Legit? Or an accident that doesn't work?

[pajarita_deDios]

Long story short. The current story I am writing began as a manuscript and then expanded to a screenplay when I was accepted into an advanced screenwriting class at my university. I am still writing the manuscript as well, but as these two mediums are very different in terms of how a story is told (tense, obviously), what makes it good and the rules of legitimacy, I find myself in this situation. So, ultimately the screenplay added another character which I love, and now am keeping in the manuscript, BUT, here's the....dilemma? Though the exact same characters and events occur in both the manuscript and the screenplay, but the protagonists are different in each version. Make sense? Well, I guess the question is, is this a legitimately interesting way to approach the story? Because it is my plan in the future, God willing, that the manuscript be published and that the script be produced as a film. The problem will arise when a reader loves the book then watches the film, will they accept the fact that the book and the screenplay are the same story focusing on different individuals? Or, will it be confusing and wind up just a mistake that never worked? I'm ok with it, because I believe that both of the character's stories deserve to be told, but unfortunately one book or film can't hold all of the information.
Not so short after all I guess...

[Lookin^Up]

I"m no expert, but I would think with as many movies as are out there, that follow the producer's whims rather than the author's intent, you should make both novel version and screenplay much the same. I don't know the pressures of writing screenplays, but I do understand that not everything in a novel can be effectively portrayed on-screen, so the final result may be different. But as the author of both, you should make them at least agree in basic characterizations.

[Keith Wallis]

Are they different enough to warrant a subtitle ?
eg
The strange affair (Sophies view),
The strange affair (Victor's love).

[DrRita]

Hi parjarita,
As a screenwriter and novelist I know your struggle with the two mediums and they ARE very different. However, I don't think having to different protags is a good idea because essentially you are changing a very key element. You will have to decide who's story it is and write that one. Write the book first as it's probably going to be much easier to publish that than find a producer for your film (unless of course you do it yourself!).

[paulchernoch]

I remember the movie, "He said, She said" from a few years ago. The whole point of the movie was how differently two people interpreted the same events. Why not do it cross-media? But you would need a compelling reason. For example, if one character was a visual, action-oriented person, the movie would show their contribution to the story in the best light. The verbal, intellectual, deliberative character would come across better in the book. The tension between these two media could be used to good effect, especially if you find a way to tie them together, say having the visual person reading an article written by the verbal person at the end of the film and disagreeing with their interpretation, while at the end of the book, the verbal person could "see" an interview on TV with the other protagonist and disagree with them. Just one idea of how it could work.

- Paul

[pajarita_deDios]

I guess, honestly, I think of them as two seperate stories.

[DraperJC]

When the book is published blame the differences on Hollywood.

[pajarita_deDios]

haha, thanks draper. ;)