Same stories but different interpretations — which film takes the cake?

By Laila Omar

Some of the best movies of our time are adaptations. But, turning words on paper into pictures on screens can be a challenging task.  

Recently, it was announced that Challengers director Luca Guadanigino is working on a new adaptation of American Psycho. Who’s to say how it will compare to the famous 2000 version but, I’m sure everyone is looking forward to finding out. Considering this, it seems like a good time for a battle of the adaptations. I’ve humbly taken it upon myself to curate a list of films with multiple adaptations and decide which version got it right.

1. Pride & Prejudice

Starting with a classic, Pride and Prejudice. The original story comes from the 1813 novel by Jane Austen. It follows Elizabeth Bennet as an unmarried 25-year-old in the Regency era and follows the tale of her romance with Mr. Darcy. Some consider them to be the original enemies-to-lovers trope. 

Pride & Prejudice (2005)

Directed by Joe Wright

The most well-known adaptation is the 2005 version directed by Joe Wright with leads Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfayden. It made 121.6 million dollars at the box office. For a book that could be a bit slow at times, this film does a good job of removing some scenes from the original story, all while still keeping its heart and essence. The leads help make this movie stand out. Knightly plays Elizabeth Bennett beautifully and faithfully, Macfayden does an excellent job as well, such that, at times, you hate him but also can’t help loving him. Their chemistry and ability to play with that thin line between love and hate sell the story perfectly.

Bride and Prejudice (2004)

Directed by Gurinder Chadha

This next one has a cultural spin and is the Bollywood adaptation: Bride and Prejudice. Released in 2004 and directed by Gurinder Chadha, the film grossed 24.7 million dollars at the box office. The leads of this film were Aishwarya Rai Bachchan (Lalita Bakshi) and Martin Henderson (Mr. Darcy). This version is a unique take on the novel, with the film being a musical and not taking place in the 19th century. These changes do not take away from the adaptation but add a cultural and musical spin to the story and make up for the period change.

Both are great adaptations, but the 2005 version is best for anyone who wants a storyline closer to that of the novel. Although, if you’re willing to see a more unique take, then the 2004 Bollywood adaptation would be just up your alley. 

2. Dracula

Dracula is a horror novel written in 1897 by Bram Stoker. It’s the original story of the famous vampire Count Dracula. It starts with a young lawyer, Johnathan Harker, who visits the Count in Transylvania. Once he discovers the truth about him, Dracula locks him in his castle and moves to London, causing mayhem. 

Drácula (1931)

Directed by George Melford

Directed by George Milder, the 1931 film Drácula is a Spanish film directed by George Melford. with a cast of Carlos Villarías (Count Dracula), Lupita Tovar (Eva), Barry Norton (Juan Harker) and others. The film has been critically acclaimed, drawing global attention. Being a Spanish production also allowed the film to open up to a different market because language dubbing wasn’t a thing then. What makes this version stand out is the performance by the talented cast, especially from Villarías. His performance as Count Dracula is the one we see today in modern adaptations, charming and classy while still being threatening. The cast as a whole is expressive and dramatic in a way you’d expect from a gothic horror film such as this one. Such as other films made in the 30s, this film is entirely in black in white. Despite being expected for a film in this time period, it still does wonders for the story and contributes to the eerie feel. 

Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992)

Directed by Francis Ford Coppola

This next adaptation of Dracula is the 1992 film directed by Francis Ford Coppola, who is well known for films such as The Godfather and The Outsiders. The cast includes Gary Oldman (Count Dracula), Winona Ryder (Mina Harker) and Keanu Reeves (Jonathan Harker). The two adaptations differ slightly in the plot, with this version including the Count falling in love with Harker’s fiancée and going to London to find her. Although, in terms of which stayed more faithful to the novel, the 1992 film does the better job. Coppola’s version also includes more backstory for Dracula and his wife, which gives context to his motivations. While this cast was far from terrible, they didn’t hold up next to the 1933 cast’s expressive and vibrant performances. 

In my opinion, Melford’s 1933 Drácula is the clear winner here, with the outstanding cast performance and atmosphere that immerse you into the story. While it’s not a bad movie, Coppola’s 1992 Dracula doesn’t stand out as much as the older adaptation. 

3. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

The next one is based on the 1964 children’s book Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Ronald Dhal. It follows a young boy, Charlie, living in poverty with his family. He’s overjoyed once he receives a rare golden ticket, allowing him to visit famous chocolatier Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. 

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)

Directed by Mel Stuart

The first adaptation, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, was made in 1971 and directed by Mel Stuart. It’s an ensemble cast with leads Peter Ostrum (Charlie Buckett) and Gene Wilder (Willy Wonka). The film did not receive much success during the time of its release, making only four million dollars. Personally, I feel like this version is unique in its storytelling in that you don’t know where it is taking you, but you are having so much fun that you don’t seem to mind. A special mention should be made to the brilliant work done by the late Gene Wilder, who brings the character of Willy Wonka to life.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

Directed by Tim Burton

Another adaptation is the 2005 version, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory directed by Tim Burton. This version also includes an ensemble cast with leads played by Johnny Depp (Willy Wonka) and Freddy Highmore (Charlie Buckett). This version is more whimsical than the 1971 film and leans much more into wacky humour. Stylistically, the colour choices are also more vibrant and colourful compared to the original. 

Wonka (2023)

Directed by Paul King

The most recent adaptation is the 2023 film Wonka, directed by Paul King and led by Timothee Chalamet, who plays Willy Wonka. This adaptation is more of an origin story, veering away from other adaptations in terms of storyline. It follows a young Willy Wonka and his struggles of starting his chocolate and candy business. Wonka is a prequel to the original story, so in terms of following the novel, this version doesn’t stick very close… or close at all. 

The film has the same exciting and eerie feeling as the others, a sense of mystery about the character’s true intentions. The characterization of Willy Wonka seems to be somewhat similar to the original film and novel, with Chalemet replicating the tone and cadence of the 1971 version. While the songs are good, Wonka in this film doesn’t seem to stand out as much, and the personality of the other characters, unfortunately, falls a bit flat.

The winner in this round is the 1971 adaptation, mainly due to Gene Wilder’s amazing performance. Depp and Chalamet just aren’t able to play the character of Willy Wonka as strangely and whimsically as Wilder, and this ultimately costs them the win for me. 

4. Little Women

Little Women is a novel by author Louisa-May Alcott. It was published in two volumes and released in 1896 and 1897. It follows the four March sisters in the 1860s and chronicles their transition from girlhood to womanhood. 

Little Women (1994)

Directed by Gillion Armstrong

Directed by Gillion Armstrong, the first Little Women adaptation was released in 1994 and made a whopping $94 million at the box office. It included an ensemble cast, with the March girls played by Winona Ryder (Jo March), Kirsten Dunst (Amy March), Trini Alvarado (Meg March) and Claire Danes (Beth March). They all do a great job at embodying their book counterparts, but admittedly, there is a standout. Ryder plays protagonist Jo March, an aspiring author who is considered a progressive-thinking woman for her time. She brings the perfect edge to the character, making her a notable standout in the film.

Little Women (2019)

Directed by Greta Gerwig

The next adaptation is the more recent 2019 film directed by Greta Gerwig, starring Sairose Ronan (Jo March), Florence Pugh (Amy March), Emma Watson (Meg March) and Eliza Scanlen (Beth March). The film quickly became popular during its release, making nearly 219 million dollars at the box office. Despite the original adaptation, this version allowed a whole new generation to rediscover the story of Little Women. Greta Gerwig does an amazing job of adapting the novel and utilizing the talent of her cast, especially that of Ronan and Pugh. But a special mention must be made for Timothee Chalamet (Laurie), who manages to have great onscreen chemistry with all the characters.

While both versions do a great job, the 2019 adaptation brings a fresher take to the story and has a cast that equally carries the weight. Their chemistry convinces the audience that they are indeed a real family.

5. Alice in Wonderland 

Finally, we have the children’s novel Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll. It follows young Alice, who falls down a rabbit hole which leads her to a fantasy world filled with mystical creatures.

Alice in Wonderland (1951)

Directed by Clyde Geronimi.

The first adaptation is the classical animated film made in 1951, directed by Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson and Hamilton Luske. Lead voice actors include Kathyrn Beaumont (Alice), Ed Wyn (Hatter) and Bill Thompson (white rabbit). Everyone loves the nostalgic animated films, and this one is no different. This medium is perfect for a story such as this, not bound down by CGI and able to maintain its whimsical nature through animation. 

Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Directed by Tim Burton

The next adaptation is the 2010 film directed by Tim Burton with leads Mia Wasikowska (Alice), Johnny Depp (Hatter) and Helena Bonham (Red Queen). This adaptation made a whopping one billion dollars at the box office. Unlike the previous adaptation, this version is live-action and was primarily filmed using a green screen. This takes the story to a new level because the audience can experience the fantastical elements of the story in a non-animated medium, adding a tangible quality to Alice’s fantastical experiences.

While the animated adaptation has more of a fairytale feel, the 2010 live-action feels as if it transports you along with Alice, so, for me, it seems to be the winner out of these two.

All of these films are great in different ways, and it’s always fun to see one of your favourite books transformed into a movie. Whether the execution is exceptional or straight-up frustrating, it’s always unique because everyone has their own interpretation.