Not-Netflix Natter episode 6 - What screens can relearn from books.

Why Some Children’s Adaptations Work — and Why That Matters

Children haven’t fallen out of love with stories.

What’s changed is how often screens trust children in the same way books do.

In earlier Netflix Natter essays, I’ve explored why quiet stories faded and why adventure still works when story leads. This episode looks at something closely related: why some book-to-screen adaptations succeed beautifully — and what they reveal about how children actually engage with stories.

When adaptations truly work

Some of the most successful children’s television adaptations in recent years come from the work of Julia Donaldson.

Programmes such as The Gruffalo, Room on the Broom, and Zog have become shared family favourites — not just once, but repeatedly.

Our grandchildren return to them again and again.

That matters.

These adaptations work not because they are louder or faster, but because they remain faithful to how the books function emotionally and structurally.

What these stories keep from the page

First, they respect pace.They don’t rush. They allow pauses, repetition, and rhythm — essential elements in the original texts.

Second, they preserve interiority.Even without internal monologue, characters are allowed to feel uncertain, brave, foolish, or hopeful without having those feelings explained aloud.

Third, they honour structure.Each adaptation feels complete. There’s a beginning, a middle, and an end. Children are not left dangling in endless arcs designed to push them into the next episode.

And finally, they trust revisiting.These are stories designed to be watched again, just as books are meant to be reread. Meaning deepens with familiarity.

What often goes wrong elsewhere

Many children’s screen adaptations struggle not because the source material is weak, but because the screen version abandons book logic.

Emotion is over-signposted.Messages are clarified too early.Pacing accelerates to avoid imagined boredom.

In books, children linger.On screens, adults often assume they won’t.

The result is content that is watched once and forgotten, rather than returned to and lived with.

Why this matters more than we think

Book-based adaptations like The Gruffalo, Room on the Broom, and Zog succeed because they understand something fundamental about children:

Children are not passive recipients of content.They are active meaning-makers.

When stories allow space — for uncertainty, repetition, and quiet confidence — children step into them fully. They don’t need everything explained. They don’t need constant reassurance.

They need stories that trust them.

What screens could relearn from books

The lesson here isn’t that all television should imitate picture books.

It’s that screens could borrow some of their deepest strengths:

• Allow silence and rhythm

• Let stories finish properly

• Design for rewatching, not endless novelty

• Trust children with emotional complexity

When adaptations honour these principles, screens stop competing with books and start working alongside them.

Why this belongs in the wider conversation

In a media landscape shaped by scale and speed, these quieter successes are easy to overlook. But they offer a powerful reminder: children don’t need more content — they need better-crafted stories.

Stories that stay.Stories that invite.Stories that respect childhood.

Children don’t need louder stories.They need kinder ones.

invitation

Which book adaptation has stayed with your family — and why do you think it worked?