"Adapting" or completely changing?

I remember the days of first through sixth grade when a simple question from my mom could sum up an entire day of school: “What did you learn today, honey?” Now, I can’t even gauge what I learned before second period in response to that simple question. But today, upon my arrival home, I educated my mother on our short story unit in AP English and consequently, the film adaptations that go along with these stories. I attributed my sudden urge to inform my mother to the time I spend following my 7^th period English class pondering the decisions made by film directors in regards to the adapted stories, predominantly in “The Balloon.” Donald Barthelme wrote this story that Martynas Zaremba later adapted, signifying two very contrasting works. Throughout our reading-then-watching journeys, I formed the belief that directors take too many liberties in relation to the authentic stories. The majority of their alterations to the story lines ultimately skew the purposes of the literature. This belief led me to encourage my mom to watch the video without any prior knowledge of the story. I did so in hopes of comparing her perception with mine (which the previous reading of the story heavily influenced). As the credits rolled, my mom explained that she thought the balloon transpired as a symbol for unity, bringing together all types of people who shared the same curiosity for the unknown. What she failed to understand resulted as the fact that the tattooed man and woman controlled the balloon, and observed the people around them in the process. Her perception of the film without first reading the short story contrasted Barthelme’s intended purpose, which I believe emerged as conducting a social experiment and thus criticizing curious people’s need to associate meaning with everything in life. What would Barthelme think of this reconstruction to his writing? If one wishes to use another person’s original thoughts to benefit themselves, shouldn’t they persist in conveying the same underlying message? To me, my mother’s inability to grasp Barthelme’s main objective underscored the fault in the film adaptations. I firmly believe that if modifying an author’s work, one must showcase the original story’s purpose accurately. Whether watching “The Balloon,” “The Sound Machine” or even “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets,” one should indicate a film’s success largely based on the true correlation to the writing.