A mirror of the eeesite "A Song of Ice and Fire"

This is a mirror of the now defunct eesite ASOIAF webboard.

The discussions for G.R.R. Martin's awesome series "A Song of Ice and Fire" are now being held at: Current ASoIaF Webboard

You cannot post new messages to this board. Go to the Current ASoIaF Webboard for the most current discussions.

A Song of Ice and Fire / Other Topics / G.R.R.M Movies

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages

brosan May 17th 3:56 AM
Hi, just received my signed copy of "Nightflyers" from Overlook (together with Tuf Voyaging (signed) and the 1st ed. of GOT (signed -yes!). On "Nightflyers" they wrote "Now a major movie...". I was surprised to learn that GRRM obviously has done some work there. Has anyone seen this (and other movies)? Is there a list out on which episodes of Beauty and Beast he wrote and what are his future plans in that field? Has he expessed his thoughts about the movie business?
Questions and questions....

Son of Hot Pie!!!
User ID: 0276214 May 17th 4:28 PM
After ten years with B&B, I don't think he cares to return to LA. He's open to feature films and writing scripts for his novels, I believe.
Heard he's doing one for FEVRE DREAM but nothing big planned yet. Just a writing gig.

As for him writing scripts for other works, I'm not sure what his answer would be.

He seems very pleased to be back to writing novels and controlling his works his way rather than having them changed by others.

** Most of the above info. was from various interviews of GRRM **

Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!

LindaElane
User ID: 0276214 May 17th 10:39 PM
Here are the episodes of Beauty and the Beast that GRRM wrote:

Terrible Savior(I believe GRRM introduces 'Mouse' character), Masques, Shades of Grey, Promises of Someday (introduces Devin, Vincent's 'brother'), Ozymandias, Dead of Winter, Brothers, When the Bluebird Sings, A Kingdom by the Sea, What Rough Beast, Ceremony of Innocence, Snow, Beggar's Comet, Invictus

GRRM said at the San Diego signing that his overall experience in Hollywood was not a good one. I honestly never expect him to write a series for TV again. On the other hand, I would not rule out a movie.

GRRM did not write for Beauty and the Beast for ten years. The series lasted under 3 years. He started as a writer and finished as something like "chief story editor". After the death of the "Catherine" character, the female lead, the series did not do well in spite of the excellent writing of GRRM. GRRM did not decide to ="kill her off"...rather, Linda Hamilton, who played the female lead, did not want to do the series anymore, and quit. I was a huge fan, the show made my week for many long sad weeks 10 years ago, but in season three they constantly showed it on different nights and showed specials instead of the show, so that I could only catch two season three episodes myself.

The thing we have not seen is how well GRRM write romance. Honestly, he is great at it. I can't wait until someone in ASOIAF falls in love ::::sigh::::

Son of Hot Pie!!!
User ID: 0276214 May 17th 11:04 PM
LE,

Typo . . . that was ten years pursuing the Hollywood career. That's a long time for anyone in that industry and I wouldn't hold it against him if he has no more interest in the Biz.

Also, I don't think there's an actual position as "chief" story editor but there are many story editors.

He was an actual producer for the show. It's on the jacket of my hard cover ACOK. That means he had clout but wasn't the showrunner.

It's difficult for a writer to choose between Hollywood and novels. The mediums are somewhat different and require different emphasizes.

brosan
User ID: 0909594 May 18th 4:34 AM
Hey, thank you for the insight. The IMDB lists George as writer for Nightflyers and Doorways. Any information on that. Was he involved in scripting Nightflyers and is there a novel for Doorways. Has he expressed his thoughts on how he likes the films?

Omer
User ID: 9014973 May 18th 12:06 PM
IIRC, Doorways is a pilot shot for a series that never happened.
Personnaly, I'm glad Martin's back to the printed world, and I hope he's here to stay. I wouldn't mind seeing a movie based on a book of his, or anything he wrote, but Novels are a superier form of storytelling, and Martin's a master storyteller.

I really wanna see NIGHTFLYERS. I don't know how you can ruin it. All you have to do is stay line by line faithful to the novella, and you have one of the greatest SF movies ever.

Son of Hot Pie!!!
User ID: 0276214 May 18th 2:46 PM
Brosan,

I don't know anything about that. Sorry.

You have to remember that for every 10 to 12 scripts bought, only one is made into a movie.
And, that doesn't include pitches and outlines, I would suspect.

The making of a movie is like navigating a labyrinth with dozens of people chattering in your ear and trying to get you to go a different way.
Just getting towards the beginning of making one requires strong personalities . . . and, if you have an A list actor or director backing you . . . even better. Travolta was the main reason for BATTLEFIELD EARTH being made . . . he took a massive pay cut.

Hey, I just went to IMDB to check him out and they have listed him as only a STORY EDITOR for B&B.
So LE may be right there. I thought he would have
gotten up to producer level but I guess that makes more sense for him leaving now.

Most writers who get up to PRODUCER level or higher in TV rarely leave b/c of the prestige, big bucks and potential glamour.

The best chance for realizing the novels of A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE would most likely be in television. More room for details which would escape us in a feature film. Also, feature films have a very long wait and there's no way you would fit 800 pages in a 2-3 hr movie. Something would have to go out the window.

You'd need a showrunner, who loved the series, and GRRM as at least an advisor, if not one of the main writers. Bringing in some other fantasy writer types would be great, too.
That's what they did for BABYLON 5 with Duane and Gerrold.

Of course, that would be tough to do and that's why some great novels and great scripts have come out mediocre or worse after being produced into a movie.

Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!

Son of Hot Pie!!!
User ID: 0276214 May 18th 2:51 PM
Omer,

I'm not entirely sure if novels are the best form of storytelling. I will agree with you that some writers are best suited for one particular area of writing and that could very well be novels for GRRM.

Of course, if the first point is true, that's a pity because from what I understand the novel industry has shrunk in the last few decades.

Less people are reading books, in other words.

That's why so many publishing houses had to consolidate and pursue the blockbuster books.
That isn't to say they're teetering off their foundation, but it's just not as big as it used to be.

Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!

Omer
User ID: 9014973 May 19th 9:02 AM
Hot Pie's Son:
I'm quite certain prose (rather than just novels, also short stories and novellas) are the best form of storytelling. That is because reading requires the atmost participation of the audience. You have to actually think about the tale, imagine it. The need for effort makes novels the most satisfying form of storytelling. For instant, I' ve never enjoyed a movie the way I enjoyed ASoIaF, or a hundred other great books.

As for the number of people reading... I'm not certain. Until 2 hundred years ago or so, literacy was non existence for anyone but the higher classes. That is no longer the case. I'm enough of an optimist to believe that, eventually, people return to books as a true for of intellect pleasing efforts.

The thing is, though, that since there are much more books out there than movies, obviously more people will see each movie than they'll read each book. I watch alot of movies, but I must reead at least five times more than I watch. Still, even if I talk to very literate people, often I'll find that while we have relatively few books we've all read, we've seen many of the same movies. That's simply because there are more books.

Also, Holliwood produces such low quality entertainment, I'm certain anyone with a Brian will prefer reading, given time.

Son of Hot Pie!!!
User ID: 0276214 May 19th 9:46 PM
Omer,

That's very true. Reading a book requires the imagination to work much more than when one sits in front of a movie screen or TV.

Novels, when done right, give the reader a journey into the heads of interesting characters. That's harder to accomplish on the screen. Talking heads are usually a no no although some work around it.
For instance, ONCE AND AGAIN does a really good job of tapping into the hidden thoughts of characters by leaping to them in black and white while they tell their views to an apparent counselor of some sort. For the most part, it's strategically placed and flows with the story.

I'd say literacy came into place for a majority of people LESS than 200 years but I hear you.

Michael Hague's SCREENWRITING website made the point that more people watch ROSEANNE than have seen GONE WITH THE WIND.

Now, as to which has affected a person for the better after viewing/reading, was not answered. I'd like to think it was the book, but some people find ROSEANNE to be education so who knows. :)

That aside, since the 80s and moves to consolidate publishing houses, I understand that gradually the readership has been eroding. There's a lot less time for middle writers to establish themselves. The hardcover books rest in the hands of the top writers. It used to be more forgiving and newer/middle tiered writers were given more time to let their book sit on the market.

Now, it's like new TV shows, where you get yanked pretty soon if you don't show promise.

I heard some radio host (this was a few years back) comment that they took a poll on how many books people read a year . . . most said only ONE.

Not good.

As for movies and books, the former is advertised much more so people are more aware of them. Also, movies are more popular than reading books and it can be a group shared experience. Moreover, it takes less time to sit and watch a movie than read a thick novel (unless you're a fast reader with great reading comprehension).

Like it or not, movies are a more popular form of entertainment than novels. Take aside a regular group of people (obviously not the people on this board . . . HA!) and as you said, most of them will be abel to talk about several movies rather than several books.

A more interesting point . . . take aside a group of fantasy readers and see if they can talk about the same three fantasy novels for the year compared to the same three (insert genre) movies.

As for Hollywood producing low quality entertainment . . . that depends what you're referring to . . . GODZILLA perhaps or ARMAGEDDON? If so, then I might agree with you that it caters to a blockbuster crowd which means less complexity and more special effects.

But, if you're referring to SAVING PRIVATE RYAN or SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE or ENGLISH PATIENT or even THE MATRIX . . . then I suggest you have some reconsidering to do.

Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!

Sphinx
User ID: 8882983 May 21st 4:14 PM
You both make good points, which are some of the reasons why I couldn't do without either. At the end of the day, it's pretty hard to watch a movie on the train, and pretty rude to red a book if your mates come round. Horses for Courses.

brosan May 22nd 3:06 AM
So I just checked amazon to find out that Nightflyers is actually available on VHS for 17.99. It has received very bad reviews from the professionals whereas the amazon customers said it was pretty enjoyable... hm... should order it.

From the description of Doorways - I think I actually saw it on a sunday morning matinee a few years ago. It was a very slow moving, dreamlike film - no wonder it was not meant to be a tv-series.

Omer
User ID: 9014973 May 22nd 6:55 AM
Son of Hot Pie -
As for the decline of the novel - I guess I'm a skeptic optimist. I believe that, even if we see more movies, even if we movies are more important culturally, the book is still globally superior.

But if I'm wrong, so what? I read. All my friends read. If some people don't read, that's their problem. Now they vote, true, but if we'll ignore the pollitical angle, than as long as there are enough bookstores and books to keep me happy, I won't complain.

At the end of the day, I like movies. But while Holliwood gives you the occasional powerful tale - Schindler's List, or The Game, or Fight Club - the average ( and I include The Matrix in it - terrible, terrible movie) is far less sterling.

OK, two points: first, I think TV is more of a threat to novels than movies are. In a way, movies are still a form of art, while TV is pure entertainment. That's mabye why I watch quite a few films - at the best of times, perhaps twice, three times a month - but hardly any TV at all.

the second point is I think you're ignoring the wide varriety of books available. I'd say I read about two books a week, on average. But I read about 30% SF , 50% Fantasy, Horror and Mainstream, and 20% non fiction. So if you read mostly Fantasy (which I barely read - I think I read 5 fanatasy epics in 1999, ACOK and AGOT and LEGENDS included), we'd probably have very little books in common other than ASoIaF.

Sphinx - yeah, books and movies aren't the same thing, but books are superior. They're intelectually and emotionally effecting, even the least of them. On the other hand, only acceptional movies have any value beyond the immidiate.

gill
User ID: 1223124 May 22nd 7:29 AM
I actually saw the movie of Nightflyers a few months ago - the first half, anyway. It was really, really bad. Of course, the fact that I absolutely love the story didn't help... All the characters had become really bland or one dimensional. Nothing happened (OK, the first half of the story isn't action-driven, but it's so atmospheric...). The heroine had become a normal-looking, non-altered, blonde white woman, rather than an amazing genetically altered black woman. It looked horribly like it was going to develop into a Hollywood love story with some horror thrown in.
You've been warned.

brosan May 22nd 10:19 AM
gill, urrrgh... sounds bad. The price is actually 9.99 us-$. Sorry

brosan May 23rd 4:42 AM
just got this from GRRM�s homepage...

Teleplays produced:

Twilight Zone episodes
"The Last Defender of Camelot" (1986) based on the short story by Roger Zelazny, nominated for WGA Award, best teleplay/ anthology, 1986. "The Once and Future King" (1986) based on a story by Bryce Maritano. "Lost and Found" (1986) based on the short story by Phyllis Eisenstein. "The Toys of Caliban" (1986) based on the story by Terry Matz. "The Road Less Travelled" (1986) original teleplay. Beauty and the Beast episodes "Terrible Savior" (1987) "Masques" (1987) "Shades of Grey" (1988) with David Peckinpah. "Promises of Someday" (1988) "Ozymandias" (1988) "Dead of Winter" (1988) "Brothers" (1989) "When the Blue Bird Sings" (1989) with Robert John Guttke "A Kingdom by the Sea" (1989) "Ceremony of Innocence" (1989) "Snow" (1989) "Beggar's Comet" (1990) "Invictus" (1990) Pilots "Doorways" -- Pilot for an ABC network series, Columbia Pictures, written 1991, filmed 1992, released on video 1993.

TELEPLAYS (UNPRODUCED):

"Xmas" -- Original teleplay, Max Headroom, 1987. In preproduction when the series was cancelled. "Black Cluster" -- Pilot for an ABC television series, Columbia Pictures, 1990. Never produced. "The Survivors" -- Two-hour pilot for a CBS television series, Trilogy Entertainment, 1992. Not produced. "Deep in the Heart" -- Backup script for Doorways series, 1992. "Starport" -- Two-hour pilot for a Fox network television series, Columbia Pictures Television, 1994. Not produced.

SCREENPLAYS (UNPRODUCED):

Fadeout -- Feature screenplay, Wildstreet Pictures, 1990. Wild Cards -- Feature screenplay, written in collaboration with Melinda M. Snodgrass, based on the Wild Cards anthologies and mosaic novels, Hollywood Pictures/ Disney Studio, 1993-1995. A Princess of Mars -- Feature screenplay, written in collaboration with Melinda M. Snodgrass, based on the novel by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Hollywood Pictures/ Disney Studio, 1993-94.

STORIES ADAPTED FOR FILM & TELEVISION:

"Remembering Melody" -- Episode of The Hitchhiker, Home Box Office, November 1984. "Nightflyers" -- Feature film, Vista Films 1987, screenplay by Robert Jaffe, directed by Robert Collector. "Sandkings" -- Two-hour TV movie for The Outer Limits, Showtime, 1995, teleplay by Melinda M. Snodgrass.

Has anyone seem some of these?

Sphinx
User ID: 8882983 May 23rd 12:39 PM
Omer, you're right about TV - it is the eater of souls and conversation (although obviously, films and documentaries and other good stuff _can_ be shown on TV - we're tallking here about the mindless brainrot that tops the ratings all day every day).

I disagree that novels are inherently superior, though, or even more moving. I can't think of many books that sucked me in as much as Three Kings or Fight Club (even the book Fight Club, although that may be because I'd watched the film first). Maybe Walking on Glass, One Hundred Years of Solitude and Imajica off the top of my head, but they're all pretty much on a par with the best films. And _nothing_ has ever left me as simply speechless as Seven.

BTW, what's wrong with the Matrix?

Omer
User ID: 9014973 May 23rd 12:50 PM
Well, as for the Matrix, the most obvious thing is that the plot is such a rediculous nonsense - the entire idea is that you use humans being as a baterie - now that's absored. The human body is a consumer of energy, not a producer of it. You'll need more energy in order to maintain a human being alive than the energy you can produce.

Omer
User ID: 9014973 May 23rd 12:53 PM
The problem with movies is that they're inheritenly insulting to your intelegence. As much as I've loved movies such as Seven of Te Game, they're incredibly dumb in their plot twists.

Also, movies are far less educational. If you read a book, you'll learn something about something. Maybe not every book, but from 90% of them. YOu can see millions of movies without learning anything.

Nynaeve
User ID: 2345204 May 23rd 11:32 PM
Omer, that's a BIG generalization there about movies being "inherently" insulting to the intelligence. I graduated with a film degree and am quite well-read. While I agree most films put to celluloid are nothing but a bog of filth, there are some redeeming films. And it is because of these sparing gems that I love films and find them wonderful. I don't look to a film to LEARN anything I might find in a book. I look to a film to have a catharsis. To know I am not the only human on the planet feeling a certain way. Have you ever seen the Italian film, Cinema Paradiso? Did you ever see the David Lean production of Lawrence of Arabia? Did you ever see the incrediblly written 'Lion In Winter' about Henry II and his wonderful queen Eleanor of Aquitaine? Did you see Braveheart - historically TERRIBLY inaccurate but a wonderful tale of what a man will do for his freedom?

When film-making works, it is a rare gift of beauty.

Nyn

Next 20 Messages Newest Messages

brosan	May 17th 3:56 AM Hi, just received my signed copy of "Nightflyers" from Overlook (together with Tuf Voyaging (signed) and the 1st ed. of GOT (signed -yes!). On "Nightflyers" they wrote "Now a major movie...". I was surprised to learn that GRRM obviously has done some work there. Has anyone seen this (and other movies)? Is there a list out on which episodes of Beauty and Beast he wrote and what are his future plans in that field? Has he expessed his thoughts about the movie business? Questions and questions....
Son of Hot Pie!!! User ID: 0276214	May 17th 4:28 PM After ten years with B&B, I don't think he cares to return to LA. He's open to feature films and writing scripts for his novels, I believe. Heard he's doing one for FEVRE DREAM but nothing big planned yet. Just a writing gig. As for him writing scripts for other works, I'm not sure what his answer would be. He seems very pleased to be back to writing novels and controlling his works his way rather than having them changed by others. Most of the above info. was from various interviews of GRRM Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!
LindaElane User ID: 0276214	May 17th 10:39 PM Here are the episodes of Beauty and the Beast that GRRM wrote: Terrible Savior(I believe GRRM introduces 'Mouse' character), Masques, Shades of Grey, Promises of Someday (introduces Devin, Vincent's 'brother'), Ozymandias, Dead of Winter, Brothers, When the Bluebird Sings, A Kingdom by the Sea, What Rough Beast, Ceremony of Innocence, Snow, Beggar's Comet, Invictus GRRM said at the San Diego signing that his overall experience in Hollywood was not a good one. I honestly never expect him to write a series for TV again. On the other hand, I would not rule out a movie. GRRM did not write for Beauty and the Beast for ten years. The series lasted under 3 years. He started as a writer and finished as something like "chief story editor". After the death of the "Catherine" character, the female lead, the series did not do well in spite of the excellent writing of GRRM. GRRM did not decide to ="kill her off"...rather, Linda Hamilton, who played the female lead, did not want to do the series anymore, and quit. I was a huge fan, the show made my week for many long sad weeks 10 years ago, but in season three they constantly showed it on different nights and showed specials instead of the show, so that I could only catch two season three episodes myself. The thing we have not seen is how well GRRM write romance. Honestly, he is great at it. I can't wait until someone in ASOIAF falls in love ::::sigh::::
Son of Hot Pie!!! User ID: 0276214	May 17th 11:04 PM LE, Typo . . . that was ten years pursuing the Hollywood career. That's a long time for anyone in that industry and I wouldn't hold it against him if he has no more interest in the Biz. Also, I don't think there's an actual position as "chief" story editor but there are many story editors. He was an actual producer for the show. It's on the jacket of my hard cover ACOK. That means he had clout but wasn't the showrunner. It's difficult for a writer to choose between Hollywood and novels. The mediums are somewhat different and require different emphasizes.
brosan User ID: 0909594	May 18th 4:34 AM Hey, thank you for the insight. The IMDB lists George as writer for Nightflyers and Doorways. Any information on that. Was he involved in scripting Nightflyers and is there a novel for Doorways. Has he expressed his thoughts on how he likes the films?
Omer User ID: 9014973	May 18th 12:06 PM IIRC, Doorways is a pilot shot for a series that never happened. Personnaly, I'm glad Martin's back to the printed world, and I hope he's here to stay. I wouldn't mind seeing a movie based on a book of his, or anything he wrote, but Novels are a superier form of storytelling, and Martin's a master storyteller. I really wanna see NIGHTFLYERS. I don't know how you can ruin it. All you have to do is stay line by line faithful to the novella, and you have one of the greatest SF movies ever.
Son of Hot Pie!!! User ID: 0276214	May 18th 2:46 PM Brosan, I don't know anything about that. Sorry. You have to remember that for every 10 to 12 scripts bought, only one is made into a movie. And, that doesn't include pitches and outlines, I would suspect. The making of a movie is like navigating a labyrinth with dozens of people chattering in your ear and trying to get you to go a different way. Just getting towards the beginning of making one requires strong personalities . . . and, if you have an A list actor or director backing you . . . even better. Travolta was the main reason for BATTLEFIELD EARTH being made . . . he took a massive pay cut. Hey, I just went to IMDB to check him out and they have listed him as only a STORY EDITOR for B&B. So LE may be right there. I thought he would have gotten up to producer level but I guess that makes more sense for him leaving now. Most writers who get up to PRODUCER level or higher in TV rarely leave b/c of the prestige, big bucks and potential glamour. The best chance for realizing the novels of A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE would most likely be in television. More room for details which would escape us in a feature film. Also, feature films have a very long wait and there's no way you would fit 800 pages in a 2-3 hr movie. Something would have to go out the window. You'd need a showrunner, who loved the series, and GRRM as at least an advisor, if not one of the main writers. Bringing in some other fantasy writer types would be great, too. That's what they did for BABYLON 5 with Duane and Gerrold. Of course, that would be tough to do and that's why some great novels and great scripts have come out mediocre or worse after being produced into a movie. Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!
Son of Hot Pie!!! User ID: 0276214	May 18th 2:51 PM Omer, I'm not entirely sure if novels are the best form of storytelling. I will agree with you that some writers are best suited for one particular area of writing and that could very well be novels for GRRM. Of course, if the first point is true, that's a pity because from what I understand the novel industry has shrunk in the last few decades. Less people are reading books, in other words. That's why so many publishing houses had to consolidate and pursue the blockbuster books. That isn't to say they're teetering off their foundation, but it's just not as big as it used to be. Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!
Omer User ID: 9014973	May 19th 9:02 AM Hot Pie's Son: I'm quite certain prose (rather than just novels, also short stories and novellas) are the best form of storytelling. That is because reading requires the atmost participation of the audience. You have to actually think about the tale, imagine it. The need for effort makes novels the most satisfying form of storytelling. For instant, I' ve never enjoyed a movie the way I enjoyed ASoIaF, or a hundred other great books. As for the number of people reading... I'm not certain. Until 2 hundred years ago or so, literacy was non existence for anyone but the higher classes. That is no longer the case. I'm enough of an optimist to believe that, eventually, people return to books as a true for of intellect pleasing efforts. The thing is, though, that since there are much more books out there than movies, obviously more people will see each movie than they'll read each book. I watch alot of movies, but I must reead at least five times more than I watch. Still, even if I talk to very literate people, often I'll find that while we have relatively few books we've all read, we've seen many of the same movies. That's simply because there are more books. Also, Holliwood produces such low quality entertainment, I'm certain anyone with a Brian will prefer reading, given time.
Son of Hot Pie!!! User ID: 0276214	May 19th 9:46 PM Omer, That's very true. Reading a book requires the imagination to work much more than when one sits in front of a movie screen or TV. Novels, when done right, give the reader a journey into the heads of interesting characters. That's harder to accomplish on the screen. Talking heads are usually a no no although some work around it. For instance, ONCE AND AGAIN does a really good job of tapping into the hidden thoughts of characters by leaping to them in black and white while they tell their views to an apparent counselor of some sort. For the most part, it's strategically placed and flows with the story. I'd say literacy came into place for a majority of people LESS than 200 years but I hear you. Michael Hague's SCREENWRITING website made the point that more people watch ROSEANNE than have seen GONE WITH THE WIND. Now, as to which has affected a person for the better after viewing/reading, was not answered. I'd like to think it was the book, but some people find ROSEANNE to be education so who knows. :) That aside, since the 80s and moves to consolidate publishing houses, I understand that gradually the readership has been eroding. There's a lot less time for middle writers to establish themselves. The hardcover books rest in the hands of the top writers. It used to be more forgiving and newer/middle tiered writers were given more time to let their book sit on the market. Now, it's like new TV shows, where you get yanked pretty soon if you don't show promise. I heard some radio host (this was a few years back) comment that they took a poll on how many books people read a year . . . most said only ONE. Not good. As for movies and books, the former is advertised much more so people are more aware of them. Also, movies are more popular than reading books and it can be a group shared experience. Moreover, it takes less time to sit and watch a movie than read a thick novel (unless you're a fast reader with great reading comprehension). Like it or not, movies are a more popular form of entertainment than novels. Take aside a regular group of people (obviously not the people on this board . . . HA!) and as you said, most of them will be abel to talk about several movies rather than several books. A more interesting point . . . take aside a group of fantasy readers and see if they can talk about the same three fantasy novels for the year compared to the same three (insert genre) movies. As for Hollywood producing low quality entertainment . . . that depends what you're referring to . . . GODZILLA perhaps or ARMAGEDDON? If so, then I might agree with you that it caters to a blockbuster crowd which means less complexity and more special effects. But, if you're referring to SAVING PRIVATE RYAN or SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE or ENGLISH PATIENT or even THE MATRIX . . . then I suggest you have some reconsidering to do. Remember, THE SEED IS STRONG!!!
Sphinx User ID: 8882983	May 21st 4:14 PM You both make good points, which are some of the reasons why I couldn't do without either. At the end of the day, it's pretty hard to watch a movie on the train, and pretty rude to red a book if your mates come round. Horses for Courses.
brosan	May 22nd 3:06 AM So I just checked amazon to find out that Nightflyers is actually available on VHS for 17.99. It has received very bad reviews from the professionals whereas the amazon customers said it was pretty enjoyable... hm... should order it. From the description of Doorways - I think I actually saw it on a sunday morning matinee a few years ago. It was a very slow moving, dreamlike film - no wonder it was not meant to be a tv-series.
Omer User ID: 9014973	May 22nd 6:55 AM Son of Hot Pie - As for the decline of the novel - I guess I'm a skeptic optimist. I believe that, even if we see more movies, even if we movies are more important culturally, the book is still globally superior. But if I'm wrong, so what? I read. All my friends read. If some people don't read, that's their problem. Now they vote, true, but if we'll ignore the pollitical angle, than as long as there are enough bookstores and books to keep me happy, I won't complain. At the end of the day, I like movies. But while Holliwood gives you the occasional powerful tale - Schindler's List, or The Game, or Fight Club - the average ( and I include The Matrix in it - terrible, terrible movie) is far less sterling. OK, two points: first, I think TV is more of a threat to novels than movies are. In a way, movies are still a form of art, while TV is pure entertainment. That's mabye why I watch quite a few films - at the best of times, perhaps twice, three times a month - but hardly any TV at all. the second point is I think you're ignoring the wide varriety of books available. I'd say I read about two books a week, on average. But I read about 30% SF , 50% Fantasy, Horror and Mainstream, and 20% non fiction. So if you read mostly Fantasy (which I barely read - I think I read 5 fanatasy epics in 1999, ACOK and AGOT and LEGENDS included), we'd probably have very little books in common other than ASoIaF. Sphinx - yeah, books and movies aren't the same thing, but books are superior. They're intelectually and emotionally effecting, even the least of them. On the other hand, only acceptional movies have any value beyond the immidiate.
gill User ID: 1223124	May 22nd 7:29 AM I actually saw the movie of Nightflyers a few months ago - the first half, anyway. It was really, really bad. Of course, the fact that I absolutely love the story didn't help... All the characters had become really bland or one dimensional. Nothing happened (OK, the first half of the story isn't action-driven, but it's so atmospheric...). The heroine had become a normal-looking, non-altered, blonde white woman, rather than an amazing genetically altered black woman. It looked horribly like it was going to develop into a Hollywood love story with some horror thrown in. You've been warned.
brosan	May 22nd 10:19 AM gill, urrrgh... sounds bad. The price is actually 9.99 us-$. Sorry
brosan	May 23rd 4:42 AM just got this from GRRM�s homepage... Teleplays produced: Twilight Zone episodes "The Last Defender of Camelot" (1986) based on the short story by Roger Zelazny, nominated for WGA Award, best teleplay/ anthology, 1986. "The Once and Future King" (1986) based on a story by Bryce Maritano. "Lost and Found" (1986) based on the short story by Phyllis Eisenstein. "The Toys of Caliban" (1986) based on the story by Terry Matz. "The Road Less Travelled" (1986) original teleplay. Beauty and the Beast episodes "Terrible Savior" (1987) "Masques" (1987) "Shades of Grey" (1988) with David Peckinpah. "Promises of Someday" (1988) "Ozymandias" (1988) "Dead of Winter" (1988) "Brothers" (1989) "When the Blue Bird Sings" (1989) with Robert John Guttke "A Kingdom by the Sea" (1989) "Ceremony of Innocence" (1989) "Snow" (1989) "Beggar's Comet" (1990) "Invictus" (1990) Pilots "Doorways" -- Pilot for an ABC network series, Columbia Pictures, written 1991, filmed 1992, released on video 1993. TELEPLAYS (UNPRODUCED): "Xmas" -- Original teleplay, Max Headroom, 1987. In preproduction when the series was cancelled. "Black Cluster" -- Pilot for an ABC television series, Columbia Pictures, 1990. Never produced. "The Survivors" -- Two-hour pilot for a CBS television series, Trilogy Entertainment, 1992. Not produced. "Deep in the Heart" -- Backup script for Doorways series, 1992. "Starport" -- Two-hour pilot for a Fox network television series, Columbia Pictures Television, 1994. Not produced. SCREENPLAYS (UNPRODUCED): Fadeout -- Feature screenplay, Wildstreet Pictures, 1990. Wild Cards -- Feature screenplay, written in collaboration with Melinda M. Snodgrass, based on the Wild Cards anthologies and mosaic novels, Hollywood Pictures/ Disney Studio, 1993-1995. A Princess of Mars -- Feature screenplay, written in collaboration with Melinda M. Snodgrass, based on the novel by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Hollywood Pictures/ Disney Studio, 1993-94. STORIES ADAPTED FOR FILM & TELEVISION: "Remembering Melody" -- Episode of The Hitchhiker, Home Box Office, November 1984. "Nightflyers" -- Feature film, Vista Films 1987, screenplay by Robert Jaffe, directed by Robert Collector. "Sandkings" -- Two-hour TV movie for The Outer Limits, Showtime, 1995, teleplay by Melinda M. Snodgrass. Has anyone seem some of these?
Sphinx User ID: 8882983	May 23rd 12:39 PM Omer, you're right about TV - it is the eater of souls and conversation (although obviously, films and documentaries and other good stuff _can_ be shown on TV - we're tallking here about the mindless brainrot that tops the ratings all day every day). I disagree that novels are inherently superior, though, or even more moving. I can't think of many books that sucked me in as much as Three Kings or Fight Club (even the book Fight Club, although that may be because I'd watched the film first). Maybe Walking on Glass, One Hundred Years of Solitude and Imajica off the top of my head, but they're all pretty much on a par with the best films. And _nothing_ has ever left me as simply speechless as Seven. BTW, what's wrong with the Matrix?
Omer User ID: 9014973	May 23rd 12:50 PM Well, as for the Matrix, the most obvious thing is that the plot is such a rediculous nonsense - the entire idea is that you use humans being as a baterie - now that's absored. The human body is a consumer of energy, not a producer of it. You'll need more energy in order to maintain a human being alive than the energy you can produce.
Omer User ID: 9014973	May 23rd 12:53 PM The problem with movies is that they're inheritenly insulting to your intelegence. As much as I've loved movies such as Seven of Te Game, they're incredibly dumb in their plot twists. Also, movies are far less educational. If you read a book, you'll learn something about something. Maybe not every book, but from 90% of them. YOu can see millions of movies without learning anything.
Nynaeve User ID: 2345204	May 23rd 11:32 PM Omer, that's a BIG generalization there about movies being "inherently" insulting to the intelligence. I graduated with a film degree and am quite well-read. While I agree most films put to celluloid are nothing but a bog of filth, there are some redeeming films. And it is because of these sparing gems that I love films and find them wonderful. I don't look to a film to LEARN anything I might find in a book. I look to a film to have a catharsis. To know I am not the only human on the planet feeling a certain way. Have you ever seen the Italian film, Cinema Paradiso? Did you ever see the David Lean production of Lawrence of Arabia? Did you ever see the incrediblly written 'Lion In Winter' about Henry II and his wonderful queen Eleanor of Aquitaine? Did you see Braveheart - historically TERRIBLY inaccurate but a wonderful tale of what a man will do for his freedom? When film-making works, it is a rare gift of beauty. Nyn