Why does the Film Industry Alter Good Books or Comics with the Assumption That They Will Make More Money?

I read Kevin B's Blog  about super hero/comic book movies and i absolutely agree. But this isn't just with comics or superheros. the film industry has always butchered the written word of stories when they are transferred into a movie. My brother and I have had countless arguments or debates where we agree that the director and producer had altered the story line from the actual story and essentially ruined the essence of the character. Deadpool was a perfect example! There is a level when it is somewhat acceptable to alter a character in order to make the film more intriguing or enticing to the audience but when you completely alter the main essence of the character it ruins it for those of us who understand their true origins.

Another example of this that really bothered me was watching the movie Watchmen. I went out of my way to avoid watching it before I finished the graphic novel and i thought it was an amazing comic! The characters have all of their own stories which all fall into each of the other characters stories as well. And the end was great. It made sense, and worked. When i finally got around to renting the movie and watching it I was shocked that it has such difference in it. For one thing, Night Owl in the comic is nerdy 100% of the time, he is awkward, and very scientifically oriented. His costume even looks goofy and he isn't this buff young man, he is probably in his late 30s, and he is a complete and utter dork. When you watch the movie, he has his dorky side when he is not in costume, but once he is in costume he completely loses his dorky side and he is this masculine, buff, hero who wears this costume that is black and accentuates his muscles. The only thing that reminds you of an owl when you see him in the movie is his helmet/mask/hood type thing. In the comic he literally looks like an owl. Then in the end, the movie had a completely different ending from the novel, and apparently it was because they felt that audiences would get upset if they destroyed New York City.

Going beyond the comic realm, Eragon was completely defiled by the movie industry. They took this awesome book that was, granted, very long, but every part of the book was needed for the rest to make sense, and the special effects were seriously lacking in order to pull of the final battle in Farthen Dur. Major key elements of the whole time Eragon spends there that affect him in the later novels were missing. Also the turning point in the battle revolved around the breaking of the huge Star Rose or Star Sapphire, that was treasured and important to the dwarf mountain, not only as a piece of beauty, but as a symbol for the time of the dragon riders, and how the breaking of the sapphire symbolized a changing of the times again.

It is rare that you will ever find a movie that can do justice to a written work. Many Nicholas Sparks novels are often done in film extremely well. However that is because they are written mostly with the essence of true life and reality, and they read like a movie which tends to be rare of most novels. However, in the grander scheme of things, the films are usually not as bad as people make them out to be. If you hadn't read the book or known the comic, then the movie is able to stand on it's own. Although i do agree with you Kevin, they totally ruined Deadpool.

Stereotype of the Nerd

According to Webster's Online Dictionary, nerd means "an unstylish, unattractive, and socially inept person; especially: one slavishly devoted to intellectual or academic pursuits" (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nerd). This is the social understanding of how most people use the word 'nerd'. However, many people have started to accept being a 'nerd' as something that is almost sought after. Teenagers want to be a nerd about something in their lives. Being a 'nerd' makes it okay to be deeply involved, almost to an obsessive level, in a way that is not only respected but also thought of as almost cool. 

In my last Rhetoric and writing class we spent the time discussing the concept of what being a 'nerd' means. We all essentially came to the conclusion that being a nerd, in today's society, means that the person has to have an extreme pursuit of something they are interested. Musicians are nerds because they have such a deeper knowledge of the way music and their instrument works, making them a music nerd. Athletes are nerds because they have an extreme passion and knowledge about "the game". Think about any subject or area of interest and the people who do well are the nerds of their field because they have a passion. Society doesn't see these people as nerds, and we don't label them as such because 'nerd' has the awful connotation that goes along with social outcast or not having friends. But on the contrary, the people who are nerds in areas that are not directly linked to science and math usually become very popular and sometimes even famous.

I watch the show "The Sing Off" and this show is a vocal competition, but it is with a capella groups. A capella literally means in that manner of the church, but that history is long and boring and confusing. It means that the singers cannot use any accompaniment of instruments; so these people arrange popular songs and make them sound like the originals but by only using their voices. The reason I am bringing this show up is because Ben Folds is one of the judges on the show. Now to the naked eye, this man is the embodiment of a 'nerd'. Thick framed glasses, awkward stance or posture, clothes that are a little awkward too, but he is a celebrity and also an extreme 'nerd'. When he listens to the music groups, he picks out the minute details that most people cannot identify. The average person would see the performance as pretty good or decent, or sometimes bad. However, the average person would not be able to tell why. Ben Folds has this ability because he has a great passion for music and not just whether it sounds good or not but the deeper musicality of the whole piece in general. He is able to pick apart harmonies and find modulated (the changing of a key) melodies in a piece that has multiple harmonies and polyphonic (multiple) melodies. The definition of him as I have just laid out would definitely put him in the 'nerd' category. But because his final product is amazing and because he is socially accepted, his ‘nerdy-ness’ no longer hurts him, it makes him who he is.

Now if you go to Urban Dictionary, you will find definitions of things the way our current society views them. There are three hundred and sixteen definitions of the word nerd according to people in today’s society. The one I have chosen is

“Nerd- A person who gains pleasure from amassing large quantities of knowledge about subjects often too detailed or complicated for most other people to be bothered with. Often mistaken for Geeks, who aspire to become nerds, yet lack the intelligence, and end up giving nerds a bad name due to their poor social skills. Non-nerds are often scared of nerds, due to their detailed knowledge, and therefore seemingly high levels of intelligence - and subsequently degenerate them as much as possible as often as possible. Nerds exist covertly within the fabric of society, often choosing to 'nerd it up' in private or in the company of fellow nerds. It is for this reason they are feared the most - unlike geeks, who are easily identified, nerds can only be found out when casual conversation reaches a subject that they like nerding.” (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerd)

I think this is one of the better definitions of the term nerd because it fully analyzes the fact that nerds are not simply this person who is socially outcast and looks weird but is someone who has a true obsession or passion for a specific subject or topic and can usually have a decent social life.  This is not to say that computer nerds don’t have trouble with social situations, but to say that all computer nerds are socially inadequate is an extreme stereotype. Often times, nerds who work with computers or machines get into the habit of thinking extremely logically and have trouble socially because social situations rarely follow a logical flow or pattern.

Merriam-Webster, prod. "Nerd." Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary. N.p., n.d.
Web. 13 Sept. 2011.  <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nerd>.

Nerdinator. "Nerd." Urban Dictionary. N.p., 13 Sept. 2011. Web. 13 Sept. 2011.
<http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerd>. 

Is the Editor Right?

Let me start out by saying that this is a really long blog post, so reading the italicized words are not entirely necessary, they just help to emphasize the point of this blog.

Recently I wrote an article for the newspaper that our church publishes, and I thought the article was great. It had the exact emotion that I wanted and my opinions were very clear and well thought out and developed. It read like an educated person had written the article. Now granted it was a bit long, but it was talking about two events that I have a great passion for and had a moving experience with. That was extremely clear from the article. I expected some editing or revisions of the article. Maybe some information that wasn't exactly necessary or pertinent could be deleted but I did not expect what was actually published. There were multiple sentences that do not even mean the same thing because they reference totally different events. The outcome was that my well developed, articulate and coherent article turned into a choppy article that sounded like someone who was just learning how to write complete sentences wrote it. Let's just say the final product did not sound like me at all, maybe a robotic version of me, but that was even cutting it close.

So I am posing the question: Is it okay for an editor to fully edit a piece of work and then sign the authors name without allowing the author to have sufficient time to revise the new edition?

My opinion is that it's wrong, and I honestly would have rather had him not print or publish my article because he had not heard back from me in time for the issue, than sign my name below an article that I can no longer say I wrote.

So here is the Article that I originally wrote:

     As my school year ended and I graduated, and finally the summer was here I found myself with the opportunity to travel to Minnesota for the Episcopal Youth Event! This is an event that invites teenagers who range from freshman to seniors in high school, from every diocese in the United States and some provinces like the Dominican Republic with their chaperons to gather in an environment where they can explore their faith and beliefs without the pressures of their peers, or society. I was lucky enough for this summer’s trip to be my second time, and I was able to look at the workshops being offered each day and choose ones that weren't necessarily fun (most were anyways) but were something I could learn from. My first workshop was about finding your voice in the church. As a teenager in general it’s rare that my opinions or ideas are legitimately heard and actually taken into consideration but during this workshop I was taught how I can be a voice that is heard and listened to within the church. The biggest point that was brought up was our relationship with adults. Most of the adults I know usually don’t take teenagers very seriously, for a lot of reasons, and don’t get me wrong often times those reasons can be correct, however, even if those reasons may sometimes be accurate, when given the opportunity to rise to the occasion almost every teenager or child will meet or exceed the standard or request you have given to them. This being said the workshop made it very clear that in order to be taken seriously by adults we must act and have the respect of the adults which we are working with essentially “when in Rome do as the Romans do” kind of mind set. I learned about Diocesan Convention, General Convention, and many other formats where the voice of the children could be heard in order to keep the Episcopal Church alive. After this workshop I went back to my group and was so excited and energetic about the whole “having a voice” concept that the whole Rhode Island Delegation was talking about it, or rather listening to me talk a lot about it. However, the whole group got a lot out of my constant yammering and they want to create a Diocesan Youth Council! Later that week we also heard a speaker name Rodger Nishioka, who said, “Children aren't the future, they are the now!” and I hope you all think about that if you would like to hear his speech please go to this YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtMaFGcNau8 I highly recommend it, and I think I can speak this one time on behalf of not only the delegation who went to EYE with me but also on behalf of the other 1,300 participants who attended the Episcopal Youth Event this year!

Here is the article that was published and my name was signed under:

     As my school year ended and I graduated, I had the opportunity to travel to Minnesota for the Episcopal Youth Event! This is an event that invites teenagers who range from freshman to seniors in high school, from every diocese in the United States and foreign countries. Thirteen hundred youth and chaperones gathered in an environment to explore their faith and beliefs, without the pressures of their peers, or society. This summer’s trip was my second time. Workshops were offered each day and we could choose those that we could learn from. My first was about finding your voice in the church. As a teenager in general, it’s rare that our opinions or ideas are legitimately heard and actually taken into consideration. During this workshop, I was taught how we can be a voice that is heard and listened to within the church. The biggest point that was brought up was our relationship with adults. Most of the adults I know usually don’t take teenagers very seriously, for a lot of reasons. Don’t get me wrong, often times those reasons can be correct. However, even if those reasons may sometimes be accurate, when given the opportunity to rise to the occasion almost every teenager or child will meet or exceed the standard or request you have given to them. This being said, the workshop made it very clear that in order to be taken seriously by adults we must act and have the respect of the adults we are working with. Essentially, this means a mindset of ―when in Rome do as the Romans do

     I learned about Diocesan Convention, General Convention, and many other formats where the voices of the children could be heard in order to keep the Episcopal Church alive. After this workshop I went back to my group and was so excited and energetic about the ―having a voice‖ concept that the whole Rhode Island Delegation was talking about it, or rather listening to me talk a lot about it. However, the whole group got a lot out of my constant yammering, and they want to create a Diocesan Youth Council! Later that week we also heard a speaker name Rodger Nishioka, who said, ―Children aren’t the future, they are the now!‖ I hope you all think about that. Iif you would like to hear his speech please go to this YouTube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtMaFGcNau8 . I highly recommend it. I believe that I have written this article to speak on behalf of, not only the delegation who went to EYE with me, but also on behalf of the other 1,300 participants who attended the Episcopal Youth Event this year!

Just to put this fact out there the difference in length or word count is thirty seven words. That is maybe three or four solid sentences. But instead the writing takes on a whole new tone that does not represent me or my writing style. 

So thank you for the adults out there in the church (not all adults are like this, I know almost an equal amount who are silencers and empower-ers) who have once again silenced the voice of another youth who was trying to speak her mind and share her individual thoughts and ideas and maybe be seen for something more than the child who was raised in her parish and maybe as the eighteen year old intelligent high school graduate who is going to be attending college in the fall for Biomedical Engineering. Ironically enough the article was based on the fact that children were trying to find their voice in the church and then my voice, in my writing, was stolen from me too.