Ever since I joined, I have seen a lot of buzz around here about a possible RJ movie. Plainly, the fans are excited. Certainly, fpw is excited: you get to see your creations on the big screen, big payday of course, etc. However, I would prefer not to have an RJ movie. Why?
1- I am not a movie buff. Hollywood in general makes bad movies since the blockbuster mentality took over after Star Wars . Oh sure, I'll watch them at home sometimes, but I hate the theater.
2- I prefer books. You can't curl up with a movie. Also, I imagine the books I read my way. I don't like confusing my mental picture with someone else's.
3- Call me petty, but while I don't mind the RJ fan base expanding, I'd hate for it too include the part of the public that doesn't know what a book is. It may not feel as special to me.
4- Hollywood does poor with SF movies in general, and does a horrible job turning the genre of fantastic fiction into movies. Let's recap a bit:
Asimov- Bicentennial Man- yawn
I, Robot- puh-lease
Nightfall- Oh the horror of it all. Worst movie ever!
Bradbury- Martian Chronicles- who knew Mars could be so boring?
Clarke- 2001- Well, here is an exception. Not a favorite movie of mine (too slow), actually, but I'll admit it is a cut above the rest, and a critic's darling.
Dick- Do Androids Dream- OK- another exception- SF book turned into classic movie.
We can Remember It For You Wholesale- The movie should have been titles "How Ahnold and Sharon Stone ruin movies in 3 easy steps".
Minority Report- Great Story, awful movie
Heinlein- Puppet Masters- this is a joke right? Could this movie have been worse? And such great material to work from. A shame.
Starship Troopers- aka "How to take a sophisticated SF story, and turn it into a killer-bugs-from-space movie."
Herbert- Dune- The best thing about this movie was Sting naked.
Tolkein- animated Hobbit, LOTR, ROTK- Wow, these were bad.
LOTR (Peter Jackson version)- one of the best movies ever.
So here is my scorecard- 12 classic stories, 3 good movies. And this is not even counting the movies that are so bad I have never seen (Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the Keep, etc etc etc).
I expect a lot of flak, so start firing...
1- I am not a movie buff. Hollywood in general makes bad movies since the blockbuster mentality took over after Star Wars . Oh sure, I'll watch them at home sometimes, but I hate the theater.
2- I prefer books. You can't curl up with a movie. Also, I imagine the books I read my way. I don't like confusing my mental picture with someone else's.
3- Call me petty, but while I don't mind the RJ fan base expanding, I'd hate for it too include the part of the public that doesn't know what a book is. It may not feel as special to me.
4- Hollywood does poor with SF movies in general, and does a horrible job turning the genre of fantastic fiction into movies. Let's recap a bit:
Asimov- Bicentennial Man- yawn
I, Robot- puh-lease
Nightfall- Oh the horror of it all. Worst movie ever!
Bradbury- Martian Chronicles- who knew Mars could be so boring?
Clarke- 2001- Well, here is an exception. Not a favorite movie of mine (too slow), actually, but I'll admit it is a cut above the rest, and a critic's darling.
Dick- Do Androids Dream- OK- another exception- SF book turned into classic movie.
We can Remember It For You Wholesale- The movie should have been titles "How Ahnold and Sharon Stone ruin movies in 3 easy steps".
Minority Report- Great Story, awful movie
Heinlein- Puppet Masters- this is a joke right? Could this movie have been worse? And such great material to work from. A shame.
Starship Troopers- aka "How to take a sophisticated SF story, and turn it into a killer-bugs-from-space movie."
Herbert- Dune- The best thing about this movie was Sting naked.
Tolkein- animated Hobbit, LOTR, ROTK- Wow, these were bad.
LOTR (Peter Jackson version)- one of the best movies ever.
So here is my scorecard- 12 classic stories, 3 good movies. And this is not even counting the movies that are so bad I have never seen (Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the Keep, etc etc etc).
I expect a lot of flak, so start firing...
You make very valid points. Nobody on this board wants to see RJ made into a stinker of a movie (any other examples come to mind?). But, if a movie is done right like Peter Jackson's LOTR Trilogy, then we'd all be really, really happy. Get the right writer, director and cast, RJ could be very good. Get someone like Uwe Boll and Christian Slater and I think everyone on this board would storm Hollywood to exact a very painful revenge.
Scott Hajek
[i]"A beer right now would sound good, but I'd rather drink one than listen to it."[/i]
I, personally, am excited for the movie, but I certainly acknowledge the potential for a lousy result. There was a thread recently about movies that were as good as, or better than the books they were based on. I hope the RJ movie will be one of those. Hopefully the movie will draw more people to the books and FPW will capture even more readers with his excellent books. We'll have to wait and see how it turns out 
I didn't list them earlier, but here are specific concerns about RJ that I have:
RJ is a very resourceful fellow. Yes, he is a good shot and a better than average fighter, but he mostly wins because he is first (ie quick) or because he is smart. Hollywood doesn't like this. They either like the guy who shoots everybody or the martial arts expert who can singlehandedly take on 4 guys at once. That is not who RJ is, and if a director did that, it would ruin the character.
RJ is not a good looking pretty boy. He looks like the average Joe. Most actors are pretty boys. The very few (ie Johnny Depp) can 'dress down' and pull it off, but there aren't many guys who as good as Johnny Depp around. fpw likes the actor who can't be named, so we'll see.
RJ is, lets face it, a nerd. I like that about him. He likes all those bad SF movies, and I'll bet we've read the same books. Hollywood doesn't like nerds. If they try to turn him into a suave James Bond type... yuck.
RJ's apartment looks like a flea market meets Hurricane Andrew. Can a good set designer show this correctly without making him look like one of those crazy ladies who have 34 cats and never leave the house? I believe this can be pulled off, but get a real talented artist for this one. For some reason, I would be as excited to see his apartment as anything else.
Can a good director pull off the fine balancing act that fpw has, namely of the dark, mysterious non-citizen with no name or identity versus the warm, loving, and kind boyfriend/father? Get a REAL good director for this.
All the things I think about on a slow Friday...
RJ is a very resourceful fellow. Yes, he is a good shot and a better than average fighter, but he mostly wins because he is first (ie quick) or because he is smart. Hollywood doesn't like this. They either like the guy who shoots everybody or the martial arts expert who can singlehandedly take on 4 guys at once. That is not who RJ is, and if a director did that, it would ruin the character.
RJ is not a good looking pretty boy. He looks like the average Joe. Most actors are pretty boys. The very few (ie Johnny Depp) can 'dress down' and pull it off, but there aren't many guys who as good as Johnny Depp around. fpw likes the actor who can't be named, so we'll see.
RJ is, lets face it, a nerd. I like that about him. He likes all those bad SF movies, and I'll bet we've read the same books. Hollywood doesn't like nerds. If they try to turn him into a suave James Bond type... yuck.
RJ's apartment looks like a flea market meets Hurricane Andrew. Can a good set designer show this correctly without making him look like one of those crazy ladies who have 34 cats and never leave the house? I believe this can be pulled off, but get a real talented artist for this one. For some reason, I would be as excited to see his apartment as anything else.
Can a good director pull off the fine balancing act that fpw has, namely of the dark, mysterious non-citizen with no name or identity versus the warm, loving, and kind boyfriend/father? Get a REAL good director for this.
All the things I think about on a slow Friday...
So, the real question isn't whether or not you want to see the RJ movie made, but are you optimistic or pessimistic about the result.
Prior to the LOTR movies I would have been more pessimistic about properly adapting this character to the big screen. However, after more crap like Alone in the Dark being released, there is reason to fear a disaster.
Prior to the LOTR movies I would have been more pessimistic about properly adapting this character to the big screen. However, after more crap like Alone in the Dark being released, there is reason to fear a disaster.
Scott Hajek
[i]"A beer right now would sound good, but I'd rather drink one than listen to it."[/i]
undefinedundefinedundefined
I would like to see a good Repairman Jack movie made, not some half-assed
Hollywood slap-dash misinterpretation. I agree with Mr._Falcon about how
Hollywood takes really good, even classic sci-fi novels and just totally
trashes them in their efforts to make a fast buck.
FYI Mr_Falcon, there was an excellent remake of Dune put together by the
Sci-Fi channel. It starred William Hurt as Duke Leto and followed the book
so closely. It had good effects, but did not rely on them to tell the story.
It is roughly 265 minutes long (4 hours, 25 minutes) and you can probably
order a copy of it through your local video retail outlet. I totally recommend
this film. Like you, I was disappointed in the "Sting" version. Also, like you,
I was upset about the mutilations performed on all the books you mentioned
that were made into movies. Most especially Starship Troopers. Did those
Hollywood jerks even bother to read the book? More often than not
Heinlein used his novels as a vehicle for his social beliefs; the only belief
shown by Hollywood is that movies with extravagant FX make big bucks.
I would like to see a good Repairman Jack movie made, not some half-assed
Hollywood slap-dash misinterpretation. I agree with Mr._Falcon about how
Hollywood takes really good, even classic sci-fi novels and just totally
trashes them in their efforts to make a fast buck.
FYI Mr_Falcon, there was an excellent remake of Dune put together by the
Sci-Fi channel. It starred William Hurt as Duke Leto and followed the book
so closely. It had good effects, but did not rely on them to tell the story.
It is roughly 265 minutes long (4 hours, 25 minutes) and you can probably
order a copy of it through your local video retail outlet. I totally recommend
this film. Like you, I was disappointed in the "Sting" version. Also, like you,
I was upset about the mutilations performed on all the books you mentioned
that were made into movies. Most especially Starship Troopers. Did those
Hollywood jerks even bother to read the book? More often than not
Heinlein used his novels as a vehicle for his social beliefs; the only belief
shown by Hollywood is that movies with extravagant FX make big bucks.
I believe Repairman Jack movie will be okay. We should believe it. If we can't believe, who can believe?
But this is sure thing; If director(or screen witer) loves Repairman Jack novels, this movie will be success. The one reason of LOTR's success was peter Jackson loved this story.
But this is sure thing; If director(or screen witer) loves Repairman Jack novels, this movie will be success. The one reason of LOTR's success was peter Jackson loved this story.
Mr_Falcon Wrote:Ever since I joined, I have seen a lot of buzz around here about a possible RJ movie. Plainly, the fans are excited. Certainly, fpw is excited: you get to see your creations on the big screen, big payday of course, etc. However, I would prefer not to have an RJ movie. Why?
I would like to see an RJ movie primarily because it would promote FPW's books. FPW has had a significant part in writing the script, so it might not be too bad -- if they stick to the script.
Quote:1- I am not a movie buff. Hollywood in general makes bad movies since the blockbuster mentality took over after Star Wars . Oh sure, I'll watch them at home sometimes, but I hate the theater.
Were on the same page here. The last movie I saw in theatre was Crocodile Dundee -- and that was almost 20 years ago. I will, however, go to the theatre to see Serenity when it comes out this fall. Same with the RJ movie if/when it comes out.
Quote:2- I prefer books. You can't curl up with a movie. Also, I imagine the books I read my way. I don't like confusing my mental picture with someone else's.
Agreed!
Quote:3- Call me petty, but while I don't mind the RJ fan base expanding, I'd hate for it too include the part of the public that doesn't know what a book is. It may not feel as special to me.
That makes you sound kind of Elitist, and don't over look the possibility that the movie may inspire many of those people to actually pick up the book.
Quote:4- Hollywood does poor with SF movies in general, and does a horrible job turning the genre of fantastic fiction into movies. Let's recap a bit:
Asimov- Bicentennial Man- yawn
I, Robot- puh-lease
Nightfall- Oh the horror of it all. Worst movie ever!
Bradbury- Martian Chronicles- who knew Mars could be so boring?
Clarke- 2001- Well, here is an exception. Not a favorite movie of mine (too slow), actually, but I'll admit it is a cut above the rest, and a critic's darling.
Dick- Do Androids Dream- OK- another exception- SF book turned into classic movie.
We can Remember It For You Wholesale- The movie should have been titles "How Ahnold and Sharon Stone ruin movies in 3 easy steps".
Minority Report- Great Story, awful movie
Heinlein- Puppet Masters- this is a joke right? Could this movie have been worse? And such great material to work from. A shame.
Starship Troopers- aka "How to take a sophisticated SF story, and turn it into a killer-bugs-from-space movie."
Herbert- Dune- The best thing about this movie was Sting naked.
Tolkein- animated Hobbit, LOTR, ROTK- Wow, these were bad.
LOTR (Peter Jackson version)- one of the best movies ever.
The only movies you mention above that I have actually seen were the Martian Chronicles, (it inspired me to read the book, as I couldn't figure put what was going on in the mini-series) Starship Troopers, (read the book numerous times, and loved it) Hated, and I do mean HATED! the movie, and finally the Lord Of The Rings series which was wonderful!
Quote:So here is my scorecard- 12 classic stories, 3 good movies. And this is not even counting the movies that are so bad I have never seen (Moon is a Harsh Mistress, the Keep, etc etc etc).
I expect a lot of flak, so start firing...
The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress hasn't been made yet. I understand they (whoever "they" is ... are? ... am?) are still working on the script. I'm not very enthusiastic about it as it's a long involved story, and I doubt "they" will be able to pull it off well. We'll see ... maybe.
Your assessment of good movies from great stories as falling in the 25% range doesn't surprise me, nor do I disagree with it. For my taste, over all, 25% is pretty good. To me, MOST movies are stinkers, maybe 10% are good. But that is, as I said . . . for MY taste.
Ken V.
Mr_Falcon Wrote:I didn't list them earlier, but here are specific concerns about RJ that I have:
RJ is a very resourceful fellow. Yes, he is a good shot and a better than average fighter, but he mostly wins because he is first (ie quick) or because he is smart. Hollywood doesn't like this. They either like the guy who shoots everybody or the martial arts expert who can singlehandedly take on 4 guys at once. That is not who RJ is, and if a director did that, it would ruin the character.
You're right, it would ruin the charcter. But if they even get a feel for RJ, and maybe Hollywood is looking for someone different, this guy WILL appeal to the masses if they follow RJ's patterns of behavior. Strong silent type, his word is his bond, dosn't dictate life for others (but some things he can't abide in his sight), will not kill for money (but when it's personal, WATCH OUT!) and murphy's law never works for him. Plus, he's free!
Mr_Falcon Wrote:RJ is not a good looking pretty boy. He looks like the average Joe. Most actors are pretty boys. The very few (ie Johnny Depp) can 'dress down' and pull it off, but there aren't many guys who as good as Johnny Depp around. fpw likes the actor who can't be named, so we'll see.
Depp would make a better R----M, then a Jack! Trust me!
Mr_Falcon Wrote:RJ is, lets face it, a nerd. I like that about him. He likes all those bad SF movies, and I'll bet we've read the same books. Hollywood doesn't like nerds. If they try to turn him into a suave James Bond type... yuck.
Repairman Jack is no nerd, I don't see the resoning behind him liking something different from the mainstream making him a nerd.
Mr_Falcon Wrote:RJ's apartment looks like a flea market meets Hurricane Andrew. Can a good set designer show this correctly without making him look like one of those crazy ladies who have 34 cats and never leave the house? I believe this can be pulled off, but get a real talented artist for this one. For some reason, I would be as excited to see his apartment as anything else.
I can't wait to feel vertigo from his apartment! That will be great!
Mr_Falcon Wrote:Can a good director pull off the fine balancing act that fpw has, namely of the dark, mysterious non-citizen with no name or identity versus the warm, loving, and kind boyfriend/father? Get a REAL good director for this.
We'll have to wait and see! I don't think alot of the fans will be happy, but I'm keepinf my expectations low.
Mr_Falcon Wrote:All the things I think about on a slow Friday...
Me too!
KRW
Scott
you say that a more accurate statement would be not that I don't want to see an RJ movie, but that I am afraid it will not do the series justice. As I am going over all I write, you are probably accurate.
Ken
I will agree that seeing kids pick up Harry Potter or Tolkein because of the movies is a very good thing. If people pick up fpw as a result, that is good as well. At least all of us can say we discovered it before it was part of pop culture.
KRW
Depp as R....m. I'll need to take a valium before seeing that performance. And maybe a pair of Depends.
OK OK a statement like you made gets me thinking that, IF DONE CORRECTLY, this movie could be good. As far as the nerd comment is concerned, I wear the moniker with pride and don't consider it to be a bad thing. Some of the coolest people I know have the so called society defined nerdy appetites, such as Star Trek, Tolkien. So, to my way of thinking, a nerd doesn't have to be the skinny, can't get a date guy, with the short pants, pocket protector, and bad haircut. In my case, these stereotypes are true, but I can't just let go of the image. :p
you say that a more accurate statement would be not that I don't want to see an RJ movie, but that I am afraid it will not do the series justice. As I am going over all I write, you are probably accurate.
Ken
I will agree that seeing kids pick up Harry Potter or Tolkein because of the movies is a very good thing. If people pick up fpw as a result, that is good as well. At least all of us can say we discovered it before it was part of pop culture.
KRW
Depp as R....m. I'll need to take a valium before seeing that performance. And maybe a pair of Depends.
OK OK a statement like you made gets me thinking that, IF DONE CORRECTLY, this movie could be good. As far as the nerd comment is concerned, I wear the moniker with pride and don't consider it to be a bad thing. Some of the coolest people I know have the so called society defined nerdy appetites, such as Star Trek, Tolkien. So, to my way of thinking, a nerd doesn't have to be the skinny, can't get a date guy, with the short pants, pocket protector, and bad haircut. In my case, these stereotypes are true, but I can't just let go of the image. :p