Texts

Abstract

In a seminal essay on adaptation, Dudley Andrew argues that the defining feature of film adaptation — ‘the matching of the cinematic sign system to prior achievements in some other system’ — can be shown to be typical of all representational film.¹ This is to say that every film — indeed, every representation — can be regarded as an adaptation because no film ‘responds immediately to reality itself but rather adapts, or represents, some pre-existing model.² As Andrew points out, adaptation theory typically limits representation, first by focusing on the transference of novels into film, and then by targeting those cases in which the prior model is a highly regarded literary classic or a widely read popular novel.³ More recently, some critics have suggested that writing about adaptation should provide a more ‘flexible [and] animating discourse in film studies’.⁴ James Naremore notes that while adaptation is mostly thought about in relation to canonical literature, it might also accommodate adaptations of other textualised materials.⁵ A broader approach to adaptation could include, for example, films derived from songs (The Indian Runner, Sean Penn, 1991), letters (The Last Time I Committed Suicide, Stephen Kay, 1996), newspaper articles (Biker Boyz, Reggie Rock Bythewood, 2003), comic books (Spiderman, Sam Raimi, 2002), computer games (Laura Croft: Tomb Raider, Simon West, 2001), adventure rides (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Gore Verbinski, 2003), television series (Charlie’s Angels, McG, 2000) and films derived from other films — remakes. This chapter sketches a broad approach to adaptation and/as remaking before attending to two extended case studies — the remaking of Yojimbo and Planet of the Apes — and concluding with some historical notes around the concept of remaking.