the scholars working inside its margins. One of the foundations of the criticism against fidelity studies can be found in Bluestone’s pivotal work Novels into Film (1957: 4–5) where he challenges old truisms (like the apparently indispensable replication of the spirit of the text in the motion picture, or the assessment of the quality of the film according to its parallelisms with the book) in order to address adaptation as a process of mutation conducted in a media that follows different narrative patterns than those of literary works.
Subsequent scholars like Naremore and Murray (as cited in Johnson, 2017: 91–92) built on Bluestone’s ideas, seeking to escape the anchor of fidelity to explore new horizons that include points of focus like the roles and influence of the film industry, the commercial apparatus, or the prospective target audience among others. But either as a pervasive point of return or as the elephant asking for more popcorn in our living room, fidelity has hovered over a vast quantity of the research historically conducted on film adaptation. In fact, albeit some scholars consider it a long gone controversy, fidelity is still a topical issue some academic circles have revisited and used as a platform for current research. Relatively recent works such as Kranz’s and Mellerski’s (2008) or MacCabe’s, Murray’s, and Warner’s (2011) compendiums of essays evince this fact, even if contributions advocate for a nuanced approach that welcomes and encompasses several aspects beyond faithfulness.
That said, the present paper does not revolve around the dual construct created by “faithful” or “unfaithful films”. On the contrary, it understands an adaptation as a product in its own right that “replicates but does not repeat” (Casetti, 2004: 83), that mutates and is shaped by the influence exerted by the macro and micro-agents that may be involved in the process: the new media of representation and its constraints, the film industry, the context of production and reception, ideology and culture, directors, screenwriters, or spectators, among others. In like vein, building our analysis on a comparison between the two products does not imply aligning our work with fidelity studies: our purpose is not to present (in)fidelity as something necessarily positive or negative, but rather to analyze modifications both in contextual features, the main topics addressed, and in Matilda’s characterization according to those parameters extensively discussed throughout this theoretical framework.
3 Methodology
In order to explore the impact that factors like the context and genre have had on the film adaptation of Matilda at large and on the characterization of the little girl in particular, the following section will be divided as follows. Firstly, a comparative analysis between the novel and the film will be conducted. In this vein and in the first place, some major changes regarding contextual aspects will be underscored and explained according to the decisions made by the film industry with an eye on generic features and the intended audience. Secondly, several core topics of the novel will be examined so as to determine their relevance and role in the motion picture. “In order of appearance”, the paper will delve into issues like the place of literature and education, adults’ abuses and school mistreatment, and children’s − especially Matilda’s − uprising against the despotic attitudes of their elders.
Finally, similarities and differences in the characterization of Matilda will be pinpointed. It is expected that this step fulfills a twofold purpose: on the one hand, to determine the extent to which context and genre have influenced the final shape of Matilda’s film incarnation. On the other, to explore whether this persona maintains the quirks that made the original Matilda as lovely as she can be hateful depending on the eye of the beholder. In order to explore the latter points on solid grounds, some explanations on the main topics of the book centralized on and triggered by the protagonist will be required.
4 Analysis
4.1 Setting: A trip from the UK to the US
The plot of DeVito’s Matilda is quite faithful to Dahl’s novel and thus, rather similar to the description provided in section 1. The first and probably most obvious difference between the book and the motion picture is that, whereas the former is set in the United Kingdom, the plot of the latter unfolds in the United States. Therefore, some aspects from the book have been changed so that the story fits within the American setting where the action in the movie takes place. Even though these changes will not be relevant for the development of the main plot and characters, they will help to better adapt the story to the US and the Hollywood industry. For instance, the book pictures Matilda living in a small village in England, in a “quite nice a house with three bedrooms upstairs, while on the ground floor there was a dining-room and a living-room and a kitchen” (Dahl, 1988; 2016: 16). The film, on the other hand, portrays a modern, one-story house in the suburbs of an American town. There are some more details that help adapt the story to the US setting, like prices being given in dollars or children eating sweets like M&Ms, the American brand, instead of regular licorice in the book.
Important as they may be, these are not the only changes worth mentioning. For instance, the book Matilda’s father tears to pieces in the novel and the presence of the FBI in the motion picture are two additional aspects that deserve due attention. The significance of both elements is highlighted not only for the Americanness they add to the film, but also because they resonate with two crucial points of this analysis: political (in)correctness and the role of magic as a reaction against adults’ misbehavior. In the first case, Mr. Wormwood arrives home quite angry from work. In the book, he notices Matilda is reading a book and he takes it from her hands. Matilda explains it is The Red Pony, and she tells her father: “It’s by John Steinbeck, an American writer”. “‘Filth’, Mr. Wormwood said. ‘If it’s by an American it’s certain to be filth. That’s all they write about’” (Dahl, 1988; 2016: 34), and he tears the book to pieces. Mr. Wormwood’s reaction to this information is not represented in the same way in the movie. In this case, characters do not mention anything related to what book Matilda is reading, and the father does not treat the book as roughly; he just throws it on the floor, for destroying a literary work could be considered as an unethical and unacceptable example for those children watching the movie. Besides, these decisions help veil a clear aggression against the culture of both the country of production and one of the main target groups the film seeks to attract: American spectators.
The second change brings the FBI to the story. Instead of talking about the police, the FBI is introduced in the film in order to tailor the production to a North American environment. Their presence is more relevant in the film than the police is in the book. While there are only scarce references to the police in the novel, the FBI’s investigation of Mr. Wormwood’s illegal business with pieces of stolen cars plays a bigger role in the film. This FBI presence is not only relevant for the context, but also because Matilda will use her magic powers in order to punish yet another reprehensible action from adults, as the FBI agents are registering the Wormwood’s garage without a legal order. Despite this, her encounter with the FBI is just one more example of Matilda’s power, and it does not imply any major change in the story or in the construction of the main character.
Therefore, and considering the changes included in the film, it can be said that these differences are most of the times introduced to emphasize the Americanness of the movie in contrast with the English context of the book. Among other considerations, the global projection of the film together with the meaning and expectations triggered by the concept “family film” may help us understand these modifications. According to Brown (2012: 191), the term “family film” does not exist in many countries, where people use labels such as “children’s film”, “action film” or even “American film” to refer to the different branches this extremely overarching genre encompasses. With that in mind, the latter designation may partly explain some of the modifications underscored hitherto. Films with some of the features displayed by Matilda are globally and almost intrinsically related to Hollywood and the American cultural machinery. The strength and range of this apparatus has also helped spread North American idiosyncrasies, getting to embed most of them in the collective imagination
