The following appeared in an ad for a book titled How to Write a Screenplay for a Movie:
“Writers who want to succeed should try to write film screenplays rather than books, since the average film tends to make greater profits than does even a best-selling book. It is true that some books are also made into films. However, our nation’s film producers are more likely to produce movies based on original screenplays than to produce films based on books, because in recent years the films that have sold the most tickets have usually been based on original screenplays.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The speaker presents a sound argument that films are more profitable than books. The premise is true. Films based on books rarely make back their costs and are rarely profitable, whereas films based on original screenplays have been financially successful for both producers and audiences. However, this argument is weak because it relies on several questionable assumptions
First, it assumes that books do not lend themselves to film adaptation. Even successful books such as Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, and Fifty Shades of Grey have been turned into movies. These books are also highly entertaining, and readers have enjoyed them. On the other hand, adaptations of books such as Pride and Prejudice, Gone with the Wind, and An Experiment in Love failed at the box office. To be fair, these adaptations were produced decades ago when audiences had different expectations as to how movies should differ from books, but the film industry has changed significantly since then. Today, audiences expect a movie to be both entertaining and faithful to the book. An adaptation of a book must work in the same way as the book itself, and if it does not, it is unlikely that it will perform well at the box office. Second, the speaker assumes that the success of a film is based solely on ticket sales. The success of the film depends on many factors, such as cast, direction, and acting. A film based on an original screenplay is likely to be better received than a movie based on a book. The cast must fit the roles perfectly, and the actors must portray the characters as convincingly as possible. A director must also ensure that the actors deliver their lines in a way that is natural and believable. Furthermore, he must ensure that the film does not drag or end prematurely. These three factors combined make for a good film, and this, in turn, leads to increased ticket sales
The speaker’s argument is also flawed because it assumes that all films based on original screenplays have been financially successful. For example, Avatar and Titanic were based on best-selling novels, but they flopped at the box office. Furthermore, there are films that are based on original screenplays which have not performed very well, such as The Color Purple, The Notebook, and Cinderella Man. These films, however, did not initially receive a lot of publicity, and this led to such low attendance at the box office that studios decided not to pursue them further. Thus, the success of a film based on an original screenplay is no guarantee of success. Furthermore, while the author is correct in stating that original screenplays sell better than adaptations of books, this does not necessarily imply that original screenplays are better. An original screenplay requires much more work, including writing, editing, and rewriting, and this increases the production costs. If the film does not do well at the box office, it is more likely that the original screenplay will be scrapped than that it will perform better if it is based on a book. This outcome leads to further wasted time and money. Thus, while an original screenplay may be more profitable, it may be less profitable than an original screenplay based on a best-selling book
The speaker’s argument also has several weaknesses. First, it does not provide any evidence to support the claim that films based on original screenplays have greater success than films based on books. The author could have easily cited a dozen or more examples of successful films based on original screenplays, but he does not. Second, he does not cite any specific examples of films based on original screenplays that flopped at the box office. He relies on his assertion that films based on original screenplays are more profitable than films based on books, but he is unable to provide any evidence that this is true. Third, the author assumes that all films based on original screenplays should be turned into films. Since not all books are suitable for adaptation, and not all films based on original screenplays do well at the box office, it is important to analyze each book and film individually to determine whether it will be successful. Finally, the author’s assertion that films based on books do not perform well at the box office is erroneous. Many successful films are based on books, such as The Lord of the Rings and The Hunger Games. It is also important to note that many of the films’ profits derive not from ticket sales, but from merchandising, such as DVD sales and tie-in merchandise such as toys, games, and clothing. Thus, it is inaccurate to state that films based on books are financially unsuccessful.