even more excited (click to enlarge the images)!

The Great Gatsby stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Tobey Maguire, Carey Mulligan, Joel Edgerton and Isla Fisher and hits cinemas in 3D and 2D on May 16th.

First Book vs Film Club: The Great Gatsby

I made a new Twitter friend recently - @timothyeraw. This may not seem particularly newsworthy to many of you, were it not for the fact that this Twitter connection sparked an idea. What about a club? A club for those who want to read a great book, see the film adaptation and (most importantly!) discuss it!

But who has the time? So I looked ahead a few weeks and discovered, right there in the middle of May, the new Baz Luhrmann adaptation of The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald – and with that, the first #bookvsfilmclub was born!

So, with over a month still to go before the film hits cinemas, there is plenty of time to get your copy of the classic American novel. (Try the gorgeous new edition, designed by Tiffany & Co: The Great Gatsby (Vintage Classics)).

When May 16th comes around, join us – either in a London cinema in person or via Twitter using the #bookvsfilmclub hashtag – to discuss what you thought of both book and film.

For more info, find me at @filmvsbook or check out those already taking part at https://twitter.com/filmvsbook/film-vs-book-club/members!

    

Cloud Atlas: Book vs Film

Cloud Atlas, David Mitchell's sweeping epic tale of six paths connecting over time and space does not leap off the pages as the easiest book to adapt for the big screen. However, Tom Tykwer and Andy and Lana Wachowski didn't let a little thing like complexity stop them adapting it onto the big screen.

The book was one of the most challenging novels I have ever read but man, was I proud when I reached the end of it. The book spans our past, present and future with six different storylines that are connected in some way as each person's soul continues to move through time. One man writes a diary that is read by another, one composes music that is listened to by another....

What made the book such an impressive piece of literature, though, is not just the complexity of weaving six storylines together as one. What Mitchell has managed to achieve with this book is nothing short of miraculous. He uses different styles for each - letters, diary entries, transcribed interviews - and alters the language to suit the era. His intricate prose is simply stunning to behold. It is all about the language he uses but thanks to his insane skill as a writer, the story becomes so much more than the words on the pages.

To adapt this 2004 Man Booker prize-winning book onto the big screen then, presents no end of problems. How do you cater for the sheer number of characters required? How do you compress all the intricacies of such a complex plot into just one film? How do you convey the subtleties of the customs and linguistics of the book in something as overt as a film?

Well first of all, the stellar cast enlisted for the film each played a different role in each of the six storylines, showing the connection between them all the more overtly. The layout has been altered too. While the book stuck with one story, moved onto the next and then worked its way back, the film jumps between them all continuously. This, once again, serves to reinforce the inate connection between everyone.

What the film manages to capture is sublime. With an incredible cast, perfect direction, six different worlds that are entirely immersive and plenty of action, drama, romance and intrigue, the film manages to remain compelling irrespective of its length.

Somehow, though the beautiful language and prose used in the book isn't exactly conveyed onto the big screen, the book adds as an aid. The pair work well as just that - a pair. Understanding the basic concepts of the book beforehand makes it that much easier to follow how each story is linked in the film. If you went into the film knowing nothing, it would probably be a jarring experience that would leave most viewers baffled. It is hard to enjoy something, after all, that just flies over your head. That said, it isn't essential to read the book before seeing the film. A lot is explained and a little research beforehand will suffice.

When I first read the book a couple of years ago, I only gave it 3/5. Yet now, having seen the film and given more thought to the story and what Mitchell achieved, I can appreciate it for what it is. Both book and film are challenging, require constant focus and attention and are certainly not easy to follow but if you have the time and patience, they are both thought-provoking and stunning to behold.

Book and film - 5/5 FOBLES

Warm Bodies: Book vs Film

Isaac Marion's Warm Bodies quite consciously does not fit into any neat genre box. It is both dark and fun, romantic and twisted, silly and serious. Yet in Marion's capable hands, the story never feels disjointed and flows just as richly as the blood from those being devoured by the zombies. In so many ways, Marion's tale is filled with brains.

The story follows a chance encounter between zombie 'R' and human Julie. When R goes on a hunger run with some of his fellow zombies, he is instantly drawn to Julie and feels the need to protect, not eat her. What follows is the development of the relationship between the two, as R tries to become more human and Julie realises that the 'dead' are not as dead as she first thought. It pays close attention to the elements of connection and interaction that makes us feel alive.

The book, though often romantic and fun, is set against an immensely dark backdrop where humans have been forced into compounds in order to survive the zombie epidemic that has taken over the world. It raises a lot of questions about the shifting priorities in this dystopian future and the conflict between surviving and really living.

The film adaptation, directed by Jonathan Levine, manages to remain quite faithful to the original text and has two incredible actors playing R (Nicholas Hoult) and Julie (Teresa Palmer). What Hoult manages to capture with such little dialogue is nothing short of miraculous. It is unsurprising then that Palmer's Julie falls for him. Hoult has arguably the most expressive eyes seen on screen for years, conveying so much depth with a shrug or a glance. His inner monologue helps, of course, and keeping his narrative was a genius move on the part of the filmmakers. Palmer, in turn, rises to leading lady with class, bringing the hardened edge to Julie that the role requires as well as the intense vulnerability. She is incredibly brave and daring, as much when facing the zombies as when she faces her terrifyingly rigid father - who just so happens to be the general of her compound.

The combination of peril, action, romance and comedy is there in the film, just as it is in the book. The only real difference to the feel of the story is that it is far more heavily weighted on the romance. This, though, is a forgivable shift as the romance itself is so brilliantly original, it still brings something new to the table. 

Another brilliant element to the novel that has found its way into the film is the author's great use of music. In the novel, when R cannot say what he wants to, he uses music to say it for him, often playing Julie records that reveal his true feelings. In the film, this happens to great effect and is mixed with a sublime soundtrack that blends some classic tunes from recent decades which serve to enhance the nostalgic elements of the story.

Overall, the tone of the book has been softened for cinema audiences. A lot of what made the book so devilishly dark has been glossed over or ignored entirely and the ending is all just a little bit 'nice'. However, the heart of the book remains, thanks to the same careful character focus Levine showed in 50/50 and the beautifully emotive leads.  

While the book has a real crossover feel to it - because it never feels like a young adult novel despite the youth of the two leads - the film does seem to have more of a teen audience in mind. However, the plot is so clever and witty that it will appeal to anyone looking for something a bit new and different. Twilight, this is NOT.

Book - 4.5/5 FOBLES
Film - 4/5 FOBLES

To be in with a chance of winning your own copy of Marion's book, check out the Film vs Book competition.

Win Warm Bodies by Isaac Marion film tie-in edition

THIS COMPETITION HAS NOW CLOSED. THANKS TO ALL WHO ENTERED.

The film adaptation of Isaac Marion's Warm Bodies arrives in UK cinemas today. To celebrate, here's your chance to win your own copy of the book that started it all...

NOW A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE STARRING NICHOLAS HOULT, TERESA PALMER AND JOHN MALKOVICH. IN CINEMAS 8th FEBRUARY.

‘I never thought I could care so passionately for a zombie. Isaac Marion has created the most unexpected romantic lead I’ve ever encountered.’ STEPHENIE MEYER

‘R is the thinking woman’s zombie – though somewhat grey-skinned and monosyllabic, he could be the perfect boyfriend if he could manage to refrain from eating you. This is a wonderful book, elegantly written, touching and fun, as delightful as a mouthful of fresh brains.’ AUDREY NIFFENEGGER

‘A mesmerising evolution of a classic contemporary myth.’ SIMON PEGG

Warm Bodies Synopsis

R is a zombie, with a great record collection, no memories, no pulse and limited vocabulary. But he has dreams. He is different from his fellow Dead.
Julie is human, warm, fierce and very much alive.
When R makes the decision to rescue her from a zombie attack, a switch is flicked and he suddenly finds meaning to his lifeless existence. This has never happened before. This is against all the rules. R begins to have new thoughts and feelings, and together, he and Julie attempt to bring the whole decaying world back from the dead.

Isaac Marion lives in Seattle. He is not married, did not go to college and has not won any prizes. He has, however, written several short stories and novels which he has published online or in limited editions. Warm Bodies began life as a short story called ‘I Am A Zombie Filled With Love’ which was published on his website and promoted with a video trailer on YouTube. Visit his blog at http://burningbuilding.blogspot.com

To be in with a chance of winning a copy of Warm Bodies by Isaac Marion, all you have to do is email filmvsbook@gmail.com with the name of the actor who plays R in the film adaptation. (If you're not sure, check out my interview with Marion here). Don't forget to put "Warm Bodies competition" as the subject heading and please include the city in which you live in your email.

This competition is open to UK residents only and closes at midday GMT Sunday 3rd March.

Interview with Warm Bodies author Isaac Marion

The film adaptation for Isaac Marion's Warm Bodies hits UK cinemas today and stars Nicholas Hoult and Teresa Palmer. I got to ask the book's author a few questions about the zombie romance novel and how it felt having his book turned into a film. Here's what he had to say...

How did the idea for Warm Bodies come about?

Are you asking where thoughts come from? Are we the sum of our experiences, or does identity and creativity come from somewhere outside of us? Pretty heavy stuff for a blog, man...

What made you want to bring romance into a zombie-filled dystopia?

I couldn't write a novel about a zombie just wandering around eating people for 250 pages. He needed to change, to rediscover his humanity and learn how to feel again, and what feeling is more essentially human than love? It's the most powerful emotion we're capable of. It seemed like the perfect catalyst to trigger R's transformation.

Though the setting for the book is dark, you've included plenty of humour and satire - and a little romance too. Was it always a conscious effort of yours to include all these elements together in the one story?

Nah, it just happened. The humor flows naturally from the premise, which is inherently ridiculous. The story is sincere and it takes itself seriously, but it also embraces its absurdity, which leads to jokes.

How did you react when you found out the book was being made into a film?

I probably ran around and punched a lot of walls. (In a good way.)

Have you been involved on the adaptation at all? If so, how?

They consulted me at various steps in the process. I had meetings with the director to discuss his ideas and whatnot. I gave extensive notes on the script, many of which were implemented. I wouldn't call it a collaboration, but they were really respectful toward me as the author.

What do you think about the casting? Did you have anyone in mind when you wrote the book? An idea of who they might be like?

I always kind of pictured Ryan Gosling as R when movie plans were first announced, but Nicholas absolutely nailed the role and I can't imagine anyone doing it better.

I hear you're writing a prequel about R, Julie and Nora. What can you tell us about it?

It's written! It’s called The New Hunger and it’s out now!

Have you seen the film? If so, what did you think of it?

I've seen it three times. I like it a lot. It glosses over some of the heavier elements of the book and takes a bit lighter approach, tonally, but that's always the case with film adaptations and I think it works really well as a movie. It's funny and charming and I'm incredibly excited to see it reaching so many people.

 

What's next once you're finished with these characters? Will you be writing more dystopias or something entirely different?

 I definitely won't be writing anything involving zombies or any other pop-culture fixtures after this. Most of the stuff I write is much weirder and harder to categorize, and I'm looking forward to letting my imagination run wild again and watching people struggle to figure out which box to stuff it into. If I've learned anything from publishing Warm Bodies, it's that people can't just let a book be a book. It has to be a YA book or a paranormal-romance or some other reductive, easily dismissed subcategory. I'm excited to write something that can be judged on its own merits instead of the merits of its assigned genre.

WARM BODIES BY ISAAC MARION IS OUT NOW. Check out my review here.

Film Rights Bought for Karen Thompson Walker's THE AGE OF MIRACLES

One of the most quietly affecting debut novels from last year was that of Karen Thompson Walker. Her novel The Age of Miracles was a refreshingly calm look at a sort-of-apocalyptic future. Through the perceptive voice of a young girl, the story follows the aftermath of the announcement that the Earth's rotation is actually slowing down - meaning that days and nights are getting longer and what effects this phenomenon will have on the planet in both the short and long term are, as yet, unknown.

River Road Entertainment optioned the film rights before the book had even come out but - though I adored the book - I'm not sure how well it will work on the big screen. What makes the book so captivating is the prose used in the text - not what actually happens. It's all very slow and calm but a compelling read nonetheless. There's no asteroid making its way down to our planet or the threat of annihilation - not imminently anyway.

It will be interesting to see if someone can take this on and keep the feel of the original text - without making it like every other apocalyptic/dystopian future set film. The Age of Miracles is a beautifully unique text and it would be such a shame to see it adapted into just another film that has been done so many times before.

Check out my review of The Age of Miracles here.
 
Source: Word and Film

Book Giveaway: The Host by Stephenie Meyer

THIS COMPETITION IS NOW CLOSED AND THE WINNERS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED. THANKS TO ALL WHO ENTERED AND CONGRATULATIONS TO THE WINNERS!

Next month will mark the release of the film adaptation of The Host, which arrives in UK cinemas on 29th March. It was surely only a matter of time before bestselling author Stephenie Meyer's other book was adapted into a film and the adaptation certainly looks promising, with Saoirse Ronan cast as Melanie Stryder, support from Diane Kruger and William Hurt and writer/director Andrew Niccol at the helm.

To celebrate the film's release, the lovely folks over at Little, Brown UK have got three copies of the film tie-in edition of the book to give away. 

To be in with a chance of winning one of these three copies of The Host, all you have to do is email filmvsbook@gmail.com with the name of the other book series that was written by The Host author Stephenie Meyer. Don't forget to put "The Host competition" as the subject heading and please include the city in which you live in your email.

The Host Official Synopsis

Melanie Stryder refuses to fade away. The earth has been invaded by a species that takes over the minds of their human hosts while leaving their bodies intact, and most of humanity has succumbed.

Wanderer, the invading 'soul' who has been given Melanie's body, knew about the challenges of living inside a human: the overwhelming emotions, the too-vivid memories. But there was one difficulty Wanderer didn't expect: the former tenant of her body refusing to relinquish possession of her mind.

Melanie fills Wanderer's thoughts with visions of the man Melanie loves - Jared, a human who still lives in hiding. Unable to separate herself from her body's desires, Wanderer yearns for a man she's never met. As outside forces make Wanderer and Melanie unwilling allies, they set off to search for the man they both love.

This competition is open to UK residents only and closes at midday GMT Sunday 10th March.