Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
>.> |
*blink*
*blink*
City of Heroes was my first MMO, & my favorite computer game.
R.I.P.
Chyll - Bydand - Violynce - Enyrgos - Rylle - Nephryte - Solyd - Fettyr - Hyposhock - Styrling - Beryllos - Rosyc
Horryd - Myriam - Dysquiet - Ghyr
Vanysh - Eldrytch
Inflyct - Mysron - Orphyn - Dysmay - Reapyr - - Wyldeman - Hydeous
Quote:
Well are we talking character and story depth or plain information depth?
|
Originally Posted by Chyll
*blink*
*blink* |
- CaptainFoamerang
Silverspar on Kelly Hu: A face that could melt paint off the wall *shivers*
Someone play my AE arc! "The Heart of Statesman" ID: 343405
Quote:
I would posit Silence of the Lambs for this simply because the characters were much better fleshed out by the great actors in that movie than by the hack writer of the novel. |
Originally Posted by Lothic
Claiming "a movie sucks compared to the book it came from" is hardly a valid way to damn any movie. Can you actually name me ANY movie that was "more in-depth" than the book it came from?
|
It can be observed that Hopkins did just a great job with the Lecter character that Harris pretty much revised the character for Hannibal to follow the Hopkins version rather than what he had been in previous novels
Too many alts to list.
Quote:
I don't know about the movies being deeper in any way. Of course not being so deep as to be a morass was something I considering a plus for the movies vs. the books.
|
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
Well are we talking character and story depth or plain information depth?
|
Too many alts to list.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
The Lord of the Rings trilogy.
>.> |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
Well are we talking character and story depth or plain information depth?
|
Sure the LotR movie trilogy was something like 10 hours long back-to-back (and was pretty well done I might add). But there was so much cut from "source material" that they could have probably easily created another 10 hours worth of finished movie without even trying very hard.
Suffice it to say we can have have our opinions/debates on how "good" these movies are forever. But it's really hard to argue against the idea that movies based on literature are almost universally "less in-depth" than their source material. To say a given movie sucks because it's a mere shadow of its source is like trying to be upset with water for being too wet.
And let's not confuse what a good screenplay based on a bad book can do. Even the good screenplay is going to leave/edit details behind compared to the source material.
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
It depends on if you count topography porn as contributing to the depth of the material.
- CaptainFoamerang
Silverspar on Kelly Hu: A face that could melt paint off the wall *shivers*
Someone play my AE arc! "The Heart of Statesman" ID: 343405
Quote:
How can you say no to those tall, firm mountains jutting majestically upward and those deep dark caverns leading to hidden treasures? Oh my! |
Originally Posted by CaptainFoamerang
It depends on if you count topography porn as contributing to the depth of the material.
|
Loth 50 Fire/Rad Controller [1392 Badges] [300 non-AE Souvenirs]
Ryver 50 Ele� Blaster [1392 Badges]
Silandra 50 Peacebringer [1138 Badges] [No Redside Badges]
--{=====> Virtue ♀
I'm a big fan of Dick.
I also like Moorcock.
Why are you all looking at me like that?
We don't need no stinking Blade Runner remake, we need remakes of Arena, Robot Jox, Ice Pirates, etc...
Branching Paragon Police Department Epic Archetype, please!
Quote:
I found District 9 to be an absolutely horrible movie all around. Hated the entire thing. For one thing, it starts out as a mockumentary then switches midstream into something else, while maintaining the same cinematic style, namely the shakey cam/faux home movie style. For another, there was not a single likable character in the entire damn thing.|
Originally Posted by Cass_
Did you find the first half of District 9 boring too?
I bet you like Michel Bay's transformer movies don't you. |
The only half decent thing in D9 was the special effects. Otherwise, D9 was an absolutely painful movie to watch.
Michael Bay's Transformers? I accept them for what they are. SFX fests and explosions along with Peter Cullen's voicing of Optimus. I waited 20 years for a live-action Transformers flick, so a certain amount of fan-glossing is to be expected. Was it what I had hoped for? Nope. But it was entertaining.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Coming_Storm
Must be quoted again. Blade Runner sucked as it lacked the depth of its source. It was a very flat and uncompelling movie compared to the novella.
|
I just know from the viewing I had of it, that it wasn't an enjoyable movie for me. I'd love to get back those hours of my life.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dark One
I'd love to get back those hours of my life.
|
I've already got an order in from 06 for the 149 mins of the Da Vinci Code, enter the queue.
At least some of the BR devotees saw it originally at release, like I did w/ my dad, which tends to make a picture much more of an epic experience, depending on the material, of course.
I remember it making an indelible imprint on my squishy young mind, dark, brooding, and it stared Han Solo. ymmv
.
While this thread seems to become a partial referrendum on the merits of Blade Runner as a film and of PKD's as a science fiction writer, it's blindlingly clear that these Messrs. Kosove, Johnson, and York don't have a single idea among them about either.
Here are some extracts from a fresh interview with these dunderheads:
Quote:
Oh, and Ridley Scott is clearly not on board with this project.|
Q: Will this movie be a prequel or a sequel? Kosove: We don't know, we just don't know yet. When we know, we'll let you know. We don't know yet it's too early. The only way to answer that is to say that we will have a process where we will hear hear {sic} different ideas from writers or potentially directors who we will bring in, in combination with the writers, before determining. We could be open to either a prequel or a sequel. |
Quote:
|
Q: Have you reached out to Ridley Scott? Kosove: The answer to that question is as follows. I'm going to answer it very briefly we won't say if we've reached out to Ridley Scott or not, but what we will say is that Ridley Scott's blessing to what we're doing is very important to Alcon {Entertainment, their production company}. |
Quote:
See, I didn't really mind DVC. I wouldn't buy it on DVD, but for a cheap matinee (I only go to matinees unless I have a freebie pass for a night version), it was an acceptable diversion.|
Originally Posted by Acemace
I've already got an order in from 06 for the 149 mins of the Da Vinci Code, enter the queue.
|
But District 9? Watchmen? Blade Runner? Horrible, horrible movies that I feel cheated for having watched.
Quote:
|
At least some of the BR devotees saw it originally at release, like I did w/ my dad, which tends to make a picture much more of an epic experience, depending on the material, of course. I remember it making an indelible imprint on my squishy young mind, dark, brooding, and it stared Han Solo. ymmv |
Blade Runner, however, does not get that same pass because I don't have that emotional attachment. Seeing it now without the benefit of nostalgia glasses leaves me with, "Why did I watch that?".
.
Quote:
/this. |
Originally Posted by Lothic
Claiming "a movie sucks compared to the book it came from" is hardly a valid way to damn any movie. Can you actually name me ANY movie that was "more in-depth" than the book it came from?
|
And if you wanted to lose depth, they'd have to make Neuromancer (which, if it were done today, would likely gloss over the decidedly out of date references in the book - like the sky the color static or the line of pay phones ringing as they're walked past. And lose bits in the process. Much like no Dune movie has had Paul's mother ask him, after the duel in the sietch and his feeling victorious, how it feels to be a murderer.)
Quote:
Though the SciFi Dune movie did have Paul at Jamis' funeral stating what he learned from him. But they also left out the part about Harrah and Paul assuming responsibility for Jamis' sons, iirc, from both attempts at the movie.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
/this.
And if you wanted to lose depth, they'd have to make Neuromancer (which, if it were done today, would likely gloss over the decidedly out of date references in the book - like the sky the color static or the line of pay phones ringing as they're walked past. And lose bits in the process. Much like no Dune movie has had Paul's mother ask him, after the duel in the sietch and his feeling victorious, how it feels to be a murderer.) |
The SciFi version is probably about as close as one could hope to get for something of the scope of Dune.
Quote:
i can agree with this.|
Originally Posted by Jet_Boy
Sweet Jeebus. No, No, a thousand times no!
There's a billion-zillion novels out there that deserve movies. STOP RETCONNING THE 80s!!! |
Y'know what i'd like to see as a scifi movie? An adaptation of Revelation Space.
Or a movie set in the universe of the Culture. (Assuming Iain Banks wrote the initial treatment of the script and had veto power. It's largely how he writes the characters, events and plotting that make the Culture stories interesting to me.)
Hell, Doctor Sleepless would make for an interesting movie.
Dr. Todt's theme.
i make stuff...
Quote:
Heretic! |
Originally Posted by Dark One
Maybe they'll actually make Blade Runner good this time around...
|
------->"Sic Semper Tyrannis"<-------
Quote:
I am loyal to Him On Earth! Cast the label of Heretic carefully lest ye be accused of Mutantcy!|
Originally Posted by ebon3
Heretic!
|
A prequel or sequel....oy.
And you want to try and possibly remake one of the best-regarded films of its era by a director who was stylish and competent and coming off the back of Alien?
Regardless of what you personally think of the film, at least have some consideration for who made it and the general regard in which the work is held. It's generally considered to be a very good movie. By a lot of people. If that's the case, and you have these people with apparently no concept on how to approach it, then I really don't want to see this get off the ground.
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
About the only time I have read a book, then seen the movie and felt that the movie perfectly reflected the book was the book, "Addie Pray" which became the movie, "Paper Moon." The movie seemed to be a perfect translation of the book, except the book had a few more episodes of "cons" in it.|
Originally Posted by Lothic
Claiming "a movie sucks compared to the book it came from" is hardly a valid way to damn any movie. Can you actually name me ANY movie that was "more in-depth" than the book it came from?
I don't care if you hated the movie or not, but at least offer up some "real" reasons to hate it. |
Other than that . . . they are different mediums. Things that work in books (and comics) don't work in movies, and things that work in movies don't work in books (and comics). In books, you can read what characters are thinking and feeling. In Movies, the soundtrack can add a different dimension to the overall effect of a scene.
I saw Bladerunner in the theater in its first run. I loved it, as it was so different than any vision of the future generally being presented in Science Fiction films. The world was dark and dingy, with a clash of cultures and commercialism. The story had a great combination of action, atmosphere and ambiguous moral issues. The bad guy could have won, but chose not to. The humanity came from the inhumans, while the inhumanity came from the humans.
And I much prefer the narration version of the original theatrical release. It made Harrison Ford feel like he could have been Bogart's heir.
Additional stories set in the same world might be interesting, but only if they were well done. But I don't have a desire to see a re-make.
LOCAL MAN! The most famous hero of all. There are more newspaper stories about me than anyone else. "Local Man wins Medal of Honor." "Local Man opens Animal Shelter." "Local Man Charged with..." (Um, forget about that one.)
Guide Links: Earth/Rad Guide, Illusion/Rad Guide, Electric Control
Quote:
See! I hear you all say this and now it makes me wonder. Does the majority of people prefere the narrative or not?|
Originally Posted by Local_Man
And I much prefer the narration version of the original theatrical release. It made Harrison Ford feel like he could have been Bogart's heir.
|
I do! Others have said they do! Is it only Harrison Ford (and I think the Director) who didn't?
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
Quote:
I remember the time my wife stopped and stared at me when I said I was looking for Dick and Moorcock in a used book store...
|
Originally Posted by sleestack
I'm a big fan of Dick.
I also like Moorcock. Why are you all looking at me like that? |
Comrade Smersh, KGB Special Section 8 50 Inv/Fire, Fire/Rad, BS/WP, SD/SS, AR/EM
Other 50s: Plant/Thorn, Bots/Traps, DB/SR, MA/Regen, Rad/Dark - All on Virtue.
-Don't just rebel, build a better world, comrade!
Blade Runner is, I mantain, a great science fiction movie, but it retains virtually none of the themes of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Many of them are discarded entirely, since PKD tends to overstuff his novels and had a difficult time himself adapting them to the dramatic structures for movies. Some, particularly the issues of empathy and the authenticity of artificial life, receive only cursory treatment in Scott's final version of the film by comparison to the novel.
Then again, although Scott is by no means a profound thinker, he's more intelligent than the guys behind this sequel/prequel/reboot/ripoff, who apparently regard Dick as just another futurist with the cliched habit of anthromorphizing machines.
Quote:
For a real taste of Dick (stop sniggering - at least the forum's censorware is letting it go), check out "Which Philip K. Dick Story Are We in Today?".
| I think for us, one of the things that made this so timely is the fact that we're all living, and we're kind of blessed to live in, what is essentially the industrial revolution age for technology. And it's changing at such a rapid pace. Because of that, and because of the fact that Philip K. Dick is quite brilliant at imagining a world that maybe doesn't exist but is very quickly getting here. {...} The logical extension of that is exactly the world that Philip K. Dick imagined, which is coming to a point where something that was not human is being charged to do tasks that we don't want human beings to do. And what if there was a degree of humanity in these "people," and how would they respond? |
I read the book after I saw the film and I barely recognised it - I love the film though (I've always thought it had more than a touch of The Man in the High Castle about the setting).
I do like Dick's work - every story is just fizzing with ideas that are pretty out there and have been plundered by loads of SF since; but lets face it, the man can't actually write for toffee; his stuff needs to be presented by people who can tell stories.
>.>
- CaptainFoamerang
Silverspar on Kelly Hu: A face that could melt paint off the wall *shivers*
Someone play my AE arc! "The Heart of Statesman" ID: 343405