Board game adaptations aren’t new, but we’re going to see more coming over the next few years. How successful the coming movies are as adaptations will depend on how well they depict game play. Not necessarily the mechanics of the game, but what the game represents. Take, for example, the movie Clue, based on the game of the same name. The game Clue had players go from room to room, checking clues to discover who killed Mr. Boddy; essentially, a murder mystery given game mechanics. The movie Clue, while being light comedy, kept to the essence of the game, with a murder to be solved with the iconic characters from the game in the movie.  The Week has an overview of board ganes we can look forward to seeing on the big screen. Let’s take a closer look at the titles to figure out if an adaptation is possible.

Monopoly
The classic game of buying, selling, and bankrupting the other players for the whole family. Ridley Scott has been tagged to direct the movie, described as a group of Trump-like greedy wannabe real estate titans. Given the trigger for the 2008 Crash, the popping of the housing bubble caused by real estate speculation, the movie just might work. However, some elements, such as auctions, might fall by the wayside. With Ridley Scott directing, the movie may be well worth seeing, even if the Monopoly name is being used to bring people into the theatre.

Risk
This is an odd one. The original game had players marshalling armies across the globe, trying to achieve total world domination. The illustrations on the cards showed infantry, horseback cavalry*, and cannon artillery more appropriate for a pre-World War I conflict, possibly even pre-US Civil War.** Updating the setting to the modern era would introduce elements that aren’t in the game – air and naval assets. Cavalry can be updated to the modern equivalent, since the game abstracts battles for playability. But that leaves the question of the story itself. Will it tell the tale of the men in the trenches or on the front lines? Or will it be about the men at headquarters, having to make hard choices? And will the story focus on battles of key locations, like Indonesia, gateway to Australia, and Argentina, the last line of defense against North America?***

Candyland
Candyland is usually most people’s first board game. It was designed so that very young children could play it and learn their colours. No dice are involved. The only skill needed is to recognize the different colours. Game play involves drawing a card and moving to the next instances of the colour on the card. First player to the end of the board wins. Other than being in a land made of candy, there’s not much to the game. Wikipedia has the current attempt as being an Adam Sandler project without details of what’s happening in it. The best adaptation for the game, though, seems to point towards a Wacky Races -style race through a land made of candy. Really, there’s not much to the game to hang a plot from.

Jumanji
Jumanji is the odd one out, the thing that’s not like the others in this entry. Originally, Jumanji, the movie, was based on a short story with the same name by Chris Van Allburg. The titular game never existed beyond the fiction of the story. Part of the charm of the movie was not knowing what was happening until the revelation. A remake will lose some of that charm, but strong writing could work around that. However, the original story was published in 1981 with the movie being made in 1995. The movie performed well at the box office and will still be remembered by the general public. And, with the film coming after the popularity of home movies through first VHS and later DVD, people who loved the movie will have a copy and can just pop it into their home entertainment system. The new movie’s crew will have to work hard to improve on the original just to be considered as good due to nostalgia.

Reaching?
As Steve mentioned, Hollywood’s current risk-adverse craze for adaptations is going to run out of major works and will need to find new sources. Games, from classic board games to tabletop RPGs to video games, won’t be ignored. What games would you like to see adapted and how?

Next week, a breather as I prepare a new batch of columns.

* As opposed to modern cavalry (i.e., tanks, APCs) and what the horseback guys became in WWI (pilots).
** My guess of the era – the War of 1812.
*** What players find critical on the board may not reflect what is critical in a real war.

Summer 2012 is shaping up to be the summer of the super-blockbuster. Marvel’s The Avengers already made its expenses after the opening weekend and is seeing people returning multiple times. Why are superhero movies becoming popular of late?

The Familiar
As always with adaptations, the main reason for using an existing property is that the work is already known to the general public. Superheroes have been around since the 1930s, with the creation of Superman, and pulp heroes go back even further. The current crop of superhero movies isn’t a new idea; Batman was featured in several serials in the 1940s and Superman had his own radio show. Cartoons featuring the supers since the 1960s also help with brand recognition. But getting people into theatre seats the first week is just part of the puzzle. As seen many times here at Lost in Translation, success doesn’t come from simply adapting and hoping for the best.

A Geek Renaissance
Along the way, geeks infiltrated Hollywood. People who grew up on the serials of the 40s, the B-movies of the 50s, the exploitation films of the 70s, found jobs within the studios. These geek insiders worked to get their ideas into production. And, unlike earlier eras, these insiders wanted to make sure that the characters they grew up with were treated properly. Again, that there “respect” thing. Still, there were some misses. Daredevil and Elektra didn’t perform as well as hoped at the box office. Changes of tone hurt Batman & Robin. But that didn’t stop more adaptations from being made. Marvel, now owned by Disney, had a plan for The Avengers.

Even in the late 90s, if you asked the average person, as opposed to a comics fan, to name five superheroes, the answer would probably include Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man, and either the X-Men* or the Incredible Hulk. Each of those heroes have had a number of animated and live-action adaptations throughout their history. The Avengers, though, were a group of A-list supers that were well-known to comic fans but not so much outside fandom.** Marvel’s plan was to introduce each of the Avengers in their own movie, beginning with Iron Man.

The plan worked.

New Approaches
Marvel’s approach was new. Instead of just introducing the Avengers and possibly getting bogged down in every character’s origin, the studio gave each character a spotlight, whetting the appetites of audiences. The lead-up films weren’t treated as filler but were major releases. In the meantime, Marvel also kept working on the X-Men franchise, releasing origin movies for the main team and for popular character Wolverine.

Over at DC, the Batman franchise was rebooted. Christopher Nolan was given three movies to develop featuring the World’s Greatest Detective. Once again, the product produced was of high quality. Meanwhile, a new television adaptation of Superman, this time as he grew up in Smallville, was well received and lasted ten seasons. A similar series is in the works for the Green Arrow, simply titled Arrow.

Super Success
The biggest reason the new super-movies are doing well is the backing of the studios. None of the Avengers-line of movies were cheap. The Dark Knight trilogy of movies showed an eye for detail. Instead of just assuming that only children will want to go to these films, the studios ensured that both fans and non-fans will enjoy what’s on screen.

There’s still room for a movie to bomb at the box office. Indeed, a series of poorly attended movies may spell the end to the current adaptation craze. But, for this to happen, the studios would have to completely miss the point of the characters, something that both Marvel and DC’s studios have so far avoided.

Next week, something will be here.

* Yes, the X-Men are a group of heroes.
** The exception being the Hulk, who remained with the team for the couple of issues before leaving.

Apologies for the delay.  The next entry should appear on Monday.  enjoy your weekend!

As mentioned last week, changes in technology can be an issue with remakes. Generally, the isn’t a problem for period pieces and works set in an older era; the technology is well understood and can be replicated. Works set in the future can run into the tech curve, but can technobabble* around it. However, works set in the here and now but first produced several decades ago might wind up running into the curve hard.

Fantasy and historical pieces have set technology. One doesn’t expect cell phones, GPS, or the Internet in medieval Europe. Historical research may find new facts on events, but those can be adapted into the narrative or be used as inspiration for a new story. Steampunk adds a new technology, but typically isn’t that much more advanced than the existing tech of the Victorian era. Charles Babbage’s difference engine was never built, but he did have plans for it.

Works set in the future tend to not go into full detail of the existing technologies. The idea is that, like today, the average person doesn’t know the full details of what they’re using. The typical computer user of today has little knowledge of programming languages like C; likewise, in the future, the average user won’t need to know how the system was built but only how to use it effectively. A few works have been affected by technology changes. Most have worked around it. In particular, Star Trek introduced transtater technology as the current state of the art. In 1967, the transistor was cutting edge, but would later be supplanted by the silicon chip. Star Trek: The Next Generation adapted to the change by introducing the isolinear chip, measured in teraquads of capacity, thus allowing for improvements in Federation technology and an out for future changes of real-life tech.

The catch happens with modern and near-future works. The past thirty years have seen computers go from house-sized to handheld, communications go from expensive bulky corded car phones to the ubiquitous smart phone tied to the Internet. Storage capacity has gone from kilobytes to terabytes. What can be done to update a work properly or ensure a work doesn’t age badly?

Roll With It. Ignore the tech curve, especially if the work is set in the here and now.  The James Bond movies are a good example. All of 007’s gadgets were advanced for the time they were made, either miniaturizing existing technology or getting creative with existing items. While some gadgets are still not available, such as the BMW’s remote in Tomorrow Never Dies, they are still believable given the computerization of modern cars.

Quietly Accept the Change. If the technology isn’t as important to the story as the events and the characterization, then just use moden equipment and forget it. Why worry about the specifics when the idea in the original work was to show the characters with typical, cheap, or expensive items of the time. Update the idea, not the specifics. The James Bond movies again show a good example. The Aston-Martin DB V in Goldfinger was updated with a Aston-Martin V12 Vanquish in Die Another Day, with the tire shredders replaced by lasers. In both movies, the car represented a high-end British sports car, appropriate for Bond to drive.

Sometimes, though, there’s not getting around the curve. In this case, Avoid Specifics When Possible. Given how fast computer capacity grows, providing specific numbers will date the work. The film version of Johnny Mnemonic ran into this; the titular character was only capable of storing 160 gigbytes in his head, though he took on 320GB. Today, netbooks can have that much hard drive storage, though Johnny had the memory in his head.** Unfortunately, the numbers were needed to give the audience an idea of how much data was being stored. This leads to…

Ignore the Curve. Sometimes, there’s no getting around the technology. The devices are critical to the story. Specifics are needed, even if the values date fast. This situation is rare, but can show up, such as in Johnny Mnemonic as mentioned above.  There are still ways around the tech curve. Downplay, if possible, the technology. If adapting, acknowledge the obsolescence. If creating the original work, leave room for creative adaptation.

Finally, Play With the Curve. Not only is the old technology accepted, it’s pointed out. The 2008 film adaptation Get Smart not only brought back the gadgets from the original series, including the iconic shoe phone, but played up the tech difference with cell phones*** and had Agent 86 use the items despite their age. Often, playing with the curve is done for laughs, such as in Get Smart, but it can be done seriously.

Next time, return of the reviews?

* Technobabble: A mish-mash of technical jargon that sounds impressive but means nothing.
** Today, he’d have a USB port at the base of his neck.
*** Though a Get Smart TV reboot did introduce shoe waiting.

If you’ve been following this column long enough, you’ll have noticed that the main key to  a successful reboot, remake, or adaptation is respect for the original work. Sounds easy enough; make sure that the new work holds up to the expectations of the original. However, many remakes have failed because the new work treated the original badly. Today’s entry takes a look at the different means of failure.

Continuity
In long running works, continuity builds up. History builds up over time, and, even in the original work, can only be ignored if there’s a reason. In an reboot or an adaptation, fans will expect the continuity to be there; the Internet will be aflame with news of breaks from canon within minutes of fans perceiving the miss. Continuity is a bugbear; even original works, such as comics, can see ignoring and even retconning* causing uproars.

Avoiding can be easy enough. Simplest way is to provide a new continuity. Remakes work well here as they are a retelling of the original story. Not everything can be handwaved away, but some minor changes may slip through unnoticed. Marvel’s Ultimate line was an attempt to essentially reboot the Marvel universe to get rid of decades of contradictory continuity. DC’s animated universe**, aka the Dini-verse***, was similar, creating a new setting to retell stories of classic titles but also allowing for new stories.

Another method is to set up the reason for the continuity break. Fantasy and science fiction have many ways to create alternate timelines, parallel universes, and slightly off dimensions. The Star Trek reboot created an alternate universe after the villain travelled back in time to destroy critical parts and people of the Federation.

Or, one can be blazen and just ignore the previous work altogether. What helps in a move like this is using an original that’s either obscure or already looked down upon. Also helping, having a solid cast with stellar writing. The new Battlestar Galactica went down this path; the original series was remembered by the general public as being not so serious. Taking the premise and treating it in a far more dramatic manner allowed the new Galactica to catch people’s attention.

Vehicle
Many failed remakes can be traced to treating the new work as first a vehicle for its star then as a proper adaptation. Often, the new work takes the premise of the original and turns it into a comedy, even if the premise wasn’t one to start. This creates a problem as fans of the original will get turned off by the idea of their old fandom being treated as a joke and fans of the star wondering what is going on in the story. The remakes of Starsky & Hutch and Land of the Lost are prime examples of the problem. However, the trend tends to remain with older television series.

Passage of Time
Sometimes, a work just doesn’t age well. History marches on. Technology evolves.  Humanity’s knowledge of the universe expands. Remakes of works set in an historical era can be updated to take into account new information. Remakes of works set in the future can take into account changes in today’s technology. Works set in the modern era may run into the tech curve hard, though. Cell phones can destroy many a sitcom; imagine if two people misunderstanding each other called each other to clear things up; now fill in the remaining twenty minutes.

Comedies aren’t immune, sitcom example above notwithstanding. The first episode of Get Smart started at the theatre, actors performing on stage. Then a phone rings. In the 60s, it just wasn’t possible to have a portable phone; the gag was funny when Max leaves to answer his shoe. Today? Not so funny; cell phones are a nuisance in theatres of all types.  However, the Get Smart remake movie acknowledged the old gadgets and used them in clever ways.

These aren’t the only ways to sabotage a remake. However, they are obvious when seen.  Other ways will be covered in later columns.

Next week, the technology curve.

* Retroactive continuity, or “No, really, it’s always been this way; we have no idea of what you’re talking about.”
** Batman: The Animated Series, Superman: The Animated Series, and Justice League.
*** After Paul Dini, producer.

Reviews & Revues
Apologies again. The reviews will return. Life can sometimes conspire against me.

However, I noticed an ad on the bus ride home recently, leading me to realize that I’ve completely ignored one adaptation completely – musical theatre. A number of works have been adapted, from comic books (Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark) to alternate interpretation of a character from a movie adapted from a book (Wicked). It’s not a new idea – Andrew Lloyd Webber made his career adapting other stories to stage musicals, including Jesus Christ, Superstar and Phantom of the Opera. However, the source has changed.

The ad mentioned earlier was for Young Frankenstein: The Musical, based on the Mel Brooks movie parody of Frankenstein and other horror standards. Today’s musical is more likely to adapt from pop culture. Among the properties mined are Evil Dead and Disney’s Lion King and Beauty and the Beast. The switch to theatre brings in a different restrictions than in other media. There is no post-production to add in CGI. There are no second takes.  There are no multiple camera angles. The stage adapation has to be able to take the existing work and boil it down so that the invisible fourth wall is believable.

Looking Forward
It’s an adaptational summer movie season. Coming soon, The Avengers, taking Marvel Comics’ Ultimate Avengers and bringing it to the silver screen. The movie follows a string of hits, including Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor. Two characters won’t be in it, Ant-Man and Wasp, and it appears that they’re being replaced by Hawkeye and Black Widow. Also now being advertised, Men In Black III. Given the length of time since the second movie, I’m hoping the existance of the movie means the writers had what they thought was good idea for a story instead of an exec saying, “Let’s exploit the franchise.”

Future Plans
One thing I have been trying to find is a work that didn’t successfully adapt a work but was still popular enough to be considered a success, either financially or critically.  Real Steel looks like it’d fit the bill; the original short story was about human boxer taking the place of his broken down android in a robot boxing league while the movie was more heart warming for the family. Other suggestions will be welcomed.

Next week, Lost in Translation will return . . .

A new feature of Lost in Translation, reporting on various remakes and adapations in the works.

JK Rowling’s publisher has announced the title of her next book, The Casual Vacancy. The book will be Rowling’s first non-Potter book and will be out September 27 this year.

A Game of Thrones has been renewed for a third season. The third season will only cover a portion of the third book, A Storm of Swords. The showrunners acknowledge that A Storm of Swords couldn’t be properly covered in ten episodes, and they will be trying to fit in the action from A Feast for Crows and A Dance With Dragons as those two novels take place during the same time frame. HBO’s co-president Richard Plepler is willing to give the series the time to develop properly, as long as George R.R. Martin is willing. (Now this is how to adapt an epic novel series properly.)

A Short Circuit remake is in the works. No production start has been announced.

Part of the Sony collapse? Sony Pictures will be remaking Sabrina the Teenage Witch as a live-action superhero movie. The biggest change seems to be changing the focus of Sabrina living as a witch among mundanes to Sabrina learning to cope with her powers.

A movie promotes physical activity! Thanks to The Hunger Games, more people are looking into archery. The movie has earned over $300 million at the box office, making it the second fastest to cross that line. Only Avatar was faster to break that mark.

Next week, back to the reviews.

Blogcritics has a an article, Seven Terrific Films That Are Truly Poor Adaptations, that relates well to this column’s interests.  It goes to show that it is possible to not follow the original work and still have a movie that is entertaining and thought-provoking.

You’ve got your story idea. You want to make it big. You hear the call of Hollywood. What’s next? As seen here at Fan To Pro, Hollywood might not be your first step. The vagaries of the business and the sheer competition just to be noticed can be off-putting. And, as can be seen in the line up of upcoming movies, Hollywood isn’t taking many chances on original work without a big name behind it.* There are other options, though.

Make it big elsewhere
Since the trend these days is in adaptations, reboots, and remakes**, you need to make it big somewhere else. Ideally, you’ve already had a hit that can be remade or rebooted, but that’s something very few people can really do, since both involve already being part of the Hollywood system. That leaves creating something that can be adapted. Write a best-selling book or create a popular game, video or otherwise. The skies the limit. About the only medium not adapted yet is the webcomic***, but it’s just a matter of time.

Ideally, you’ll have a strong plot, memorable characters, drama, comedy, and a heart-warming moral. Given some of the upcoming adaptations, like Battleship, they’re not needed. However, without a major toy company publishing your game for several generations, those elements help. There are other items to consider, though. For one, think about how the work could be adapted in the future. If a Hollywood studio were to release it as a PG-13 film, would your work suffer? Not all works have gone that route, but age ratings may play a part in getting noticed. For a movie, the ideal rating is PG-13, allowing younger viewers in while still keeping an older audience’s attention.

However, not all works become a movie. Some become television series, a longer format that allows for a more intricate plot and greater details. Going with the traditional broadcast networks still requires an eye to the age ratings; certain words aren’t allowed before the watershed and others just aren’t allowed at all. However, cable specialty channels aren’t as handcuffed. What can only be hinted at on a broadcast network can be shown cable. The need for Nielsen ratings isn’t as great, either. Cable channels look at subscriber numbers, and if a show brings in new subscribers just to see that show, the channel is happy.

Adapt somewhere else
However, the competition is still stiff and the gatekeepers’ decision making makes about as much sense as a cat with a Ouija board. Still, you want your work adapted. Look outside the US. Many countries have a thriving entertainment industry and are looking to fill time slots and tax deductions. Take a look at how other countries approach entertainment and give your work the needed slant. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has a lot of Canadian content, as expected. A story with a Canadian slant could get their interest.

As an added bonus, making it big elsewhere may get Hollywood interested. Many popular TV shows in the US were adapted from foreign works, including All in the Family (Til Death Do Us Part), The Office (The Office), and Three’s Company (Man About the House). Movies have also been imported and remade; for a while, Japanese horror movies were getting Hollywood remakes.

Look elsewhere
And, sometimes, even getting noticed is impossible, even with the ideal work. All is not lost. Comic books, video games, tabletop games, all of these media have adapted works, even between themselves.**** With such cross-adaptation, Hollywood may even notice.

Hopefully, this will help get a work adapted well by the Hollywood machine. Never hurts to try.

Next week, a surprise.

* Possibly not even then. George Lucas had to guarantee the distribution costs of Red Tails, the movie about the Tuskegee Airmen, because no studio would even bite at the movie otherwise.
** Without this trend, there would be no Lost in Translation.
*** Technically, Order of the Stick has been adapted into a board game, but that’s outside Hollywood.
**** Oddest one could be the DC Comics adaptation of TSR’s Gammarauders board game.

Over half a million Macs have been infected by the Flashback virus.  The virus creates a botnet designed to steal personal information.  A new variant was found over the weekend that takes advantage of a vulnerability in Java that Apple released a patch for today.

Takeaways:

– Keep up to date on patches, especially when online.

– Don’t get cocky about whatever platform you’re running.  For a while, Mac enthusiasts laughed at how vulnerable to viruses Windows was.  Now, the Mac is as vulnerable.

-ScottD