MovieChat Forums > Affinity (2008) Discussion > Not Andrew Davies!

Not Andrew Davies!

posted 16 years ago by wondernat
16 replies | jump to latest

I see the same guy who wrote the screenplay for "Affinity" is the same one who did the adaptation of "TTV." UgH. Was anyone else really bothered (and a bit disturbed) by Mr. Davies' creative liberties? The ending really shocked me - it was a complete 180 from the book, and the "Nan" he wrote wasn't at all Nancy Astley. (Note I'm not mentioning the bit he said in the DVD extras, where he made a very subtle perverted comment regarding burlesque lesbians.)

FOR THOSE WHO READ THE BOOK ("AFFINITY"):

Watch, maybe in the end Margaret will have a happy ending and Selena's betrayal will all be forgotten... and we'll end up with a DVD ending that has NOTHING to do with the book.

I really hope Mr. Davies did a better job with this one as opposed to TTV... otherwise, they'll need to remake "Affinity" and ask the "Fingersmith" screenwriters to fix it up.

[–] wieldy 16 years ago

Yes, this is Andrew Davies, one of the best screen writers and television adaptation writers of the last 10 years. Yes, he changed the end of Tipping, but the ending he put in didn't change anything to do with the story. In the book, as you well know, Nan turns down Kitty and stays with Florence. This is exactly what happens in the TV version, it's just showed in a more dramatic manner. After all, the ending of the book isn't an ending that would work on TV.

You have to remember that telvision and books are a totally different medium. In a book you tell the story, on TV you have to show the story and that's all her did.

I can't say I thought the character of Nan was particularly different from TV show to book, I don't see what could be disturbing at all in his adaptation and I really don't consider the ending to be a '180' from the book. After all, Nan made the same choice in the book as she did in the adaptation.

Andrew Davies has provided the scripts for some of the best novel adaptations in recent years. I expect his Affinity will be of similarly high quality.

Dear Buddha, please send me a pony and a plastic rocket.

[–] wondernat 16 years ago

If Davies is truly "one of the best screen writers and television adaptation writers of the last 10 years" then I need watch more of his stuff because I'm certainly not at all impressed with what he did with TTV.

This is why I feel Davies' ending was drastically different: Davies altered the very core of Nancy. TTV is a coming-of-age drama of a girl who eventually comes back to herself, despite being caught up in the glitzy life of Victorian London. Nancy spread her wings, came out of the closet by following her first love, got screwed, got lost, became a rich lady's bitch, and came back to square one more mature, wiser and more cautious.

The TV adaptation, on the other hand, overlooks this important evolution of the character by suggesting that who Kitty created ("Nan King") was who she was and wanted to be. What did Nan ultimately learn about her relationships and herself, accordingly to the TV adaptation? In my view, TTV is a great book because it brings the character back 360 and reinforces the importance of learning from one's mistakes and moving forward with a wiser head.

Yes, Nancy did eventually choose Flo over Kitty, but that's very superficial - it's not right to comply with the superficial details while sacrificing the real substance of the character. The adaptation was unsatisfactory to me because I really couldn't see why Nancy chose Flo over Kitty. However, in the book, it made a lot more sense... Nancy was coming home to the family she carefully created with love and maturity.

Lastly, There are many other great adaptations out there because they don't sacrifice the core of a character for the sake of superficial drama. For instance, on the cover of "Affinity" there's two girls kissing. Thus, I'm not at all surprised if Davies would have the protagonists hook up to add unnecessary drama to this great narrative piece. The screenwriters who adapted "Fingersmith" did a much better job.

[–] generalsmuts 16 years ago

Ever see the 1995 TV version of Pride and Prejudice? It's probably considered one of the best TV series of all time.

TTV wasn't amazing, but it certainly didn't butcher the book. A TV adaption will never be as good as the book - but he made some mistakes - it doesn't mean he'll make them again - he has made some very good series. Also, in Pride and Prejudice no one ever kisses anyone - I'm sure he'll be able to cope with the protagonists never consummating their relationship in Affinity, unless I've underestimated him.

[–] wieldy 16 years ago

I don't think Andrew will have a problem at all with the non-consummated angle of Selena and Margaret's relationship. After all, all the sex we see in TTV is specifically included in the book.

One of my main gripes about the Fingersmith adaptation was that they added in a sex scene. I felt they were just doing it to tittilate as it added nothing to the story whatsoever. One thing Sarah Water's excellent writing does not need is sensilisation.

Dear Buddha, please send me a pony and a plastic rocket.

[–] wondernat 16 years ago

ah-ha! I did watch "Circle of Friends" after reading the book. Yes, again I see how Mr. Davies likes to butcher novels to fit a formulaic, Hollywood-ish craptastic ending. Feminists and fans of the novels didn't deserve the ending they got from the film. Nope, my vote is decidedly "nay" on Mr. Davies.

[–] wieldy 16 years ago

Well, I stand by what I said and I have to disagree with you all. I also have to disagree with the OP's interpretation of Nan's character returning to where it was a the beginning of the book. That's a long way off how I see it.

Dear Buddha, please send me a pony and a plastic rocket.

[–] ray-gen 16 years ago

I think he did a great job with ttv. i think that when you are adapting from a book, you have to cut and change some parts to make it fit. he had to fit the whole book in 3 hours!!! and he did a great job, cuz he kept the essence of it. ya he changed some stuff, like it doesn't end in the park with the thousands of people and she doesn't see all of the women she was with because maybe they didn't have the buget to do that.but we still get it and the sense of the story is the same. I am sure affinity will be great.

[–] ingemund 16 years ago

I remember Ms. Waters saying somewhere in an interview... she made Fingersmith have a happy ending because a friend told her she didn't like the ending for Affinity, that novels should be "triumphant" or something like that. Not to say she regretted how she ended Affinity, but it might change the way the adaptation ends.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing an extra twist at the end... Margaret secretly follows them abroad, then looks on half-hidden in a doorway while the sabotaged boat sinks, or something. :) But Andrew Davies isn't, usually, creative in that direction, so we'll have to see.

[–] wieldy 16 years ago

Whilst I'm not a reader who needs a happy ending to be satisfied with a book, the ending of Affinity does have a particular bearing on repeated readings.

The first time I read Affinity the twist at the end totally blew me away. As a reader I'd come to sympathise with Margaret and hope for her to find some happiness in her life. It took me a long time to read the book for a second time as I knew how heart-rending the ending is and it was very hard to will myself to read the book knowing I was heading towards darkness the further in I got.

Dear Buddha, please send me a pony and a plastic rocket.

[–] GemaMelnicenko 16 years ago

****slight Spoilers****

I have actually just finished watching Affinity and i have to say that i agree with the butcher theory,

if you enjoyed the book then please stay clear,

the adaptation is rushed into an hour and a half with much of the storyline skipped over, many of the charecters have been cut out compleatly or made to be the opposite of as you see them in the book

the charecter of Margaret has been taken from the sweet but lost girl she is in the book to some bitter woman,
the dialoge is rushed and much of it far from the actual book itself, there has also been a change in the ending i think to try and make it less depressing but instead has made a pointless confusing conclusion to the film,

i will admitt the book was not my favorate but just because i didn't like the way it ended, although it is beautifully written,

the tv adaptation however does not do it justice at all,

I also feel i have to agree with the comments on Nancys charecter in TTV they did sway away from the roots of her charecter for example in the book she is nieve and is told what TTV means by Flo but in the film its the opposite way around i have to say i found this insulting to the core of the charecter of Nan and also putting her back on stage was a bit poor as in the book it was actually Flo who was the leading lady now they really dulled down the charecter of Flo which i found quite dissapointing

I want to walk into the sea and never come back - Runt

[–] waybexxx 16 years ago

TBH Tipping was pretty crap and the book wasn't up to much either... there again i'm not a lesbian and i don't feel the need to big it up at every available opportunity. It's almost like there's a 'it features lesbians, i'm a lesbian, so i MUST like it' attitude going on.

Affinity was just as average, but with an even weaker ending.

As for these book/tv or film adaptation debates... erm get over it, it doesn't really matter which is better does it? Think of it as some artist doing a cover version... if you liked the original then the poorer cover version doesn't suddenly make you dislike the former, or indeed prefering the cover probably wouldn't make you change your attitude regards the original. Like either or both or neither

And is it really the same Andrew Davies who wrote Game On? (itself a piss poor attempt to emulate Men Behaving Badly, that missed the mark by many, many miles)He really can't be as good as some of you are making out.

[–] wieldy 16 years ago

Wow, that's a pretty harsh post Waybexx. The disdain you have for lesbian culture comes over loud and clear.

You have your opinion of Tipping and Affinity, fair enough, but it's not the same opinion as most of us here on this board. So, you're welcome to air your opinion, but there's no need to be quite so scornful of those of us also exercising our right to air our opinions.

I don't think there's any idea that lesbians should like Sarah Water's books just because she is a gay writer writing about gay characters. I love her books because she is an brilliant writer. Also, what is wrong with lesbian culture? Most books/films/TV is geared towards straight people so it is really so harmful that some of us in the lesbian community enjoy and celebrate lesbian culture?

Dear Buddha, please send me a pony and a plastic rocket.

[–] waybexxx 16 years ago

Let's be honest here, whatever it may be - a book, film, TV show, features lesbians then you can almost put money on a lesbian becoming a big fan. Of course they will show an interest, as it's something close to their hearts, but a lot of the time it really is like they're ticking the boxes for the sake of it. You ask most gay women what they're particular faves are from books, TV, film, music etc and at the top of most lists will be the same old stuff.. yup, that's just the way it is. I'm not knocking it but it is the case nine times out of ten.

I stick by what I said about her not being a great writer - that'll be my opinion then.

I also stand by what i said... lesbians will 'big up' Waters because she herself is gay and she uses lesbian characters. It smacks of solidarity sister! Which leads me on to your final point...

Is there really still a lesbian community - it makes it sound like it's a special club. Does being gay still need to be celebrated? It's the gay pride thing on a smaller scale. Why do so many feel the need to celebrate and tell the world they're gay? As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't make any difference whether you're straight, gay, bi or whatever - sure there's a very small minority that can't accept this but surely those few don't still get you down? I doubt very much the homophobes effect your everyday life. Surely everything is equal now and there's nothing left to fight for... and the break down of this so-called community should be applauded. It's not lesbian culture, it's just culture. There doesn't have to be a special name for it.

Like i say, I've absolutely nothing against anyone's sexuality - that really would be odd given my small circle of not necessarily straight friends... I think you get my point, but I do still see this desire to shout about being gay/lesbian if that's your inclination. It seems the world has no problem with it, so perhaps it's time to just get on with it, and perhaps along the way, stop ticking those boxes.

[–] bwfilmfan 16 years ago

Well, that's an oversimplification, with all due respect. Yes, let people like what they like and live as they live. But it's a fact that people like to see people like themselves (or people they can somehow imagine being themselves), in films and books. A lesbian has a book or film she very much favors and it features a lesbian. So? I still don't follow how that's "ticking the boxes." Sexuality's a part of everyday life, and if she happens to read a book and the protagonist reminds her of her own life, or presents a part of her life that's never been featured in the mainstream, of course she's going to be interested, and of course it's going to mean something to her. How is that showing off? More to the point, how does it effect anyone else? Why should she have to favor something that features a heterosexual person in order to confirm her humanity or objectivity? If it were the reverse, and a heterosexual person were demanded to favor a film or book featuring a homosexual, it would be decried as "political correctness," as something unreasonable and insincere...

A lesbian community as "special club." What nonsense. To the extent that lesbians continue to have other lesbian friends and lean on them, it is a result of continued prejudice, maybe not the kind that can get her beaten or get her fired (though such things do happen in exceptional circumstances), but the kind that might very well get her ostracized, or not hired to begin with, or might cause her to make a heterosexual friend with demands rather like yours - 1) never mention a gay book or film 2) never mention a love interest 3) never mention the way that cunning bigots who know not to raise the issue of sexuality overtly might continue to effect your life. That is the new attitude, and it's frustrating. Prejudice has gone underground. So while a person may be more than happy to make friends with others, she also has the right to find strength in others like herself.

All of that notwithstanding, what you're saying makes damned little sense. And, to upset the apple cart, I thought the "Affinity" adaptation was just average.

[–] RanArashi334 16 years ago

Waybexxx, I think your heart and mindset is in the right place, though its a bit idealistic. Weather your gay or straight shouldnt make any difference in ones life. But if you are misguided enough to think that prejudice and even sometimes hate towards gays has vanished then I pity your ignorant perception of the world around you.

Why do gays feel the need to sometimes stand up and announce that they're gay? Because unfortunately in the real world it DOES make a difference weather your gay or straight. It makes a difference if you want to get married, adopt children, live your life in equality. Why did blacks back in the civil rights movement feel the need to stand up and say they were proud of their race? Because back then they were treated unfairly, and the same is happening to gays today. It may be disputed or argued against, but gays have just as much say in their sexuality as blacks have in the color of their skin. Sexuality is NEVER black and white. Your either gay or your straight. It doesn't work that way. The way people should look at it is "Your sexual, or you aren't sexual". Why would someone intentionally pursue a lifestyle that they know would immediately put them in a minority? They are tired of the abuse and they're standing up to say "I'm proud of who I am, and I should be treated like everyone else."

P.S. this is all entirely off topic. On topic, I saw Affinity (before reading the book, I know, blasphemous, blah blah) and it was a complete downer. I'm glad I saw it thought I don't think I'll be watching it again anytime soon.

[–] threeoranges 16 years ago

"Affinity was just as average, but with an even weaker ending."

"Average"? I'm convinced it's one of the greatest novels of the last ten years. It's extraordinary! (Also, I'm straight, before you argue that my sexuality is causing me to "big up" a novel that doesn't deserve it.)

What made you think it was "average"? Did you really see the twist ending coming from a mile away? If so, what made you predict it - and if you didn't see the rug-pull coming, how can you possibly say the ending was "weak"?

AFFINITY is one of those rare and valuable books that teaches us more about ourselves; in my opinion you can only say you recognized nothing in it, or learnt nothing from it, if you have never EVER been mistaken in your judgement of a friend or a lover.