Why did he only adapt books?

Why did he only adapt books?

Attached: 4469.jpg (2600x1560, 124.88K)

He was movier not a booker

As opposed to what? Songs, poems, bathroom wall scrawlings?

He understood that books are the primary source of stories, not original screenplays, and only movies adapted from books can truly be considered art.

Because he was fucking great at it

video games
creepypastas
famous reddit posts

What did you wanted him to adapt? a papyrus?

Jesus Christ is boiling in hot excrement in hell read the Jewish Talmud

I believe hes quoted as saying something along the lines of "a good story is a miracle" and he admitted he struggled to come up with one himself. Hell of a screenwriter though, and even even better director, of course.

>Why did he only adapt books?
because books are more kino than kino

Because he was a hack. He literally went to bookstores to read the first pages of random books to find something that grabs him. A HACK!

>He literally went to bookstores to read the first pages of random books to find something that grabs him.

Attached: giga5.jpg (1280x720, 47.45K)

He foresaw that self-insert degenerate propogandists are the "writers" of original screenplays and wanted none of it

his best film was an original screenplay though. the 2001 novel came afterwards.

Ah yes, the 2001 script
>monkey play around for 20 minutes
>hour and 40 minutes of a spaceship floating in space
>DAVE DAVE PLS DON'T TURN ME OFF DAVE DAVE HELLLOOOO

This. Only rich source material can make a good movie. Movie scripts are garbage trash tier basic stories that are not worth the time.

>only movies adapted from books can truly be considered art

Citizen Kane

Because he died before he could start adapting board games.

Books are usually quite considerably longer than films. a GOOD book is, therefore, packed with good, usable content.
Idk. Probably makes it a lot easier when you have a text to adapt that's rife with material, material of which you as a screenwriter can pick and choose from, blend, or do whatever you want with.
He gets to use material that works, and then fill in with his own ideas and interpretation. The result? A mostly original work of cinema with familiar (if not beloved) backings ERGO a classic.

Didn't he want to do a biopic of Napoleon? Maybe he would've based it off some biography or memoirs but that's not really adapting a book.

doesn't this only prove how ridiculous it is that cinema is considered a serious art? all the great directors have to kneel to daddy literature to make a worthwhile picture.

His main creative goals were aesthetic. He just wanted to bring worlds to life

>doesn't this only prove how ridiculous it is that literature is considered a serious art? all the great writers have to kneel to daddy oral tradition to make a worthwhile text.

Attached: homer.jpg (635x800, 206.04K)

Because he had trouble writing original screenplays

Kek