In 2017, I started creating my major of Media Production. Made up of the Communications, English, and Theater disciplines, my major focuses on what goes into producing a piece of media. With people consuming media like cups of coffee, it’s a field that I’m excited to hop right in to. I wrote about my experience building my major and my experience studying it in my IDS Essay and Update.
My final Applied Project is a short film that I wrote, cast, directed, managed, and edited myself. Through my program here at PSU, I’ve learned that the first half of producing a piece of media comes from the English discipline when it comes to researching, writing, and formatting. Casting is a blend of English and Communications disciplines as it involves communication with actors in order to find out their strengths and chemistry, but must match the characters to be cast. The rest of the process I’ve learned from the many video production classes I’ve taken in the Communications department as well as my English internship at the local television station. In this post, I will detail the process I underwent in the creation of the short film, Goldfish.
For my Research Article, I studied the topic of book adaptations into visual media because I think that the future of adaptations will benefit greatly from making written work into television series over films. As my IDS major is a combination of the Communication, English, and Theatre, it’s a great focus topic. The process of adapting a book to a visual medium includes transferring the source material into a screenplay (English), casting and working with actors to produce the desired product (Theatre), and using video production to bring the concept to screen (Communications). This article delves in to how making a television show and a movie work differently and what there is to gain and lose from both mediums. This gave insight into the benefits of adapting a book (or books) into a TV series over a film series.
In conclusion, the Applied Project greatly shows the skills that I learned through my designed program here at PSU. The Research Article is a great focus of the three disciplines that make up my major and greatly contributed to my understanding of how the industry works. I can’t wait to go out into the world of media production after I graduate.
I’ve been burning the candle at both ends for the majority of the semester, and I’m glad to say that my final applied project is finally ready to be posted onto my ePort. My final project is a short film that I wrote, cast, directed, managed, and edited myself. Through my program here at PSU, I’ve learned that the first half of producing a piece of media comes from the English discipline when it comes to researching, writing, and formatting. Casting is a blend of English and Communications disciplines as it involves communication with actors in order to find out their strengths and chemistry, but must match the characters to be cast. The rest of the process I’ve learned from the many video production classes I’ve taken in the Communications department as well as my English internship at the local television station. In this post, I will detail the process I underwent in the creation of the short film, Goldfish.
I wrote the first draft of Goldfish for Paul Rogalus’ scriptwriting class for an assignment. When we were tasked with coming up for the applied project, I knew what I had written could be polished and shot in an apartment no problem. With the scriptwriting course, everything was written in playwriting format and had to be redone in screenwriting format, which I am more familiar with. The document can be read here.
I was a part of the theatre program at my high school, and a lot of people in that program came to this school around when I did. So when it comes to needing actors, it’s easy for me to find a few. Especially some that will do anything if I offer them cheese in return for their time and effort.
Filming is always interesting with my two friends that helped me out as they may not get a long all the time, but they are willing to hit each other with swords, which the script calls for. We shot it at my apartment that I share with the main actress of the film, which provided us with all of the necessary props and environment that we needed. Directing your friends always an interesting experience as I do not demand taking the lead often but this is one of the few situations where I try. They are also amazing at making the parts their own and this short film is one example.
Editing is something that I’ve always found comfort in because dealing with other people is over and I’m no longer in charge of many humans, just the editing program in front of me. If there are any issues, it’s too late at that point and I have to solve it then and there. There were a few issues that I ran into when using iMovie, mostly audio issues, but there are a few tools built in to smooth it over. Superimposing extra audio effects was a breeze and it really cam together in the end. iMovie also has the great feature of uploading directly to YouTube, and can be seen below. Hope you enjoy 🙂
For my applied project I’m creating a short film from writing it to editing it with everything in between. This covers the three disciplines that make up my major: Communications, English, and Theatre. I also wanted to accompany the entire process with a video diary, but I’ve decided to rather document everything in writing and with some pictures because, as it turns out, it’s difficult to get everyone’s permission in certain aspects of the process of filming. Not everyone wants to be in a final project and it’s a lot more effort to only use footage or blur some people out in the video and it’s also hard to FILM while trying to do everything else. I’m only one person. I can take a few pics here and then but not tape all of it.
The actual creating process of the project has been running along smoothly. I greatly enjoy writing screenplays and plays and had some read aloud and workshopped in Paul Rogalus’ Scriptwriting course to get feedback on how I can improve my writing and have it run more smoothly when actually said by actors while filming. I have the actors I need and we are set to film on Monday due to our busy schedules. I love editing so there won’t be a problem with me locking myself in my room for a few hours to sort all of this through. I’ll be using Final Cut Pro as it is the editing software that I am most familiar with.
Books have been adapted in to new mediums since theatre needed some new ideas. Films, television shows, even musicals today are adaptations of either other films, television shows, or theatre productions due to the lack of originality in today’s society. With this, production companies are often making bank when bringing a popular book or book series to the stage, small screen, or big screen. Iconic stories such as Harry Potter or The Hunger Games grossed millions of dollars at the box office, motivating various production companies to adapt screenplays rather than hire original screenwriters. For years, film has been the main way to adapt a book into a visual medium, but in recent history, television shows like A Series of Unfortunate Events or Game of Thrones are proving the success of adapting a well-known story for television instead. I am studying the topic of book adaptations because I believe through my research that the future of adaptations will benefit greatly from making written work into television series over films. Ready?
As an Interdisciplinary student at Plymouth State University, my major is a combination of the Communication, English, and Theatre, as is this focus topic. The process of adapting a book to a visual medium includes transferring the source material into a screenplay (English), casting and working with actors to produce the desired product (Theatre), and using video production to bring the concept to screen (Communications). This article will delve in to how making a television show and a movie work differently and what there is to gain and lose from both mediums. This will give readers media producers insight on how they benefit.
Firstly, One of the biggest aspects about turning a well known book into either a film or television series is the creative freedom allowed from the author themselves. Studios often choose to purchase the license of the property to adapt it into whatever they want, leaving little for the author to do. Authors can be kept on the production set as consultants, but depending on the contract they sign give them a certain amount of power over the creative decisions. Looking at the Harry Potter film series, J.K. Rowling was a prominent consultant as production had begun before her fifth book was published, and the studio wanted to make sure the movies were consistent with the books she had yet to write. This greatlty helped Alan Rickman with his character of Professor Snape, as “Alan Rickman has said in some interviews how he wasn’t sure of the way to approach Professor Snape until Rowling took him into a little secret – it being all that we learn about him in books 5, 6 and 7.” Contributions like this resulted in a thriving series that became the third-highest grossing film series ever.
With the Percy Jackson movies however, Rick Riordan has discussed in multiple interviews how he fought the studio on so many creative liberties that they took. He had almost no say in what happened and the decisions made by the studio, saying they would “alienate the expected audience” by turning a story aimed at children into a teen film with bland main actors. With this, two mediocre movies were produced, with the second fixing some of the issues with the first, but ultimately killing the franchise.
This brings up the major risk of putting so much time, money, and effort into a movie and have it being a flop. If the movie is a flop, then there isn’t much room for improvement unless a sequel is released or a new adaptation is made. With television, there is room to improve based on the feedback given by audiences as the series goes on. If the first season doesn’t do very well, writers and producers can take the constructive criticism and build off of that and improve as the show goes along. There’s a reason a number of Netflix series such as BoJack Horseman and Grace and Frankie both had rough first seasons but later rose to critical acclaim. With films, there are some focus test groups to get a feel about how people are going to react to it before it comes out and possibly make a few changes. But that’s nothing like the mass audience feedback of a few episodes being released for mass consumption.
An example of this can be found in Freeform’s Shadowhunters, which barely got a passing grade by critics in it’s first season, with it’s main saving grace being its representation of LGBT+ characters. After this, with some firing and hiring of writers and producers, the following season became popular with teen viewers and found some of it’s footing. It became popular enough to make money off of merchandising for the show and not just from its literary source material, The Mortal Instruments.
A few years before this show came out, a film adaptation was released to theaters, and was critically panned. This absolutely killed the chances or even the opportunity to branch out into sequel movies and build upon what they had started. A television show was created based off of the same source material, the creators ran into similar issues, but because of the difference in medium, the show was more of a success than the film series. “As our reboot-heavy era has shown, what fails in one medium can be reborn in another.“
The final comparison I want to make is with Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events. In 2004, a film version was made of the first three books of the well-known children’s series. Starring Jim Carrey and produced by Nickelodeon films, it featured a star studded cast while doing great justice to the source material. Jim Carrey was excited about a possible film series as he stated in an interview “I don’t have a deal [for a sequel], but it’s one that I wouldn’t mind doing again because there are so many characters.” It received positive reviews and made 209 million dollars at the box office with a budget of 142 million. Not the best numbers, and its sequel was ultimately swept under the rug.
In 2014, Netflix attained the rights to turn the beloved series into a television series, to great success. Given a high production budget with the talent of Neil Patrick Harris as Count Olaf, the series thrived through three seasons on Netflix to critical acclaim and obtained numerous accolades. Instead of cramming the information of three books into two hours, there are two hours dedicated to each book at two episodes a piece. The show was amazingly consistent to the books and is hailed as “outshining” the film version in many ways. This is a prime example that even though the movie wasn’t a failure, the platform of television allowed for the same story to be told in a more successful manner.
Even when a television show fails to be picked up with a produced pilot, it’s a heck of a lot cheaper than a feature length film bombing. There are pros and cons of each, with movies having one major payout while a television series makes money over time. Plus, the longer a television show is relevant, the more money it makes in merchandise over time. A television series is a lower risk as they are in general more low budget. More changes can be made over time with television series while in a movie, the decision is final. Ultimately, an author choosing to adapt their piece of work into a television series over a movie would leave a lasting impression in people’s homes and hearts, be a lower risk, and overall be beneficial to the producers of media.
“Why Neil Patrick Harris Is ‘Gobsmacked’ by ‘A Series of
Unfortunate Events’.” Observer, Observer, 12 Feb. 2018,
Alex. “Is Netflix’s A Series of Unfortunate Events Better Than The
Movie?” Screen Rant, Screen Rant, 19 Jan. 2017,
“Here’s How Much It Costs HBO to Produce One Episode of ‘Game of
Thrones’.” CNBC, CNBC, 6 Aug. 2017,
“A Side-by-Side Comparison of the Movie and TV Versions of ‘A
Series of Unfortunate Events’ Reveals One Huge Difference.”
INSIDER, INSIDER, 25 Jan. 2017,