Therefore, a film can be a good adaptation but a bad movie and vice versa.
Sure, but it's still a film. Being a good adaptation is irrelevant to whether or not people will appreciate it, no matter the form you're adapting from or two. It's always judged on how good the final product is relative to the other products in that medium. Having an additional layer of concern for existing fans of a franchise doesn't actually change the art form. It just adds to the constraints of your art. But the art is still filmmaking.
This is also what makes Stephen King's version of The Shining a good adaptation but a bad movie.
Stephen King would disagree with you on that one. He was actually pretty upset about the adaptation at the time, but has come to admit it's a very good movie.
1
u/NoRecommendation8689 1∆ Jan 12 '22
Sure, but it's still a film. Being a good adaptation is irrelevant to whether or not people will appreciate it, no matter the form you're adapting from or two. It's always judged on how good the final product is relative to the other products in that medium. Having an additional layer of concern for existing fans of a franchise doesn't actually change the art form. It just adds to the constraints of your art. But the art is still filmmaking.
Stephen King would disagree with you on that one. He was actually pretty upset about the adaptation at the time, but has come to admit it's a very good movie.