What sf novel would I like to see made into a movie?

[vidar]

I agree, Foundation would make a great series. But then certain things have to be in place, or else its best to leave it as books. (The moviemaking of Nightfall is awful, I have heard.) The realisation of The Ring and Babylon5 gives some hope, though.<br /><br />I tried to read the series a long time ago. It was hard, because English is not my native language, and reading is not really my favourite pastime. But it was fascinating and I preferred them to schoolbooks. <br /><br />Anyway, I think for producers, that it might be a good idea to have at look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Foundation_Series . (Note, this is a ‘Spoiler’, that’s telling the whole plot and more.) It is a huge work, especially because Asimov tried to merge The Foundation, the Empire and the Robot series.<br />

 

[yevaud]

Personally, I'd like to see an adaptation of Pournelle's "Falkenberg's Mercenary Legion" or Drake's "Hammer's Slammers." Either would, IMO, make for rocking good plots. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[vidar]

I suppose you are right about these series. I would like to see much more SF series on film. <br />Reading is boring.<br />What are they about, anyway?<br />

 

[yevaud]

Umm, both future military SF. Lots of action, interpersonal stuff. And many, many tech toys in each to please the studio people, with their penchant for CGI and crashes. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[vidar]

I would like to see the completion of Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001 series (2001, 2010, 2061 and 3001). Generally, there is a lot to pick from him, like the Rama series, Childhood's End, The Star and much more. However, I think he had second thoughts after the production of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

 

[lunatio_gordin]

Oh contraire. (sp) Ender's Game Movie is in the works right now <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <br />http://www.frescopictures.com/movies/ender/endersgame_update.html

 

[spacefire]

Riverworld. Maybe a series rather than a feature film.<br />the SciFi pilot was utter crap, it changed things too much from the book series. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[lunatio_gordin]

That was a book? the concept seemed interesting. too good for them to have made up, anyway.

 

[spacefire]

that was 5 books actually. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[avaunt]

The first book is called<br /><br />"To your scattered bodies go" by Phillip Jose Farmer.<br /><br />You ought to give it a go mate, really stunning ideas. The image of the big shout will stick in your mind.

 

[tempel1]

Dear friends <br />Go here please:<br />http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/press-release-details.cfm?newsID=117 <br />” The spacecraft's VELOCITY RELATIVE TO THE SUN is at about 26 kilometers per second (about 59,250 miles per hour). Cassini is now more than 9 million kilometers (almost 6 million miles) from Earth”. <br /><br />Since our probe is launched from the earth, it has already a velocity of 65,000 miles per hour (earth's velocity). <br /><br />Why have NASA engineers steered Cassini on this trajectory? <br /> http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=h_cassini_trajectory_02.gif&cap=The <br /><br />Instead of increasing Cassini's velocity they have slowed down it at 59,250 miles per hour. <br /><br />NASA engineers think the earth is the center of our solar system and don't consider earth's velocity. <br /><br />In this wrong way Cassini has travelled for 2 200 000 000 miles to meet Saturn. <br /><br />Cassini would have been able to fly along a straight line travelling for less than 1 000 000 000 miles. <br /><br />65,000 miles per hour (earth velocity) + 36,000 miles per hour (spacecraft's velocity) = 101,000 miles per hour <br /><br />1 000 000 000 miles : 365 days : 24 hours : 101,000 miles per hour = 1.13 years <br /><br />If NASA engineers considered the earth's velocity, Cassini could meet Saturn in one year! <br />

 

[lunatio_gordin]

I'll definitely pick it up next time i'm at the bookstore. thanks <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[darth_elmo]

I'd actually like to see <i>Lest Darkness Fall</i> by L. Sprague de Camp turned into a movie.<br /><br />And the <i>Belisarius</i> series of novels would make outstanding miniseries.

 

[le3119]

A Foundation series would have a "Dune" feel to it, more than Star Wars, due to the far-future "true" science themes. It could be done, it might compare to a historical drama like "Winds of War" or "North and South". I'd like to see someone try it.

 

[vidar]

I will rather say it should be neither like star wars or dune. <br />Not being an Asimov expert, I know he was an atheist Jew. <br />Therefore the over focus on logic, rather than religion.<br />Both SW and Dune have strong religious influence.<br />It would certainly be historical drama as you suggest.<br />Not quite comparable, but I thing Babylon5 is more in direction.<br />A tv series needs characters and action, or else it wont pay off.<br />That would be a modification of the story, more actionmen.<br />I also would like someone to try, - but not fail<br />There were some bad versions of The Ring before time made it right.<br />I believe that now is the time.<br />

 

[mattblack]

"MOONSEED" by Stephen Baxter. The ultimate disaster novel. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>One Percent of Federal Funding For Space: America <strong><em><u>CAN</u></em></strong> Afford it!!  LEO is a <strong><em>Prison</em></strong> -- It's time for a <em><strong>JAILBREAK</strong></em>!!</p> </div>

 

[wmdragon]

Id rather see Stephenson's <i>Diamond Age</i> before <i>Snowcrash</i> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#993366"><em>The only laws of matter are those which our minds must fabricate, and the only laws of mind are fabricated for it by matter.</em> <br /> --- James Clerk Maxwell</font></p> </div>

 

[relaisterre]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Foundation series would make an excellent movie. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I disagree. I'm a huge fan of Asimov and I read the Foundation trilogy as others read the Lord of the Rings. And I think it would make aweful movies or TV shows. I'm a writer myself and Foundation just doesn't feel right as a motion picture. SF and their movies are usually centered on action. There isn't much of that in Foundation. I don't deny its value as an SF masterpiece, but it just doesn't cut it as movie material.

 

[vidar]

I certainly see the dilemma. <br /><br />It does not cost much to make a book compared to making a movie. Making a book can be done by a single person in the spare time. Making a movie of it, is a great project. It has to be financed, which means making some compromises. That does not necessarily mean bad ones.<br /><br />Excuse me for saying so, but I find books one of the most primitive ways of communication. It is as close to morse as it can be. Pictures are richer. Moving pictures can make that saga available to many more people. And it has the potential to make the story even greater than the books.<br />

 

[relaisterre]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Excuse me for saying so, but I find books one of the most primitive ways of communication. It is as close to morse as it can be. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Books are capable of great storytelling, and they are definately not primitive. Go read stuff from Paul Auster. See his views about the bond between reader and writer.

 

[vidar]

Books are better than nothing.

 

[avaunt]

When Gravity Fails, George Alec Effinger <br /><br /><br />GOOD CALL !<br /><br />Well played, Stutch ! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />What about "Across Realtime" by Venor Vinge ?<br /><br />MAN talk about sweeping epics!.

 

[avaunt]

"Excuse me for saying so".<br /><br />Sure mate, you are excused, for your egregious crime! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> J/K<br /><br />Now, books that are written PROPERLY, contain FAR more information that the black and white letters on the page.<br /><br />Ever read, and understood even a tenth of the cultural, social and historical information in that GREATEST of novels "Pride and Prejudice" ?. The value of a book is all in the writing.

 

[vidar]

Anything is better than nothing.<br /><br />Anyway. I do agree that books that are written PROPERLY, contain FAR more information than letters on a paper. The problem is not the author; it is the simple means available. Letters and numbers in itself are not more than rational morse code, or digits if you’d like.<br /><br />Books have been the most effective mean to create and distribute a work of art. But the hypothetical ideal way would be to copy the authors mind. I am sure he’s imagining in pictures. Letters are the simplest forms of communication, moving pictures are better.<br /><br />It’s like a musician starting out with a flute, because that all that’s available. However, the musician might be a genius and the tune should really be performed by an orchestra, to truly present the musician’s intellectual property. It can be done, but it usually costs more than available.<br /><br />Now the costs of means of creation and distribution have fell dramatically.<br />Good music can be heard without an orchestra.<br />More good books should be movies.<br />

 

[avaunt]

Umm. Well I see your point, though you have broken your point up into somewhat descrete parts there, mate.<br />I take your meaning and agree about the blokes that only shared the world with drums and flutes being behind the 8ball when it came to writing the works of Chopin.<br /><br />However, writing a novel well, is a separate art to taking a picture or a film of the plot.<br /><br />It is like the difference between a photograph of a woman smiling gently to herself, and the " Mona Lisa ". Or a Kodacrome of a lily pond, against Monets' lilyponds.<br /><br />The beautiful play of words contained in the best writing, is the effect ITSELF that the author has sought, not that of letting you exactly follow his plot of the little lives of his creatures.<br /><br />Don't SAY, SHOW, and show by weaving a web of words, that lays the sought imagery into the minds of the readers.<br /><br />I think that you are a product of your times, vidar, as we all are. And if you are taken up in the spell of moving images that is cast so VERY convincingly nowadays, thats good, when we watch the best of it, it is BETTER than life, eh?.<br /><br />Allow us dinosaurs, that cherish the likes of Maugham, Poe, Ayre, with their spells of syntax, our dying moments, we will retire from the field soon enough, in all love, don't hound us away mate. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />