Adaptations do not often get away with changing the genre of the story it is retelling, so it is especially interesting that the movie based on Neil Gaiman's classic Stardust did. Romance, whether as a subplot or the main focus of a story, is so popular we see it insert itself into all types of genres. Stardust featured a romantic storyline between a love-struck shop boy and a fallen star. Its 2007 movie adaptation was written as a fantasy romance, making the love story the main focus of the retelling. As a fairytale, the book was brilliant. As a romance, the movie was breathtaking. Even with the addition of subplots and conflicts, both told the same magical story and, in my opinion, both did it wonderfully. There were a few unsavory changes, however, like how the movie did away with a lot of the more magical aspects of the story in favor of focusing strictly on the romance. But despite all this, it is important to keep in mind that Neil Gaiman himself does not believe adaptations should be exactly like the original. He had this to say when asked about working with the director of the movie;
“I really trusted him, and you don’t run into that very often. He offered me the script, but I said, “No, I wrote the novel, but this is your film, your vision.” - Neil Gaiman
Complemented by the superb acting of the movie’s stunning cast, as well as the limitless potential of special effects, the movie became a landmark in the realm of good adaptations. I truly believe this to be one of the cleanest genre transitions in which the values of this story held true throughout the retelling process.
Although Triston’s and Yvaine's thrilling romance was a large part of the book, it was tame in comparison to how the movie portrayed it. The romance between the main characters was slow-burning, with little-to-no scenes of passion throughout the whole story. The movie added declarations of love and passionate kisses, putting the romance on full display. While neither was better than the other, they were undoubtedly different. Stardust was intentionally written in the pre-Tolkien style of English fantasy, which limited the way in which the story was told. These limitations are seen most during the book's ending, which featured the realism of Triston dying before his immortal wife, leaving her to rule alone.
“They say that each night, when the duties of state permit, she climbs, on foot, and limps, alone, to the highest peak of the palace, where she stands for hour after hour….She says nothing at all, but simply stares upward into the dark sky and watches, with sad eyes, the slow dance of the infinite stars.” - Neil Gaiman PG48
Whereas in the movie, Triston and Yvaine return to her home in the stars together after many years of ruling, a more modern happy-ending. The book features a more neutral ending that is more intone with the pre-Tolkien style it was written in. Both stories share a low-point in which Yvaine believes Triston has left her for his first love, Victoria. In the movie, this low point is made more dramatic by getting rid of the part in which Triston tells Yvaine he’s going to see Victoria, resulting in a climactic scene in which Yvaine tries to find Triston. The movie took the fairytale romance of the book and modernized it, creating a popular retelling that a new audience could gravitate towards.
Like any fairytale, the book was filled with magical creatures, cultures, and celestials. Gnomes, unicorns, talking trees, and even gods made an appearance as characters in the novel. The movie kept some of these aspects of magic but limited it to witches and spells. What they did keep was the same as in the original; the witch's magic grew weaker the more they used it. However, the witches as characters were changed somewhat drastically, as their ending in the movie did not match their ending in the book. In the movie, the witches capture Yvaine as she is looking for Triston, taking her back to their lair where they nearly succeed in killing her before Triston heroically saves her. In the book, the depleted witch expresses her regret in not succeeding but wishes her well.
“You have a good heart, child. A pity it will not be mine.” The star leaned down, then, and kissed the old woman on her weaned cheek.” - Neil Gaiman, PG47
These changes felt natural given the genre change, they added tension to the retelling. The addition of the climatic, action-packed end scene did not change Gaiman's intent for the novel but rather enhanced it. The interaction between Yvaine and her former enemy was a twist of character that showed a softer side to the antagonist. And the removal of other species, while somewhat disappointing, did not change the story overall as most of those scenes served as filler. Though magical elements were removed, the retelling told the same beautiful, magical, love-story as Gaiman’s novel just with more emphasis on romance.
Besides the change to the book’s magical system, one of the largest differences in the movie was that of the lightning pirates. Johannes Alberic, as he was known in the book, became Captain Shakespear, an English loving pirate who caught lightning with his crew in a flying ship. In both stories, the pirates save Triston and Yvaine after they become stranded in the clouds. Johannes played a somewhat small role in the book, after saving the two lovers they help transport them part of the way to their destination. In the movie, Captain Shakespear helps Triston find confidence, helps Yvaine show her true self, and helps both of them acknowledge their feelings for one another. The character comes off as a ruthless pirate, but through the course of their journey, he shows himself to be a theater enthusiast, as well as a feminine loving man who frequently wears dresses. Even in 2007 when the movie was released, showcasing a crossdresser as a prominent character would have been risky, yet across the board, it was well-received. The brilliant writing was only further complimented by the acting, the both hilarious and heartwarming scenes of acceptance made the character unique. The scene of the crew finding their captain, after being defeated by an enemy while wearing a pink dress, has remained one of my favorite scenes in the movie. While the character underwent intense changes in the movie, these differences added both value and humor, enhancing the original story.
The story had one side plot that worked alongside the main plot, the royal princes competing for the throne. To win, one of them had to find a royal jewel, the same jewel that knocked Yvaine, the star, to earth. In both the original and the adaptation, the brothers have slowly killed each other off until two remain, who both end up being killed by the main antagonist of the story; the witch. In the book, the last remaining brother dies while trying to seek revenge on the witch for killing his younger brother. In the movie, he is also killed by the witch, but it's while trying to steal Yvaine from the witches, so he can have her immortality-giving heart for himself. Eventually, you find out that Triston has royal blood, being the son of the princess, and he is able to restore the stone himself, taking the throne with Yvaine as his queen. Because the subplot did not impact Triston’s story outside of his discovery he is the last royal, I am not surprised they took the opportunity to add tension through the climactic finale battle between the last brother, Septimus, and the witch. It allowed for instances of action without changing major aspects of the story. This stunning transfer from page to movie complimented Gaiman’s original, its changes only adding further value to the subplot.
This adaptation, even with its changes to characters and subplots, has become a staple of great retellings since its release. The differences had added value, kept true to Gaiman's intent for the story, and gave the adventure humor. While the romance was certainly portrayed differently in the movie, these differences only highlighted Neil’s love story. The book's both climactic and romantic ending where Triston saves Yvaine serves as the cherry-on-top of this story's stunning romance. Although magic was largely removed from the movie, its replacements were worthy of the original book. The movie was able to lengthen the Pirate Captain’s role because of these cuts to magic, adding a quality of content in both humor and diversity that made the story that much better. And the Royal family too was changed, their subplot lengthening to involve itself in both the climactic movie ending and sultry romance. The final brother's epic fight against the witch queen is an expertly executed scene, which was only possible due to the removal of magical fluff that occupied much of the book. This movie, with its access to modern CGI and brilliant casting, was a stunning complement to the original. The story of Triston and Yvaine, whether told through the book or the movie, is a beautiful romance that I will continue to recommend to anyone that is interested in a wonderful fantasy story.
Sources;
Staff, MTV News. “'Stardust' Author Neil Gaiman Tells Why He Turns Down Most Adaptations - But Not This One.” MTV News, 10 Aug. 2007, www.mtv.com/news/1566862/stardust-author-neil-gaiman-tells-why-he-turns-down-most-adaptations-but-not-this-one/.
Gaiman, Neil, and Ernest Riera. Stardust. Roca Editorial, 2019.
Edited by Jade Rabor
Cover art by Deys on Instagram
Comments