Much like the high/low cultural debate, formalist theory made an attempt to understand the relationship between film and literature. Initially, the formalist theoretical approach endeavored to establish film as an independent art by distinguishing its different attributes in comparison to theater. Formalist theory is based on the presupposition that form and content have an organic connection, and that certain content can only be expressed adequately through specific art forms (Balazs 1952, Bluestone 1957). This underlying assumption reflects back to the initial cultural debate, whereby adapting content to a different medium is detrimental to a work of art as it invariably must be changed.

According to George Bluestone, "what is particularly filmic and what is particularly novelistic cannot be converted without destroying an integral part of each" (63). Bela Balazs argues that story events can be retold, but that one cannot adapt a finished work to another medium (261); "one may perhaps make a good film out of a bad novel, but never out of a good one" (259). Again, the relationship between film and cinema is based on hierarchy with the novel remaining superior.

In assessing the differences between sign systems, a structural semiotic approach (see Saussure1919) arises as the normative framework for comparing the two mediums. Combined with formalist theory, the supposition that words are more sophisticated than and superior to images prevails. As a result of this assumption, the invariable changes that stem from the differences between a linguistic and a visual medium become the basis of possible critical discourse related to film adaptation. The assessments of the effectiveness of adaptations then rest upon evaluative judgments made with comparison of the two mediums (Kline, 1996). Normative theories, such as the translation, pluralist, and transformation models arise out of the historical cultural debate and formalist approaches to film adaptation. As a result, each tends to conceive a hierarchical relationship between the texts, and/or evaluates the success or failure of the film through focusing on differences.