Adaptations: Why You Shouldn’t Mess with Grandma’s Recipes

Adapting a beloved book into a movie or TV series is a high-risk, high-reward endeavour. It’s the golden ticket for Hollywood and streaming services, offering built-in fan bases, effortless marketing, and a ready-made script. Even casting becomes easier (if Henry Cavill has read it, you can bet he’ll want in!). But despite these advantages, so many adaptations fall short, especially in the sci-fi and fantasy genres. Why? Because too often, studios ignore the fundamental rule of adaptation: respect the source material.

This article was sparked by the recent release of The Wheel of Time Season 3 on Amazon Prime, reigniting the eternal debate on what makes a good adaptation. While The Wheel of Time might not be the best case study for my argument, it serves as a reminder that translating epic fantasy to the screen comes with inherent challenges. The moment you introduce the word "but" into the equation—we want to adapt this 14-book epic fantasy series, but we only have eight episodes per season—you’re already compromising the very essence of what makes it epic.

To illustrate the dos and don’ts of adaptation, let’s examine two prime examples: Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy and his The Hobbit trilogy. One is widely regarded as one of the greatest film trilogies ever made; the other, a cautionary tale of what happens when adaptations go awry.

The Lord of the Rings: A Masterclass in Adaptation

So why did The Lord of the Rings succeed where so many others have failed? First, Jackson refused to compromise where it mattered most. When shopping his vision to studios, he initially pitched two films—a compromise in itself, given the depth of Tolkien’s work. Every studio balked, demanding he condense it into one film. A lesser filmmaker might have caved, but Jackson stood firm. His determination paid off when New Line Cinema executives famously said, “Isn’t The Lord of the Rings three books? Why not three films?” The result was a cinematic triumph that preserved the integrity of Tolkien’s masterpiece.

Second, Jackson approached the material with reverence. He wasn’t interested in injecting his own agenda or "fixing" Tolkien’s work. Cuts were carefully considered—Tom Bombadil was omitted because he slowed the pacing; the Scouring of the Shire was left out to avoid multiple endings—but the soul of the story remained intact. Dialogue was often reassigned rather than discarded, ensuring that Tolkien’s voice was still present. Even changes to characters, such as Aragorn’s more gradual acceptance of his destiny or Faramir’s internal struggle, were made for understandable dramatic reasons.

The Hobbit: A Bloated Missed Opportunity

Now contrast this with The Hobbit, a short, whimsical book that could have been beautifully adapted into a single film—or, at most, two. Instead, we got three bloated movies nearly as long as The Lord of the Rings itself. While many behind-the-scenes factors contributed to its downfall, the fundamental sin was violating the core principles that made The Lord of the Rings work.

First, it was compromised from the outset. The decision to expand the story into a trilogy wasn’t a creative one—it was a financial one, made in post-production when studio executives demanded more content to maximize profits. Scenes were artificially stretched, and new subplots were shoved in to justify the extended runtime.

Second, unnecessary additions drowned out Tolkien’s original story. The Hobbit trilogy wasn’t just padded—it was polluted. We didn’t need a manufactured love triangle between an elf and a dwarf, an over-the-top Legolas action subplot, or bizarre new characters like Alfrid, who added nothing but slapstick filler. Worse still, we got nonsensical moments like the ridiculous "drowning a dragon in molten gold" scene and the White Council battling Sauron—sequences that added spectacle but no substance. These changes didn’t enhance the story; they diluted it.

When to Change and When to Hold Firm

Changes in adaptations aren’t inherently bad. The Lord of the Rings made alterations, but they were done with care and purpose. Adding depth to Aragorn’s arc made him a more compelling protagonist. Expanding Arwen’s role gave the film a stronger female presence. Even the controversial removal of the Scouring of the Shire made sense within the context of film pacing.

By contrast, The Hobbit made changes that not only failed to stand up under scrutiny but actively harmed the adaptation. Legolas could have had a brief cameo—fine. But turning him into a major action hero? That’s just studio meddling at its worst. The entire subplot with the White Council and the Ringwraiths? Unnecessary. And the elf-dwarf romance? Forced and unconvincing.

The Industry Problem: Too Many Cooks in the Kitchen

At the heart of bad adaptations is an industry issue: too many stakeholders, too many agendas. A classic proverb states, a camel is what you get when a horse is designed by committee. The best adaptations trust in the source material, making only the changes necessary to fit the new medium.

A recent example of an adaptation getting it right is Denis Villeneuve’s Dune films. Frank Herbert’s novel had problematic elements, particularly in its depiction of homosexuality. The film addressed these issues without compromising the essence of the story. It’s proof that respectful, thoughtful changes can improve an adaptation without alienating fans.

The Audience’s Role: Perspective Matters

As viewers, we also play a part. It’s okay to be disappointed when your favourite book moment gets cut, but it’s important to ask why it happened. Not every omission or change is an insult to the source material—sometimes it’s a necessity of adaptation. And when engaging in online debates, remember: the people you’re arguing with probably love the source material as much as you do. At the end of the day, we all want the same thing—adaptations that honour the stories we cherish.

So, next time a studio decides to "improve" a beloved book, maybe they should take a lesson from Grandma: don’t fuck with the recipe!