One of my all-time favorite plays is "Arsenic and Old Lace". It's also one of my favorite movies, and one of my favorite radio dramas. When the stage version debuted on Broadway in 1941, it was a smash hit, leading to a theatrical movie release in 1944, an hour-length radio drama in 1959, and a TV movie in 1967. However, as a fan of this story in all of it's interpretations, I have noticed a numerous amount of differences within the adaptations. Some of them are easily explainable, such as non-plot relevant material being cut for time restrictions, or to better fit the mode the story is being told in, yet some- such as characters' first or last names being changed for seemingly no reason, and whole scenes and conversations being omitted- make less sense. I plan to research the differences in each adaptation and analyze them through adaptation theory, as in-depth as I can.
I think that for such a cultural phenomenon in its heyday, Arsenic and Old Lace has fallen out of public consciousness, despite being a modern genre definer for both the screwball and dark comedy. With my inquiry project, I'm hoping to not only find out more about the history and reasons behind the different adaptations of my favorite play, but also reach an audience of people interested in theatrical history, or better still, people who have a specific interest in this play. As for my research questions, here's what I plan to start with:
- What are the differences in the four main adaptations?
- What are the reasons for these differences, if any?
- How do these differences affect the story and how it's told?
- How do these different adaptations fit into adaptation theory?
No comments:
Post a Comment