Adaptations, Limitations, and Imitations

Comic books suck. Movies are slightly better, but still suck. Books are the only valid form of literature, and not one more minute should be wasted on the other inferior types of literature. A few years ago, a statement like this could have potentially come out of my mouth. Now, if someone were to say it, they better be more than arms reach away from me, or it's go time. As I became more of an avid reader, all other forms of entertainment came in a distant second to a good book. Much like comic books before it, films were now nothing more than a fleeting childhood pastime. I considered books to be much more than a form of escapism; they were philosophies on life told through fascinating stories. I considered films to be books lost in translation, with popcorn entertainment replacing the books' deeper meaning. As for comic books, I considered that particular pastime as the one former interest I should be ashamed to call my own. All three mediums were at different levels on the social hierarchy I had unfairly created, with books coming in first, movies in a distant second, and comics finishing dead last. This hierarchy was tom down worse than the Berlin Wall when, in my sophomore year of high school, I was introduced to my first graphic novel.

One of the required readings in my British Literature course that year was George Orwell's 1984. The book focuses on a meek office worker who fights a totalitarian government that has outlawed any behavior considered to be non-conformist. Sexual activity was viewed ".. .as a slightly disgusting minor operation, like having an enema" (Orwell 65), and ".. .to do anything that suggested a taste for solitude, even to go for a walk by yourself, was always slightly dangerous" (Orwell 82) in the eyes of the government in power. I had finished the book in its entirety in a matter of days, and, needless to say, I loved it. The teacher of the course, who also happened to be a graphic novel enthusiast, offhandedly suggested that everyone who enjoyed the book also read a graphic novel entitled V for Vendetta by Alan Moore. I was confused as to why my English teacher was comparing a classic piece of literature to a graphic novel. At that time, I was of the opinion that graphic novels were nothing more than glorified comic books, and the audience who enjoyed them were illiterate morons with attention spans as low as their intelligence level.

Just to prove myself right, I chose to read V for Vendetta to be absolutely certain it didn't hold a candle to a great piece of literature like 1984. My drive to read this graphic novel originated solely from my naivete which told me that graphic novels were for children and grown men with maturity levels comparable to children. Much to my surprise, by the end of V for Vendetta, which took only a few hours to complete, I was equally impressed by the graphic novel even though it had a completely different storyline and cast of characters. Although V for Vendetta deviated greatly from its source of inspiration, the dystopian theme and mood of the book were translated flawlessly into the graphic novel medium: a medium I now suddenly and deeply respected.

Now, nothing seemed to make sense. How could I be equally impressed by a book as a graphic novel of all things? Up was down, black was white, my social hierarchy ceased to exist. With no more delusions about a book's superiority to films or graphic novels, I chose to view a film adaptation of 1984 to size all three mediums up. I had my pick among several versions of 1984, and in the end I rented a film called Brazil, which was a rather strange take on 1984.

Much like V for Vendetta, Brazil was a rather loose adaptation. Instead of taking events straight from the book and filming them, Brazil only took the basic plot outline of 1984 and made the rest up. After seeing all of the other films based on Orwell’s novel, I believe it is a safe assumption that Brazil remains the only film version of 1984 that was able to turn the tragic story of an office worker brainwashed by the government into a dark comedy rife with monsters dressed in samurai armor, botched face lifts, and office workers fighting for a desk.

George Orwell fills 1984 with expositions about fearful citizens who submit to a harsh ruler because of the punishment they will undergo should they consider rebelling. He delves into the nature of fear that causes everyone to obey every law that is passed, regardless of how irrational it may seem. At the very end of the book, Winston, the protagonist, begs that the woman he committed the crime of sexual activity with be tortured in his place. Orwell’s basic theory was that "obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation" (Orwell 266). Harsh punishment insured obedience. Orwell wrote about such things in long passages that comprised most of the book. While these passages are what make the book so insightful, they are hardly visual. What works very well in writing is not perfectly adaptable in pictures, whether the pictures are in motion or still. 1984 was not written for the screen, and so naturally film makers and graphic novelists alike had plenty of freedom to interpret the book any way they wished, deviating from the story to make both the film and the graphic novel two distinctly different works instead of just a rehash of a story everyone already knows.

Brazil used some of the scenes in 1984 and satirized them to such an extent as to make some of the darkest events rather funny, which will happen when the director of the movie, Terry Gilliam, is the same man who directed several Monty Python movies. At first, this major change in mood appeared to be a mockery of 1984, but it was just a lighthearted way of conveying the same dystopian theme. Orwell made the book tragic to show the outcome of a totalitarian government in power, while Terry Gilliam made the movie humorous to satirize how ridiculous the idea of a totalitarian government is; two vastly different approaches convey the same message. Orwell described the society as chaotic, yet never went into everyday life type of chaos: a subject Brazil chose to portray in a very strange manner. In Brazil, the chaos of society is portrayed visually rather than explained: in most of the interiors, gaudy ventilation systems are strewn about everywhere with no sense of order, a massive amount of paperwork must be filled out before the simplest task can be performed by the government, bombings from another country occur throughout the entire movie randomly, and the most minute typographical error results in the death of an innocent man. These moments of dark comedy served as substitutes to Orwell=s lengthy monologues, which of course was viewed as a poor alternative by some of the die hard fans of 1984, but it was simply a way in which the film makers could break free of the source material to help transform Brazil into a completely unique experience.

Also, considering Brazil was meant to be infused with more of a comedic undertone than the book, the film makers strove to make the protagonist not quite as depressing as Winston from 1984, because, while the character in the movie could hardly be considered charismatic, a completely depressed main character leaves little room for comedy. Sam, the protagonist of Brazil, was instead made into a much weaker character than Winston. Both were meek office workers, but while Winston decided for himself to rebel against the rules of society, join the resistance and fight the system, Sam is bullied into everything he does, including his eventual decision to fight against the government. Every major change in his life is made by either his mother, the woman he loves, or a fugitive/electrician played by Robert DeNiro. By making Sam such an impotent character, any attempt to put his foot down and make a decision for himself fails miserably, and the laughter of the audience follows. If he were as depressing as Winston, the audience would probably feel guilty about laughing at his misfortune.

While Brazil made the protagonist meeker than in 1984, the graphic novel version favored a deadly anarchist hell bent on destroying the government in power. This drastic change could easily be dismissed as being against the entire point of 1984, depriving the book of all meaning and so forth. Completely altering the main character did indeed make the graphic novel very different, but V, the main character from V for Vendetta, despite his resourcefulness and cunning, suffered the same tragic outcome as both Sam and Winston, which all support Orwell’s view that individual efforts were futile, but "only there, in those swarming disregarded masses…could the force to destroy the Party ever be generated" (Orwell 69). V for Vendetta had more of an action hero as the protagonist simply because most graphic novels, with certain exceptions, are expected to have action sequences, and a character as weak as Sam or Winston would not provide such opportunities. Despite the fact that most graphic novels are no longer geared toward children, the medium has not gained enough popularity to explore different genres. While, in the future, graphic novel dramas or comedies could experience a popularity boom, for now the only widely accepted genre in graphic novels is action, and V for Vendetta would probably be at the bottom of the bargain bin at your local bookstore covered by hundreds of trashy romance novels and a thick layer of dust right now if the main character was a wimp rather than a maniacal and deadly anarchist.

Similar to movies, graphic novels have to focus more on visuals rather than exposition in order to avoid becoming too preachy. The downside to graphic novels is that, unlike a book or a movie, text is extremely limited. There is only space in each picture for a tiny blurb, which means that the graphic novel has to get across the overall idea of 1984 using a fraction of the amount of words: a difficult task for a book comprised mostly of monologue. This leaves a reliance on the visual aspect of the graphic novel more so than a film: pictures have to drive the story, the colors used have to set the mood and tone of the story, and the characters have to pantomime without appearing to be mute. V for Vendetta uses colors in such a way as to set the tone of the story rather than simply make it colorful and pretty. Society is very dark and drab, because in a land where independent thought is against the law, nothing creative can possibly occur. The only bright colors are used in the protagonist's hideout, where books, music, and films are kept; everything is bright and vibrant in these scenes in order to portray the hideout as the last sanctuary in the world. In a book, a lengthy description of the hideout could invoke the same effect. In a movie, dialogue and sweeping camera angles could help portray the hideout as a sanctuary, but a graphic novel, without such basic resources as written descriptions or movement at its disposal has only the tiny frames on each page to describe the sanctuary.

The impressive thing about both Brazil and V for Vendetta is that they both took a risk by deviating from 1984, but the final products were great in spite of that, because each story stood up on its own rather than settling for cheap imitation. These three works, despite having the same theme, are rarely compared to each other. When discussing the film Brazil, I have not heard anyone claim the book was better, not because of the film's superiority, but because no one viewed the movie as a straight adaptation, and so a direct comparison would seem fairly irrelevant. The same could be said in regards to V for Vendetta. Rather than rehashing the events of the book and drawing in pictures or filming the sequences verbatim, Brazil and V for Vendetta morphed a classic piece of literature into something wholly original so that each work was meant for their own specific mediums, whether it be in book, movie, or graphic novel form, with little in common other than a unifying theme.

Works Cited
Dir. Terry Gilliam. Perf. Jonathan Pryce and Robert DeNiro. Universal, 1985.
Moore, Alan. V for Vendetta. New York: DC Comics, 1988.
Orwell, George. 12M. London: Penguin Books, 1949.

Adaptations, Limitations, and Imitations-Draft 1

In my sophomore year of high school, one of the required readings in my British Literature course was George Orwell's 1984. The book focused on a meek office worker that fights a totalitarian government that has outlawed any behavior considered to be immoral. I had finished the book in its entirety in a matter of days, and needless to say I loved it. The teacher of the course, who also happened to be a graphic novel enthusiast, offhandedly suggested that everyone who enjoyed the book also read a graphic novel entitled V for Vendetta. I was confused as to why my English teacher was comparing a classic piece of literature to a graphic novel. At that time, I was of the opinion that graphic novels were nothing more than glorified comic books, and the audience who enjoyed them were illiterate morons with attention spans as low as their intelligence level.

When I was much younger, I would always steal the newspaper from my father and read the funny papers; revisiting them years later, I felt embarrassed that at one point in my life I was actually entertained by these newspaper blurbs that were about as funny as the obituary section. In my ignorance, I came to categorize graphic novels as one notch higher than the comic strips in the newspaper. As is mostly the case with me, my opinion turned out not only to be terribly naive, but completely unfounded as well. If ever an opinion could be considered flat-out incorrect, my former stance on graphic novels would fit that category. Just to prove myself right, I chose to read V for Vendetta just to be absolutely certain it didn't hold a candle to a great piece of literature like 1984. Much to my surprise, I was equally impressed by the graphic novel even though it had a completely different storyline and characters. Although V for Vendetta deviated greatly from its source of inspiration, the theme and mood of the book were translated flawlessly
into graphic novel form.

Following my sudden revelation that there is a such thing as a great graphic novel, I wanted to discover how well 1984 could be translated to film. I had my pick among several versions of 1984, and in the end I rented a film called Brazil, which was a rather strange take on 1984. Much like V for Vendetta, Brazil was a rather loose adaptation. Instead of taking events straight from the book and filming them, Brazil only took the basic outline of 1984 and made the rest up. After seeing all of the other :films based on Orwell's novel, I believe it is safe to say that Brazil was the only film version of 1984 that was able to turn the tragic story of an office worker brainwashed by the government into a dark comedy.

George Orwell fills 1984 with expositions about the fearful citizens of a totalitarian society that submit to such a harsh ruler because of the punishment they will undergo should they consider rebelling. He delves into the nature of fear that causes everyone to obey every law that is passed, regardless of how irrational it may seem. At the very end of the book, Winston, the protagonist, begs that the woman he committed the crime of sexual activity with be tortured in his place. Orwell's basic theory was that instilling fear in someone put that person at your will. Orwell wrote about such things in long passages that comprised most of the book. While these passages are what make the book so insightful, they are hardly visual. What works very well in writing is not perfectly adaptable in pictures, whether the pictures are in motion or still. 1984 was not written for the screen, and so naturally film makers and graphic novelists alike had plenty of freedom to interpret the book any way they wished, deviating from the story to make both the film and the graphic novel distinctly different works instead of just a rehash of a story everyone already knows.

Brazil used some of the scenes in 1984 and satirized them to such an extent as to make some of the darkest events rather funny, which will happen when the director of the movie is the same man who directed several Monty Python movies. Orwell described the society as chaotic, yet never went into everyday life type of chaos. In Brazil, the chaos of society is portrayed visually rather than explained: in most of the interiors, ventilation systems are strewn about everywhere with no sense of order, a massive amount of paperwork must be filled out before the simplest task can be performed by the government, bombings from another country occur throughout the entire movie randomly, and the most minute typographical error results in the death of an innocent man. These moments of dark comedy served as substitutes to Orwell's lengthy monologue. Also, since Brazil was more of a comedy than the book, the film makers strove to make the protagonist not quite as depressing as Winston from 1984. Sam, the protagonist of Brazil, was made into a much weaker character than Winston. Both were meek office workers, but while Winston decided for himself to rebel against the rules of society, Sam is bullied into everything he does, including his eventual decision to fight against the government. Every major change in his life is made by either his mother, the woman he loves, or a fugitive/electrician played by Robert DeNiro. By making Sam such an impotent character, any attempt to put his foot down and make a decision for himself fails miserably, and the laughter of the audience follows.

While Brazil made the protagonist meeker than in 1984, the graphic novel version favored a deadly anarchist hell bent on destroying the government in power. Although this would seem against the theme of 1984, his tragic outcome is the same as both Sam's and Winston's, which all support Orwell's view that an individual can't accomplish everything on his own. V for Vendetta had more of an action hero as the protagonist simply because most graphic novels, with certain exceptions, are expected to have action sequences, and a character as weak as Sam or Winston wouldn't provide such opportunities.

Similar to movies, graphic novels have to focus more on visuals rather than exposition in order to avoid becoming too preachy. The downside to graphic novels is that, unlike a book or a movie, text is extremely limited. There is only space in each picture for a tiny blurb, which means that the graphic novel has to get across the overall idea of 1984 using a fraction of the amount of words: a difficult task for a book comprised mostly of monologue. This leaves a reliance on the visual aspect of the graphic novel more so than a film. Pictures have to drive the story, the colors used have to set the mood and tone of the story, and the characters have to pantomime without appearing to be mute. V for Vendetta uses colors in such a way as to set the tone of the story rather than simply make it colorful and pretty. Society is very dark and drab, because in a land where independent thought is against the law, nothing creative can possibly occur. The only bright colors are used in the protagonists hideout, where books music, and films are kept; everything is bright and shiny in these scenes in order to portray the hideout as the last sanctuary in the world.

The impressive thing about both Brazil and V for Vendetta is that they both took a risk by deviating from 1984, but the final products were great in spite of that, because each story stood up on its own. Rather than rehashing the events of the book and drawing in pictures or filming the sequences verbatim, Brazil and V for Vendetta morphed a classic piece of literature into something wholly original so that each work was meant for their own specific mediums, whether it be in book, movie, or graphic novel form, with little in common other than a unifying theme.

Adaptations, Limitations, and Imitations-Draft 2

In my sophomore year of high school, one of the required readings in my British Literature course was George Orwell's 1984. The book focuses on a meek office worker who fights a totalitarian government that has outlawed any behavior considered to be immoral. This included independent thought, sex out of wedlock, and basically any active viewed as improper. I had finished the book in its entirety in a matter of days, and, needless to say, I loved it. The teacher of the course, who also happened to be a graphic novel enthusiast, offhandedly suggested that everyone who enjoyed the book also read a graphic novel entitled V for Vendetta. I was confused as to why my English teacher was comparing a classic piece of literature to a graphic novel. At that time, I was of the opinion that graphic novels were nothing more than glorified comic books, and the audience who enjoyed them were illiterate morons with attention spans as low as their intelligence level.

When I was much younger, I would always steal the newspaper from my father and read the funny papers; revisiting them years later, I felt embarrassed that at one point in my life I was actually entertained by these newspaper blurbs that were about as funny as the obituary section. In my ignorance, I carne to categorize graphic novels as one notch higher than the comic strips in the newspaper. As is mostly the case with me, my opinion turned out not only to be terribly naive, but completely unfounded as well. If ever an opinion could be considered flat-out incorrect, my former stance on graphic novels would fit that category. Just to prove myself right, I chose to read V for Vendetta just to be absolutely certain it didn't hold a candle to a great piece of literature like 1984. My drive to read this graphic novel originated solely from my naivete which told me that graphic novels were for children and grown men with maturity levels comparable to children. Much to my surprise, by the end of V for Vendetta, which took only a few hours to complete, I was equally impressed by the graphic novel even though it had a completely different storyline and cast of characters. Although V for Vendetta deviated greatly from its source of inspiration, the theme and mood of the book were translated flawlessly into the graphic novel medium: a medium I now suddenly and deeply respected.

Following my sudden revelation that there is such a thing as a great graphic novel, I wanted to discover how well 1984 could be translated to film. I had my pick among several versions of 1984, and in the end I rented a film called Brazil, which was a rather strange take on 1984. Much like V for Vendetta, Brazil was a rather loose adaptation. Instead of taking events straight from the book and filming them, Brazil only took the basic outline of 1984 and made the rest up. After seeing all of the other films based on Orwell's novel, I believe it is safe to say that Brazil was the only film version of 1984 that was able to turn the tragic story of an office worker brainwashed by the government into a dark comedy.

George Orwell fills 1984 with expositions about the fearful citizens of a totalitarian society that submit to such a harsh ruler because of the punishment they will undergo should they consider rebelling. He delves into the nature of fear that causes everyone to obey every law that is passed, regardless of how irrational it may seem. At the very end of the book, Winston, the protagonist, begs that the woman he committed the crime of sexual activity with be tortured in his place. Orwell's basic theory was that instilling fear in someone put that person at your will. Orwell wrote about such things in long passages that comprised most of the book. While these I passages are what make the book so insightful, they are hardly visual. What works very well in writing is not perfectly adaptable in pictures, whether the pictures are in motion or still. 1984 was not written for the screen, and so naturally film makers and graphic novelists alike had plenty of freedom to interpret the book any way they wished, deviating from the story to make both the film and the graphic novel two distinctly different works instead of just a rehash of a story everyone already knows.

Brazil used some of the scenes in 1984 and satirized them to such an extent as to make some of the darkest events rather funny, which will happen when the director of the movie is the same man who directed several Monty Python movies. Orwell described the society as chaotic, yet never went into everyday life type of chaos: a subject Brazil chose to portray in a very strange manner. In Brazil, the chaos of society is portrayed visually rather than explained: in most of the interiors, gaudy ventilation systems are strewn about everywhere with no sense of order, a massive amount of paperwork must be filled out before the simplest task can be performed by the government, bombings from another country occur throughout the entire movie randomly, and the most minute typographical error results in the death of an innocent man. These moments of dark comedy served as substitutes to Orwell's lengthy monologue, which of course was viewed as a poor alternative by some of the die hard fans of 1984, but it was simply a way in which the film makers could break free of the source material to help transform Brazil into a completely unique experience.

Similar to movies, graphic novels have to focus more on visuals rather than exposition in order to avoid becoming too preachy. The downside to graphic novels is that, unlike a book or a movie, text is extremely limited. There is only space in each picture for a tiny blurb, which means that the graphic novel has to get across the overall idea of 1984 using a fraction of the amount of words: a difficult task for a book comprised mostly of monologue. This leaves a reliance on the visual aspect of the graphic novel more so than a film. Pictures have to drive the story, the colors used have to set the mood and tone of the story, and the characters have to pantomime without appearing to be mute. V for Vendetta uses colors in such a way as to set the tone of the story rather than simply make it colorful and pretty. Society is very dark and drab, because in a land where independent thought is against the law, nothing creative can possibly occur. The only bright colors are used in the protagonist's hideout, where books, music, and films are kept; everything is bright and shiny in these scenes in order to portray the hideout as the last sanctuary in the world. In a book, a lengthy description of the hideout could invoke the same effect. In a movie, dialogue and sweeping camera angles could help portray the hideout as a sanctuary ~ but a graphic novel, without such basic resources as written descriptions or movement at its disposal has only the tiny frames on each page to describe the sanctuary.

The impressive thing about both Brazil and V for Vendetta is that they both took a risk by deviating from 1984~ but the final products were great in spite of that, because each story stood up on its own rather than settling for cheap imitation. These three works, despite having the same theme, are rarely compared to each other. When discussing the film Brazil, I have not
heard anyone claim the book was better, not because of the film's superiority, but because no one viewed the movie as a straight adaptation, and so a direct comparison would seem fairly
irrelevant. The same could be said in regards to V for Vendetta. Rather than rehashing the events of the book and drawing in pictures or filming the sequences verbatim, Brazil and V for Vendetta morphed a classic piece of literature into something wholly original so that each work was meant for their own specific mediums, whether it be in book, movie, or graphic novel form, with little in common other than a unifying theme.

Adaptations, Limitations, and Imitations-Draft 3

As I became more of an avid reader, all other forms of entertainment now came in a distant second to a good book. Much like comic books before it, films were now nothing more than a fleeting childhood pastime. I considered books to be much more than a form of escapism; they were philosophies on life told through fascinating stories. I considered films to be books lost in translation, with popcorn entertainment replacing the books' deeper meaning. As for comic books, I considered that particular pastime as the one former interest I should be ashamed to call my own. All three mediums were at different levels on the social hierarchy I had unfairly created, with books coming in first, movies in a distant second, and comics finishing dead last. This hierarchy was tom down worse than the Berlin Wall when, in my sophomore year of high school, I was introduced to my first graphic novel.

One of the required readings in my British Literature course that year was George Orwell's 1984. The book focuses on a meek office worker who fights a totalitarian government that has outlawed any behavior considered to be immoral. This included independent thought, sex out of wedlock, and basically any attempt to be unique. I had finished the book in its entirety in a matter of days, and, needless to say, I loved it. The teacher of the course, who also happened to be a graphic novel enthusiast, ofi11andedly suggested that everyone who enjoyed the book also read a graphic novel entitled V for Vendetta by Alan Moore. I was confused as to why my English teacher was comparing a classic piece of literature to a graphic novel. At that time, I was of the opinion that graphic novels were nothing more than glorified comic books, and the audience who enjoyed them were illiterate morons with attention spans as low as their intelligence level.

Just to prove myself right, I chose to read V for Vendetta just to be absolutely certain it didn't hold a candle to a great piece of literature like 1984. My drive to read this graphic novel originated solely from my naivete which told me that graphic novels were for children and grown men with maturity levels comparable to children. Much to my surprise, by the end of V for Vendetta, which took only a few hours to complete, I was equally impressed by the graphic novel even though it had a completely different storyline and cast of characters. Although V for Vendetta deviated greatly from its source of inspiration, the theme and mood of the book were translated flawlessly into the graphic novel medium: a medium I now suddenly and deeply respected.

Much like V for Vendetta, Brazil was a rather loose adaptation. Instead of taking events straight from the book and filming them, Brazil only took the basic plot outline of 1984 and made the rest up. After seeing all of the other films based on Orwell's novel, I believe it is safe to say that Brazil was the only film version of 1984 that was able to turn the tragic story of an office worker brainwashed by the government into a dark comedy.

George Orwell fills 1984 with expositions about the fearful citizens of a totalitarian society that submit to such a harsh ruler because of the punishment they will undergo should they consider rebelling. He delves into the nature of fear that causes everyone to obey every law that is passed, regardless of how irrational it may seem. At the very end of the book, Winston, the protagonist, begs that the woman he committed the crime of sexual activity with be tortured in his place. Orwell's basic theory was that instilling fear in someone put that person at your will. Orwell wrote about such things in long passages that comprised most of the book. While these passages are what make the book so insightful, they are hardly visual. What works very well in writing is not perfectly adaptable in pictures, whether the pictures are in motion or still. 1984 was not written for the screen, and so naturally film makers and graphic novelists alike had plenty of freedom to interpret the book any way they wished, deviating from the story to make both the film and the graphic novel two distinctly different works instead of just a rehash of a story everyone already knows.

Brazil used some of the scenes in 1984 and satirized them to such an extent as to make some of the darkest events rather funny, which will happen when the director of the movie, Terry Gilliam, is the same man who directed several Monty Python movies. Orwell described the society as chaotic, yet never went into everyday life type of chaos: a subject Brazil chose to portray in a very strange manner. In Brazil, the chaos of society is portrayed visually rather than explained: in most of the interiors, gaudy ventilation systems are strewn about everywhere with no sense of order, a massive amount of paperwork must be filled out before the simplest task can be performed by the government, bombings from another country occur throughout the entire movie randomly, and the most minute typographical error results in the death of an innocent man. These moments of dark comedy served as substitutes to Orwell's lengthy monologue, which of course was viewed as a poor alternative by some of the die hard fans of 1984, but it was simply a way in which the film makers could break free of the source material to help transform Brazil into a completely unique experience.

Also, considering Brazil was meant to be infused with more of comedic undertone than the book, the film makers strove to make the protagonist not quite as depressing as Winston from 1984, because, while the character in the movie could hardly be considered charismatic, a completely depressed main character leaves little room for comedy. Sam, the protagonist of Brazil, was instead made into a much weaker character than Winston. Both were meek office workers, but while Winston decided for himself to rebel against the rules of society, join the resistance and fight the system, Sam is bullied into everything he does, including his eventual decision to fight against the government. Every major change in his life is made by either his mother, the woman he loves, or a fugitive/electrician played by Robert DeNiro. By making Sam such an impotent character, any attempt to put his foot down and make a decision for himself fails miserably, and the laughter of the audience follows.

Similar to movies, graphic novels have to focus more on visuals rather than exposition in order to avoid becoming too preachy. The downside to graphic novels is that, unlike a book or a movie, text is extremely limited. There is only space in each picture for a tiny blurb, which means that the graphic novel has to get across the overall idea of 1984 using a fraction of the amount of words: a difficult task for a book comprised mostly of monologue. This leaves a reliance on the visual aspect of the graphic novel more so than a film. Pictures have to drive the story, the colors used have to set the mood and tone of the story, and the characters have to pantomime without appearing to be mute. V for Vendetta uses colors in such a way as to set the tone of the story rather than simply make it colorful and pretty. Society is very dark and drab, because in a land where independent thought is against the law, nothing creative can possibly occur. The only bright colors are used in the protagonist's hideout, where books, music, and films are kept; everything is bright and shiny in these scenes in order to portray the hideout as the last sanctuary in the world. In a book, a lengthy description of the hideout could invoke the same effect. In a movie, dialogue and sweeping camera angles could help portray the hideout as a sanctuary, but a graphic novel, without such basic resources as written descriptions or movement at its disposal has only the tiny frames on each page to describe the sanctuary.

Adaptations, Limitations, and Imitations-Process Memo

For the first draft of my second paper, I wrote down as many ideas as I could think of. It was in a random order, with many of the ideas going nowhere. When I had searched through all of my notes, I picked out some of the points that were acceptable at the very least and expanded upon them even more. The finished product resembled a research paper, except it had no focus or a rational arrangement of ideas. A revision would have benefited the paper greatly, but, as it was the first draft, I resisted the urge and handed in what could only be considered a 'shitty first draft.

The main problem with the first draft was its lack of focus, so naturally the backspace key came in handy during my revision. Instead of worrying about meeting the length requirement of the paper, I chose to concentrate on the focus more than anything else. By eliminating everything except the very basic ideas, I was able to sort of start fresh while retaining the same basic layout of the first draft.

The third draft was basically a tweaking of the second draft. Now that I was more confident in the paper's focus, I opted to elaborate more on the points already in the paper in order to meet the six page minimum. The detail provided in the third draft, I feel, was the most beneficial to my paper. It not only served to make the paper more personal, but also to make it entertaining for the reader. The third draft transformed the paper from an assignment to an interesting read.

The final draft of the paper involved the actual research part of the research paper. In previous drafts, I discussed Orwell's philosophy without providing real evidence. The only work I quote is the book 1984, because it is the main focus of my paper, and the quotes I chose to include support my interpretation of Orwell's philosophy.