Great idea!
Author of "Survivor" - http://www.vaughnripley.com
"Adventure is worthwile in itself."
—Amelia Earhart
I was watching Dexter & thinking that, if you take away the serial killer angle, you have the foundation of a RJ series...
A guy who does his best to blend in, disappear in plain sight ....not interact with the authority...
i also think Jeremy Renner[ Avengers , Bourne Legacy] might make a good Jack candidate..he's very ordinary looking , but cool..
Am a semi-new Jack fan...very great series ...also Adversary cycle /secret history...muy bueno
A guy who does his best to blend in, disappear in plain sight ....not interact with the authority...
i also think Jeremy Renner[ Avengers , Bourne Legacy] might make a good Jack candidate..he's very ordinary looking , but cool..
Am a semi-new Jack fan...very great series ...also Adversary cycle /secret history...muy bueno
Bobby Gorgon Wrote:I was watching Dexter & thinking that, if you take away the serial killer angle, you have the foundation of a RJ series...
A guy who does his best to blend in, disappear in plain sight ....not interact with the authority...
i also think Jeremy Renner[ Avengers , Bourne Legacy] might make a good Jack candidate..he's very ordinary looking , but cool..
Am a semi-new Jack fan...very great series ...also Adversary cycle /secret history...muy bueno
Welcome, Bobby.
Where in CT are you?
EWMAN
thanks....i'm in ellington...
My first post to the forum -- just want to say that listening to the RJ books on audio keeps me sane in LA traffic. 
I agree that RJ is much better suited to the television format than the feature format. In TV-development speak the RJ stories would be referred to as "one-hander procedurals" (one-hander: single lead; procedural: detective-type, "find-the-bad-guy" stories). Procedurals are much loved by the TV industry because the stories can be easily contained in the 42-minute, five-act structure of network television. (They are also perceived as easier to write, but I'm not so sure how true that is.)
But we know all that! The Dexter example is an excellent one.
While "House of Cards" is perfect for Netflix, it definitely wouldn't work on, say, ABC. It's too intellectual and too slow-moving to bring in the level of viewership that ABC needs to support all that pre-sold advertising.
But an RJ series could work on ABC. RJ has action, romance, a fast-moving plot, a great cast of supporting characters, and a continuing mythology that rivals (and surpasses, I think) the best of the X-Files series. If a show like GRIMM can work on ABC, then RJ can certainly work.
On the other hand, a Netflix version of an RJ series could really be dark and edgy, really play up Jack's anti-hero status and foreground the darker horror aspects. But going that route would turn off a lot of viewers.
What would you guys prefer?
An RJ series that was more accessible to a wider audience, ala GRIMM?
Or a darker, grittier, more anti-hero RJ, ala Dexter?
I agree that RJ is much better suited to the television format than the feature format. In TV-development speak the RJ stories would be referred to as "one-hander procedurals" (one-hander: single lead; procedural: detective-type, "find-the-bad-guy" stories). Procedurals are much loved by the TV industry because the stories can be easily contained in the 42-minute, five-act structure of network television. (They are also perceived as easier to write, but I'm not so sure how true that is.)
But we know all that! The Dexter example is an excellent one.
While "House of Cards" is perfect for Netflix, it definitely wouldn't work on, say, ABC. It's too intellectual and too slow-moving to bring in the level of viewership that ABC needs to support all that pre-sold advertising.
But an RJ series could work on ABC. RJ has action, romance, a fast-moving plot, a great cast of supporting characters, and a continuing mythology that rivals (and surpasses, I think) the best of the X-Files series. If a show like GRIMM can work on ABC, then RJ can certainly work.
On the other hand, a Netflix version of an RJ series could really be dark and edgy, really play up Jack's anti-hero status and foreground the darker horror aspects. But going that route would turn off a lot of viewers.
What would you guys prefer?
An RJ series that was more accessible to a wider audience, ala GRIMM?
Or a darker, grittier, more anti-hero RJ, ala Dexter?
i feel like the more accessible Jack would be the way to go....The character is not perpetually gritty , brooding or even violent...
In fact, a character that collects all the crazy shtuff that Jack does , could handle the main stream [ ironically]......
Although, on the hand , The Tomb , All The Rage , & Hosts were all scary in their own special way...it would be a shame to water that down..;-0
In fact, a character that collects all the crazy shtuff that Jack does , could handle the main stream [ ironically]......
Although, on the hand , The Tomb , All The Rage , & Hosts were all scary in their own special way...it would be a shame to water that down..;-0
Polonius7 Wrote:But an RJ series could work on AMC
Fixed that for you. :p
I finally got around to watching DRIVE (Nicolas Winding Refn, 2011) starring Ryan Gosling and as I was watching I kept thinking, "this guy would be great as Repairman Jack." In DRIVE Gosling appears exactly as FPW describes Jack: a brown-haired guy of medium height and medium build who looks unremarkable in a crowd. He's also very convincing in the fighting department, Gosling could pull off anything that Jack needs to do. Gosling also has the ability to portray Jack's intelligence as well. An all-around good fit to portray Jack.