Goodreads Librarians Group discussion
Book & Author Page Issues
>
One of these things is not like the other . . .
date
newest »




Usually when we separate them we're separating graphic novel adaptions of text novels, but I agree that adaptions in the other direction should also be separated.


Right, but a change from a text novel to a graphic novel is considered a thorough enough adaption to call for separation regardless of the reason it's done, so an adaption in the other direction should get the same separation. It's not just a new cover: it's a whole new inside, usually with a new collaborator (the artist(s)) as well.
(The only other examples of graphic-to-text adaptions that I've noticed so far have been multi-volume graphic novels into one text novel, so the combination issue wouldn't have come up anyway.)

I did find a review of the novel written based on the screenplay. The screenplay author changed some names and details, and MAC kept those changes when writing the movie tie-in novel, so in this case it seems that the movie novel would be much more different than just having a cover with actors' photos.
Max Allan Collins wrote a graphic novel named Road to Perdition. It was made into a move (same name), then he put out a novel (same name again) based on the screenplay another guy wrote for the movie. I haven't read either, so I have no idea how much the novel differs from the graphic novel.
At the moment, the novel and graphic novel are combined. But should they be?