Berger, R., 2023. “Something’s lost in the translation!” Hemimetabolic Adaptation (or Incomplete Metamorphosis) in David Cronenberg’s The Fly. In: Cutchins, D. R. and Perry, D. R., eds. Revenge of the Remakes: Adaptation and Influence of 1950s Sci-Fi Films. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company. (Unpublished)
Full text available as:
|
PDF (Images removed from this pre-peer review version.)
Berger Fly Chapter v.4.pdf - Submitted Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. 248kB | |
Copyright to original material in this document is with the original owner(s). Access to this content through BURO is granted on condition that you use it only for research, scholarly or other non-commercial purposes. If you wish to use it for any other purposes, you must contact BU via BURO@bournemouth.ac.uk. Any third party copyright material in this document remains the property of its respective owner(s). BU grants no licence for further use of that third party material. |
Official URL: https://call-for-papers.sas.upenn.edu/cfp/2019/08/...
Abstract
The Fly (1986) is David Cronenberg’s only remake. Ostensibly based on the 1958 movie, The Fly cites George Langelaan’s 1957 short-story as its inspiration. In doing so, Cronenberg’s version attempts to efface the Vincent Price B-Movie horror classic, and replace it with something more complex and visceral. Indeed, the short-story and subsequent filmed versions are about the biological metamorphosis of a human-being into something else: the 1958 fly being a ‘complete’ swap between human and insect (holometabalous) and Cronenberg’s incomplete metamorphosis (hemimetabolous) into ‘Brundlefly’. As Clarke (2002) puts it, “…stories of metamorphosis are inherently self-referential: they are always also allegories of the media through which they are communicated”. This chapter will argue that the two metamorphoses stand as metaphors for the process of adaptation itself, between complete and incomplete versions of texts in different media. While the 1958 adaptation was a warning of the high-capitalist tech society to come, Cronenberg’s remake concerns itself with the failure of technology to solve global problems and re-tools the story to be one about body dysmorphia; which some scholars have lazily perhaps ascribed to the HIV/AIDs pandemic of the 1980s – see Mathijs (2003) and Snowdon (2012). While the 1958 movie warns humanity about the perils of ‘playing God’, the 80s remake eerily predicts the social media age’s obsession with flesh and body image; in a hyper-mediated culture of Instagram and facial recognition technology, the computer’s failure to no-longer recognise Seth Brundle’s new augmented reality, speaks to our image conscious era - mirrored in the way Cronenberg’s film misrecognises the 1958 original. While, accepting that “[adaptation can be a violent process, in either direction” (Milligan, 2017), the chapter will also cover how previous versions of texts can gain an “afterlife” (Benjamin) through streaming services and EPG preferencing technology, rending Cronenberg’s direct signalling of Langelaan’s story as source, highly problematic.
Item Type: | Book Section |
---|---|
Uncontrolled Keywords: | Adaptation;David Cronenberg;George Langelaan;Remake;Science Fiction;The Fly;Vincent Price |
Group: | Faculty of Media & Communication |
ID Code: | 38394 |
Deposited By: | Symplectic RT2 |
Deposited On: | 25 Mar 2024 11:09 |
Last Modified: | 25 Mar 2024 11:12 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Repository Staff Only - |