# Which book would you like to see made as a Film?



## Star Girl (Aug 18, 2011)

Seeing as so many books have been made into films, some good and some bad. I was wondering if anyone has any favourite books they'd like to see made into films or TV series.

 I don't know about how you feel, but with me I always get a sense of fear when some one announces that they are making a book I like into a film. Isaac Asimov's Foundation was annouced not to long ago and I'm very interesting and anxious to see what it'll be like. However some work out really well and some TV series based on books, like Game of Thrones, seem to work fine as well. 


[Sorry if there is a thread like this already, I tried looking but couldn't see anything.]


----------



## geordie bob (Aug 18, 2011)

I've always wanted to see legend by david gemmell or possibly The swords of night and day.


----------



## Mouse (Aug 18, 2011)

American Gods by Neil Gaiman would be pretty damn good. Garth Nix's Sabriel would be good too.


----------



## alchemist (Aug 18, 2011)

China Mieville's Perdido Street Station. Go on, Hollywood - I dare you.


----------



## HareBrain (Aug 18, 2011)

Even though I didn't like reading them much, I would like to see decent film versions of Steven Erikson's Malazan books.

Also, Elric.


----------



## HoopyFrood (Aug 18, 2011)

Like to see *Lies of Locke Lamora* made into a film. I think the setting would be awesome on the big screen, all those towers and elder glass, would love to see that. And Locke is a typically winning, witty, toeing-the-wrong-side-of-the-law-but-that's-fine-by-us protagonist that we'd want to watch. Good, twisty plot with shocking moments to toy with our emotions.


----------



## j d worthington (Aug 18, 2011)

Yes, a good film of Elric would be a wonderful thing to see; sadly, the project which has been in the works for years still seems to be getting nowhere fast. Ah, well....

I hope del Toro is still able to pull HPL's *At the Mountains of Madness* off; I'm a bit wary of that one, but at his best he certainly has the ability to do magnificent films, and if he did that level of work on this one... then it might not be HPL's novel, but it would still be one of the best films to ever come out of that field.

Actually, I think a film of J. G. Ballard's *The Drowned World* would be a good possibility. That novel is intensely visual to begin with, and if you got a good script and a director who knew how to give it that nightmarish, dream-like feel, and who didn't muck about too much with the original material, then you'd have one heck of a powerful (and very disturbing) film. *The Atrocity Exhibition* would have been an excellent choice for a film in the 1960s, with the experimentation which was going on with the language of film then; now... I'm not sure we have anyone with the vision to pull such a thing off successfully -- though I'd love to be proven wrong....

Then again, I'm still waiting for a truly faithful (not slavish; there's a difference) yet good adaptation of Mrs. Shelley's *Frankenstein*. (And no, I don't consider the Kenneth Branagh film to be such. Magnificent cast; beautiful cinematography, a rather good script... and the corpse just never got up off the table.)


----------



## Metryq (Aug 18, 2011)

I'd love to see Robert Heinlein's _The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress_ done as a mini-series on TV, or perhaps a very long cinema film. The scene with the Stilyagi Air Corps cycling the heckler through the repaired airlock is made for the movies.

Murray Leinster's _The Wailing Asteroid_ has already been made into a movie (_The Terrornauts_, 1967), but bore little resemblance to the book. I'd like to see the story done right—and not "updated" either. It should be retro sci-fi told in the same technical and political atmosphere in which it was written. _The Wailing Asteroid_ is not a *great* story, but there are lots of old sci-fi stories that would make excellent popcorn adventures.


----------



## Rodders (Aug 19, 2011)

I'm not too sure if i want to see any of my favourite books made into movies and i think movie makers have an obligation to come up with a few new stories themselves. 

I do think that TV is an excellent forum for good SF as a series or 5 can give proper credit to any great story.


----------



## Pyan (Aug 19, 2011)

geordie bob said:


> I've always wanted to see legend by david gemmell ...



I'll go with that - no need for much CGI, and short enough to avoid things been missed out. 

I'd also like to see _Lord Valentine's Castle_, by *Bob Silverberg*, and *Naomi Novik's* _Temeraire_ series as films.


----------



## Allegra (Aug 19, 2011)

I'd love to see The Culture on big screen, such as *Consider Phlebas*, *The Player of Games* and *Use of Weapons*.It wouldn't be easy I know, unless they have to change quite a bit and most probably in the end disappoint us quite a lot!


----------



## TheTomG (Aug 23, 2011)

A good Culture movie would be awesome. I think they have the technology to make it these days (the film effects technology, not actual Culture technology unfortunately, heh.) Probably 'Player of Games' would be my first movie choice, though 'Use of Weapons' is probably my favorite but its story telling mechanism in terms of timeline might not work in movie format.

Elric too would be fantastic, if done well. The main thing with any of these adaptations would be to avoid having them "Hollywoodized" beyond all recognition.

There are some Philip K. Dick novels I'd also enjoy as movies, with the same proviso as above, that they don't just get turned into some 'Total Recall' that bears little resemblance to the source work.


----------



## Quokka (Aug 23, 2011)

With modern special effects some of the SF classics would be a lot easier to do and many are still short enough stories to fit into a 2 hour film. I'm sure any of these would suck if really made but imo they _could_ be done well.

_Jem_ - Frederik Pohl (This could really work)
_Mission of Gravity_ - Hal Clement
_Ringworld_ - Larry Niven (never going to happen now with the Halo franchise).

Arthur C Clarke's _A Fall of Moondust_ would have made a great 70s style disaster movie.


----------



## biodroid (Aug 23, 2011)

Neal Asher's Cormac series would work as a Hollywood blockbuster maybe?


----------



## thaddeus6th (Aug 23, 2011)

Mine!

This seems unlikely, however, especially as it has yet to be published.

I'd quite like to see The First Law Trilogy, and also Space Captain Smith. Hoopyfrood's Lies of Locke Lamora suggestion is also excellent.


----------



## Foxbat (Aug 23, 2011)

Julian May's Saga Of The Exiles would be nice to see on the big screen. 

Also, I agree with  Perdido Street Station - could look wonderful if done right.


----------



## Star Girl (Aug 23, 2011)

I normally don't really enjoy a book to film adaptation unless it's really impressive, like exactly the same just a film,  or makes it different from the book so it is a different story and you can enjoy it in a different light. For instance I really liked Children of Men both film and book because both were different but yet told the same issues and feelings. 

For me I'd really like to see a TV series of The Caves of Steel by Isaac Asimov, just a crime drama with Elijah and Daneel with the story from the book and maybe added crimes for the two to investigate. I'd like to see what they would do with the story and how they'd treat the divide between the New Yorkers and the Spacers. I'd also love to see what style they'd go for with the show. I always imagined a classic detective story look with the elements of the futuristic city.


----------



## Glen (Aug 24, 2011)

"The Road to Corlay" Richard Cowper.

I enjoyed it more years ago than I care to remember.  I am unwilling to read it again, in case it hasn't stood the test of time*.  If I didn't like the movie I could blame it on the adaption.

* "Wandering Worlds" Terry Greenhough.  Took me forever to remember this book, so I hope I have it right.  I loved it, it made a big impression, and a re-read spoilt it 'cos the spaceship had a ticker-tape printer, or some such.  Anachronisms in dated sci-fi...whole other thread.


----------



## Cayal (Aug 26, 2011)

Green Eggs and Ham directed by Michael Bay 

Seriously, I would like to see some of the EU Star Wars books made into movies (even animated like the Clone Wars), also would like to see House of Leaves made into a movie.


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 26, 2011)

2001: A Space Odyssey 

No really I would, although they'd have to change the title obviously.


----------



## Metryq (Aug 26, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> 2001: A Space Odyssey
> 
> No really I would, although they'd have to change the title obviously.



I generally hate remakes, and I especially don't see how _2001: A Space Odyssey_ could be improved. The book and the movie were written together, and any differences in the plot are minor: Jupiter vs. Saturn, Dave Bowman leaves the ship to chase Frank or not. (Clarke had already used the naked crossing of vacuum stunt in another story.)

The movie served two purposes: show the audience what spaceflight might look like in the next century, and a philosophical treatment on mankind's destiny. _2010: The Year We Make Contact_ is for anyone who did not "get" the first movie. And it visited some of the concepts not used in the first film, such as radiator "wings" (_Leonov's_ were still very small) and an external rotating habitat section. The ballute was a nice touch. 

I submit that the title would _not_ have to be changed. So the real world of 2001 did not have the technology seen in the movie, but the movie was released in 1968, before the actual Moon landings. At the time, giant space stations, regular shuttle flights to orbit and the moonbases (plural) might have been optimistic, yet possible. The space race did not maintain its pace. In the real world people lost interest in spaceflight the moment Armstrong's boot touched the surface. "Okay, we're done." Sci-fi is _speculation_, not prediction. 

Also, Kubrick and Clarke picked 2001 intentionally—it was the first year of the new century and particularly the new millennium. (Most people can't count.) There's an almost Biblical symbolism. The man-apes were shown to be war-like, and the fast-forward takes us into orbit with a nuclear weapons platform. But instead of Armageddon preceding the new millennium, man's destiny into space offered hope for a better future.

The independent film _Man Conquers Space_ will show an alternate history of how things _might_ have been. If you think it's just wishful thinking, historical accounts show that the Nazi rocket team launched two flights in early 1945 with a winged, shuttle-like upper stage. The second flight may have actually reached the edge of space, even though the unmanned vehicle broke up on reentry. Just because the future didn't go the way Von Braun, Ley, Bonestell and others envisioned does not mean such a movie is "wrong."


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 28, 2011)

I think the title would have to be changed simply for that fact that 2001 is now in the past, and so it would just look silly. Just remove the year and have the title as "A Space Odyssey" for example, seems fine to me.

I don't think it will ever happen, because the original film is somehow seen as sacrosanct to a lot of people, but, despite loving it as a kid, I think it's pretty poor really. It's visually and aurally a very good piece of cinematic work, but it doesn't do a very good job of telling any sort of story. For example, after sitting through half an hour of lovely space **** docking sequences, and hostesses wandering around in zero gravity, Heywood Floyd finally arrives on the Moon, we see everyone settling down to hear the talk about what's actually going on... and then it skips to the next scene! (Which is incidentally yet more model shots and minimal dialogue). The final 15 or 20 minutes of the film also doesn't mean a thing unless you read the book.

On the other hand the book (in common with most other Clarke stuff I've read), while comveying the plot much much better, is also a very dry and descriptive read, somewhat lacking in artistry. If the book could swing some way towards the film, or the film some way towards the book then I think something wonderful would be the result. But as it stands at the moment the choice is either a rather dry novel, or an incomprehensible art flick. Which to me is just such a shame because at the heart of it I really do think it's probably the best sci-fi story ever written, it's just not been told very well yet.

I'd actually love to see the extra 40 minutes or whatever it was that got cut from the original film version as I suspect that that's where a lot of the plot might be hidden.

edit: lol, not sure what I put in there to get it asteriskified, but it may have been a typo of the word "ship"


----------



## Metryq (Aug 28, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> I really do think it's probably the best sci-fi story ever written, it's just not been told very well yet.



Check out Mamoru Oshii's _Ghost in the Shell_. The characters and situations vary from those in the original manga, but the adaptation is good. In the closing chapters of _2001: A Space Odyssey_, Clarke describes an age of machine entities. Where _2001_ spans uncounted millions of years between the dawn of intellect through incomprehensible, god-like, incorporeal beings, _Ghost_ examines memory, the self, and an "alien" awareness that is near omniscient compared to humans—yet it is just a tiny portion of _2001_. Because it has more plot and overt explanation, perhaps you might find it more desirable.



> I'd actually love to see the extra 40 minutes or whatever it was that got cut from the original film version as I suspect that that's where a lot of the plot might be hidden.



Plot was irrelevant in _2001_. Odds are those missing 40 minutes are more colored lights and strange landscapes with acid trip posterization. I don't think the argument can be made that a new film halfway between the book and the original film should be made. Books and movies are different media so that even the most straightforward, script-like book will need alterations. Timothy Hines' _The War of the Worlds_ is just one example of how terrible a literal screen adaptation can be.


----------



## Pyan (Aug 28, 2011)

Star Girl said:


> For me I'd really like to see a TV series of The Caves of Steel by Isaac Asimov....



There is one already, with Peter Cushing, no less, as Elijah Baley...

The Caves of Steel


----------



## Connavar (Aug 28, 2011)

*Altered Carbon* by Morgan would be a very cool cyberpunk,noir thriller with great action.   By Luc Besson or someone else who knows his SF,action thrillers.


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 28, 2011)

Metryq said:


> Plot was irrelevant in _2001_. Odds are those missing 40 minutes are more colored lights and strange landscapes with acid trip posterization. I don't think the argument can be made that a new film halfway between the book and the original film should be made. Books and movies are different media so that even the most straightforward, script-like book will need alterations. Timothy Hines' _The War of the Worlds_ is just one example of how terrible a literal screen adaptation can be.


 
Of course the argument can be made, an argument can be made for most things. In fact I just made one. Whether you agree with it or not is a different matter, but that doesn't mean such things shouldn't be suggested.


----------



## Star Girl (Aug 28, 2011)

pyan said:


> There is one already, with Peter Cushing, no less, as Elijah Baley...
> 
> The Caves of Steel


I've already seen that... I kind of enjoyed it however I want a remake which is more gritty and realistic than that one. Although I still enjoyed that version.


----------



## clovis-man (Aug 29, 2011)

Hard to think of an SF book that I would really think of as good material for a film. The movie (almost) never measures up to the book. My favorite Banks, Reynolds, Kress, Vinge, etc. don't look like they would be treated well by Hollywood. One that might work, although the canvas may be too large, is *Red Mars* by Robinson. The FX would readily be attainable by current "filmic" minds and, if it turned out to be a hit, there is ready made sequel material.


----------



## Oskari (Aug 29, 2011)

No more superhero adaptations, please! At least give it a break for about 10 years and then re-think your strategy, Hollywood.

Okay, got that off my chest ...

If I may be so bold, I'd love to work on a remake of *Silent Running*. I've watched that movie many times. Even though it's slow and clumsy at times, I think the themes explored are powerful and especially relevant today.

If I had any say in writing the script, one idea I'd consider is casting Bruce Dern's daughter, Laura, as the main protagonist - just for a bit of continuity and respect for the original. I'd probably even include Bruce in a cameo role and, perhaps, cast him as the messenger from Earth that gives the orders to abort the mission and, therefore, the catalyst for the destruction of Earth's last forests.


----------



## Rodders (Aug 29, 2011)

Connavar said:


> *Altered Carbon* by Morgan would be a very cool cyberpunk,noir thriller with great action. By Luc Besson or someone else who knows his SF,action thrillers.


 
Good call Connavar. Black Man (or Thirteen) would also make a superb movie. As a bit Alastair Reynolds fan, i'd love to see Revelation Space on the screen, but i don't think that this would suit the big screen and would be better off as a TV series. 

I'd love to see Clive Barker's Weaveworld done as a movie. Done right, they could do justice to this beautiful book IMO.


----------



## Connavar (Aug 29, 2011)

Yeah Black Man would be a hardcore, stand alone version of Kovac books.  Hollywood would typically give it to Will Smith and make Marsalis a hero, not amoral assasin im sure 

Thats why books like Morgan SF is more vivid,visual than SF films in hollywood.  They would get ruined by hollywood unless its brain dead as Transformers.....


----------



## Varangian (Aug 29, 2011)

David Gemmell's "Legend" would look pretty darn good on the big screen!


----------



## Metryq (Aug 30, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> But as (_2001: A Space Odyssey_) stands at the moment the choice is either a rather dry novel, or an incomprehensible art flick.



"I believe that an artist should always leave some free space for interpretation, giving only some hints on the story behind it—completely self-explaining art has a tendency of being boring, because it doesn’t involve the viewer’s mind to complete the puzzle."


----------



## CyBeR (Aug 30, 2011)

I'd actually love to see some really fast paced Sci-Fi get turned into either a series or a full fledged film. We really aren't getting enough FUN Sci-Fi into cinemas these days and it's a darn shame. 

I'd love to see *Retribution falls* by_ Chris Wooding_ turned into a film. It's fun, great characters that would translate well to the big screen and a heap of fun in action. 

Aside from that, I'd love to see a well made *Dune* film at long last. No, the Hallmark ones aren't that satisfying, and nor are the classic ones. 

And I have to echo Metryq's idea: I really don't think there could be anything to be gained out of a "dumbed down" remake of 2001. At best, what I believe would be a rather good idea is a story inspired by 2001, film and book, but that can go strange new places instead of trying to recapture the original's lightning.


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 30, 2011)

Metryq said:


> "I believe that an artist should always leave some free space for interpretation, giving only some hints on the story behind it—completely self-explaining art has a tendency of being boring, because it doesn’t involve the viewer’s mind to complete the puzzle."


 
It depends if you want your film to tell a story or if you want it to be a moving abstract painting I suppose. Also, does that mean you think the book is pointless?


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 30, 2011)

CyBeR said:


> And I have to echo Metryq's idea: I really don't think there could be anything to be gained out of a "dumbed down" remake of 2001. At best, what I believe would be a rather good idea is a story inspired by 2001, film and book, but that can go strange new places instead of trying to recapture the original's lightning.


 
Well I never said it would be a widely-held opinion  but I do object to the term "dumbed down" just because I would like a version to be a lot closer to the book than the film.


----------



## mike1366 (Aug 30, 2011)

The Hyperion books by Dan Simmons could be amazing films, if they were done well. According to IMDB, the first one is in pre-production for a 2013 release.


----------



## clovis-man (Aug 30, 2011)

mike1366 said:


> The Hyperion books by Dan Simmons could be amazing films, if they were done well. According to IMDB, the first one is in pre-production for a 2013 release.


 
And *Rendezvous With Rama* has been a targeted film project for decades. The rights were purchased shortly after the book's release. IMDB now calls it for 2013 also. Pshaw! And monkeys..............

*Hyperion* could be visually stunning, but I have no confidence in anyone getting it done right or done at all.


----------



## Metryq (Aug 30, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> It depends if you want your film to tell a story or if you want it to be a moving abstract painting I suppose. Also, does that mean you think the book is pointless?



Not at all. One might see the book as a classic example of the British understatement. Clarke wrote about very fantastic things in a dry, unpoetic way. Carried too far, that can be a curse. In the sequel _2063: Odyssey Two_ Clarke reduced the monolith, an awe-inspiring enigma, to a mere computer that Mankind tries to short circuit with a software virus. I also noted that books and movies are different media with different "languages." 

Is _Gattaca_ merely a cautionary tale about genetic bigotry simply because that is what the plot spells out?

Is _The Sky Crawlers_ about high-tech reincarnation and oppressive fate handed down from evil corporations?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-cpojkILO0


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 30, 2011)

I don't think being unambiguous about what's actually happening on a basic narrative level detracts in any way from looking for deeper meanings or picking up on broader general themes. If anything, if you're struggling to just work out what's actually going on and why, then you're less likely to be thinking about what it all actually "means".

It's also rather ironic that you're now saying that books and films are different media with different languages, after you used a quote about a painting and applied it to a film 

Incidentally, in 3001 (which I think is the book you're referring too) Clarke himself altered the original dates so that the first film/book took place in the 2030s and not 2001, so I don't think it would be too disrespectful to do that in any putative remake, although I still think simply not mentioning any dates would be the best way.


----------



## Metryq (Aug 31, 2011)

LadyLara said:


> It's also rather ironic that you're now saying that books and films are different media with different languages, after you used a quote about a painting and applied it to a film.



Perhaps you mean non sequitur rather than ironic. And the quote said "artists" and "art," which is a generalization I find applicable to books and movies. The quote said nothing about paintings.

What's ironic is that _Thus Spake Zarathustra_ in the soundtrack to _2001_ suggests the intuitive leaps that are the hallmark of human intelligence and the elusive goal of A.I. programmers, yet you seem to be arguing against those very connections in the telling of the movie.

It's been a long time since I read the _2001_ sequels, so the virus attack on the monolith may well have been _3001_. (I said "_2063_" previously, but the book is "_2061_.") Whichever book it was, I can't believe a technically oriented writer like Clarke would use such a gimmick—coincidentally at the same time a silly Hollywood movie did.


----------



## clovis-man (Aug 31, 2011)

Metryq said:


> What's ironic is that _Thus Spake Zarathustra_ in the soundtrack to _2001_ suggests the intuitive leaps that are the hallmark of human intelligence and the elusive goal of A.I. programmers, yet you seem to be arguing against those very connections in the telling of the movie.


 
Nietsche's influence on Strauss and in the formulation of "Also Sprach Zarathustra" got a little warped in the translation. Staruss was mostly interested in what he saw as Nietsche's upholding the status of the artist in a post-metaphysical world and in (of all things) predestination. Some of the most striking of the music was designed to expose man's unfortunate dependence on sentimentality. It backfired, because the music itself inspired sentiment.

As far as Kubrick was concerned, I think he was simply drawn to the dramatic effect of the first bars. He used Khachaturian's "Gayne" to good effect also, but there was no relation to the actual theme of the ballet from which the music was lifted.


----------



## Metryq (Aug 31, 2011)

Thanks, Clovis-Man. Have you heard Alex North's original score? The studio arranged it, Kubrick just nodded his head and said thanks, then used the music he wanted. Thankfully.


----------



## LadyLara (Aug 31, 2011)

Metryq said:


> It's been a long time since I read the _2001_ sequels, so the virus attack on the monolith may well have been _3001_. (I said "_2063_" previously, but the book is "_2061_.") Whichever book it was, I can't believe a technically oriented writer like Clarke would use such a gimmick—coincidentally at the same time a silly Hollywood movie did.


 
It's true, I don't really like any of the sequels as I don't think they have very much to say, I think they were just vehicles for Clarke to let his imagination run on things like Jovian life, comet-mining (or whatever was going on in 2061) and space elevators and other things like that. But then most of his writing seems to be more about putting a scientific idea across than actually telling a story. I do think turning the monoliths just into big computers was a bit rubbish in 3001 too.

But anyway, all I was saying was that, in my ideal world, I would like to see a film made of the book. If you can imagine that there never was a film, and that it was simply the book written in the 60s, then it's prefectly feasible that someone would pick up the rights and make a film of it now, and that that film would be very different to the one that was made. And as writing of the book was integral with the making of the original film then making something that was stylistically closer to the book would in no way be "disprespectful" to anyone or anything. Kubrick made his film the way he did for a reason and that's fine by me, but there's room for a different stylistic take on the story, as the book proves, and I would like to see it.


----------



## Abernovo (Sep 14, 2011)

So many books could be made into good films, if the studios had the guts to stick to the spirit of the books.

_The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ by Heinlein

_The Book of Skulls _by Robert Silverberg

and just as a suggestion, an Edwardian version of  _The War of the Worlds _by H G Wells. Personally I'd find it more interesting than the two 'updated' versions made by Hollywood that pretty much only shared a name with the book.

Iain M Banks _Culture_ novels could make good films too. Problem is a lot of Hollywood execs don't seem to respect viewers' intelligence and class a lot of books like _Culture_ as too 'cerebral'.


----------



## Diggler (Sep 14, 2011)

At the moment it would be Ex-Heroes. Superheroes and a 15 ft tall human controlled Mech fighting off zombie hordes, and gang members, in a post apocalyptic L.A. is the flavour of the month for me.


----------



## Metryq (Sep 14, 2011)

James P. Hogan's _The Proteus Operation_.

Time travel is a sci-fi staple, and audiences love action. This story has both. All too many time travel stories run afoul of paradoxes and other logical flaws. However, _The Proteus Operation_ features some fantastic twists without the usual pitfalls. If a movie could deliver even half the wealth of detail and character development in this book, it would be a top-notch sci-fi experience.

Aside from the real people listed in the summary link above, Isaac Asimov also appears as a minor character.


----------



## Mith (Sep 14, 2011)

_The Lies of Locke Lamora_! Would love to see Locke, Jean and crew strutting their stuff on the big screen.

Matt Stover's _Heroes Die_ would translate well from book to film I think, a really good story with lots of kick ass action scenes to keep an impatient audience entertained!


----------



## jojajihisc (Sep 15, 2011)

Here is an interesting called "Don't Remake These 21 Movies, Film These Books Instead" which makes some interesting cases. Several books I'm not familiar with are mentioned and a few others I'd like to see get done. The lack of risk-taking in Hollywood over the last decade has taken its toll with me and even these suggestions wouldn't be wholly original as they're based on books but at least they aren't remakes or old TV show adaptations.


----------



## TheTomG (Sep 15, 2011)

That is a good article! I was amazed and frightened to see the number of remakes being worked on or planned. As someone who is creative, I am not sure what it is with remaking a movie that was perfectly fine to begin with.

So I know special effects have come a long way, sure, but are people really unable to see past those and enjoy great stories and acting and directing? Are our imaginations so crippled these days that we can't come up with anything new?

I've seen these originals - please, I want to see new movies, not watch the same ones I've seen before with a new lick of paint on it!


----------



## clovis-man (Sep 15, 2011)

jojajihisc said:


> Here is an interesting called "Don't Remake These 21 Movies, Film These Books Instead" which makes some interesting cases. Several books I'm not familiar with are mentioned and a few others I'd like to see get done. The lack of risk-taking in Hollywood over the last decade has taken its toll with me and even these suggestions wouldn't be wholly original as they're based on books but at least they aren't remakes or old TV show adaptations.


 
I'm not so sure that a Doc Smith "Lensman" movie would be all that good. I certainly agree that a *When Worlds Collide* remake isn't a good idea. But why not the book sequel: *After Worlds Collide*? Philip Wylie and Edwin Balmer wrote both "Before" and "After" within a year of each other (1933 and 1934). They were certainly intended to be a matched pair.


----------



## Rodders (Sep 16, 2011)

I've recently finished Greg Bear's Hull Zero Three and thought that would translate quite well to the big screen.


----------

