@Franklin Harris: I spoke to Jeremy Lassen of Night Shade Books and he is definitely trying for some of that. They recently became the publishing partner of Electric Velocipede to help keep venues for speculative fiction short stories alive in print.
@Franklin Harris: That's my perception too... but on the other hand, you still need short fiction magazines to nurture new talent and provide stories for anthologies to reprint.
@Charlie Jane Anders: Magazines are definitely better at nurturing new talent, but the anthologies we see now are increasingly publishing previously unpublished stories. I suspect one reason anthologies are supplanting mags is anthologies tend to offer more known talent for the reader's buck. But it could end up self-defeating is there's no place for new talent to become known.
The first two volumes of Eclipse were truly great. What I really dig is that these are general Speculative Fiction, no themes. You ain't going to cotton to every single story, but I'll guarantee you'll find something you love that's not really "your type of story".
And kudos to Jeremy and Johnathan for getting that piece of vintage SF art by Richard Powers for the cover. Nice touch.
@MosesMonster: Eclipse 3 comes out in October, as does Last Drink Bird Head Here's a link to the first two Eclipses: [nightshadebooks.com]
...or go to Amazon.
I think when you're having a discussion about unfilmable books, you need to consider the films that worked.
"The Godfather," for example, is considered by many to be the greatest film ever made. I found that, but for a subplot or two, the book was almost identical the to the movie. I wouldn't call the book the greatest book ever, but it was quite enjoyable. I don't believe anything was lost in the adaptation. In this case, it seems to me that the adaptation was so successful that it superseded the novel. I suppose the same could be said for "Gone With the Wind." I've never seen the movie or read the book, but I imagine I could just watch the movie to save time and not miss anything from the novel.
Similar to "The Godfather," I saw "Fight Club" before reading the book. Once again, but for some minor details, I found that they were quite similar. So similar, in fact, that after some time had passed, I found I couldn't remember the differences anymore.
Which reminds of the main problem I have with film adaptations: after seeing one, it seems to erase the way I had imagined the book version. Put a gun to my head right now and I wouldn't be able to tell you how main battle of The Two Towers played out in the book. The only difference I remember in "Contact" is that more than one person went on the interplanetary subway. The only versions of Dexter, Frankenstein, Interview With the Vampire, Catch-22, A Scanner Darkly and several others that I remember are the filmed versions. It's for this reason that I refuse to watch the Harry Potter movies: for fear of losing the books as imagined in my head. Thus is the power of the visual medium.
This brings me back to my main point: good adaptations seem to take the essence of a book and the most important points and make them work. I think this is why I forget the little details that have been excised from the filmed versions. The films that I can clearly differentiate in my memory are the ones that had serious departures from the original work: the end of "A Clockwork Orange," the completely different "I Am Legend," "Jumper,"etc.
So, if I had to give advice to someone trying to adapt a book, I would give these pointers:
1. Understand the essence of the source material.
2. Be careful to keep the main points intact.
3. Don't significantly change things!
(As long as this post is, it only scratches the surface of what makes a good adaptation work. I should mention that I saw the first Harry Potter film and was utterly bored by it. Perhaps because it was more a literal translation instead of an adaptation.)
One book I'd like to see re-made into a movie is Naked Lunch, only do it low budget, independent, and preferably made in a country that has a lenient attitude towards obscenity. I actually liked the version that was made but it felt like a surreal take on the real life story of the writing of the book. I'd be happier with something that does justice to the fucked up humor of the book and a bit of the shit-eating ickiness of it. And the bits that offend Muslims - no ethnicity on teh planet should ever be beyond ridicule. Ever. Someone should suggest it to Peter Jackson.
I agree pretty much with everything you say -- and yeah, Adaptation is an excellent example of how to do it. Film and print are very different media, and a literal film adaptation of a book is almost missing the point in some ways. They should be different. I am trying to think of a film adaptation that proves my point, but my mind has momentarily gone blank.
I am glad you mentioned -- even passing -- David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest, which is one of my favourite books, somewhere in my top five, and which is technically a science fiction novel. It does have a very idiosyncratic approach to its narrative. But even as I was reading it, I kept thinking how I'd adapt it for film or TV.
I think it'd make a great twelve-part HBO series, actually. I reckon you could do it.
Likewise, some people here have mentioned House of Leaves. Obviously, you could film it, but you'd have to find a way to express what the book says in a way that exploits the visual in the way that the book exploits the textual.
@tetracycloide, @ wOOKIE1972, @ BOOKLING
I am a fan of Enders game, and I just finished listening to the new Audio book and card does a great 40 minute recap of the, How Enders Game came to be and where it is going, discussing specifically how he writes, Enders game becoming a movie, and how the first few screen plays he wrote failed, but after writing Enders Shadow, he was able to rewrite a screenplay for Enders that he liked and sold the rights for, to movie people he trusted and felt understood the actor, had to be young and had to act... something he struggled with while dealing with movie studios ... It was a great synopsis by Card and is worth the listening to, very informative on his style process and history of the story.
Feels like the core of the argument devolves to degree of difficulty. Hollywood will try to throw any title on the screen if the anticipated receipts can generate enough return on investment. In 2007, there were not one, but two, film versions of Abbott's "Flatland". IT'S A BOOK ABOUT FRIGGIN' GEOMETRY!
The question is how close a work in one medium (film) can maintain the spirit of a work from another medium (literature), without stinking of its own accord.
That being said I'd like to see some poor soul attempt a treatment of Greg Egan's "Diaspora". Unless the screenwriter had a Math or Physics doctorate (maybe both), I'd expect their head to explode.
You know one book that's unfilmable but has been filmed multiple times? Dune. How do you film a book that jump around so leisurely. Half the book take place in people's thoughts. It's really hard to do. Both the movie and mini-series had serious trouble communicating the story with anything that resembled coherency.
And they're going to try at it again. I wonder if they'll actually leave all the different stories.
Sure some novels are unfilmable, some shouldn't be filmed but at least the people who want to film them are ambitious. Say what you will about Watchmen, even if it was a failure, it was an ambitious failure. I would rather watch an ambitious failed attempt to bring a difficult book to the screen than an unimaginative success based on toys like Transformers 2.
i know it's not the ideea of discussing things but it's really what i feel: every book is unfilmable. That's all. And every movie adaptation is a insult to the writer work and even more to our intelligence : as a reader, are we too much stupid to create our own images in our mind when we read? so please, Hollywood, stop insulting us and do your f%@&ing job: taking risks and spending money in originals ideas of new talented people!
For the most part, a good filmed adaptation of a book does not project the book onscreen, but uses it for a subject, as a painter might a landscape, or a model. The best paintings do not exist simply to reproduce the subject, but spring from the needs of painting as art and the needs of the painter as artist. They reflect the history of their medium, and are a figurement of the artist's conception of the possiblility of the medium. The best films do the same, but the medium is different. So most of the best adaptations are doing something different, and are great for different reasons than, the books that inspired them. Adaptation and American Splendor are great examples, as are The Shining (Kubrick's version) and Solaris (Sodherberg's version). For this reason, the adapted authors are rarely happy with even the most masterful filmed version of their works.
So, some books may not submit to projection onto the screen in the manner of Jackson's Lord of the Rings cycle, but a great 'unfilmable' book could still serve as a subject for a great filmmaker, with many things lost and many things gained in translation. Naked Lunch is another great film in this mode.
I always figured Neuromancer was unfilmable because of the very first line:
The sky over the Chiabatsu was the colour of television tuned to a dead channel.
It's a perfect metaphor for the entire story.
Film makes use of visual metaphors, it's true, but it always seemed to me that you couldn't recreate that literary metaphor without either seeming cheesy or bizarre (as with a voice-over or a visual effect), or losing the image entirely.
Neuromancer is filled with poetry like that, which can only be communicated in words. How about this one?
His mouth filled with an aching taste of blue. His eyes were eggs of unstable crystal, vibrating with a frequency whose name was rain and the sound of trains, suddenly sprouting a humming forest of hair-fine glass spines...
I am not sure how "his mouth filled with an aching taste of blue" can be properly translated into film, but I guess we'll see how this new movie turns out... Maybe I'm too attached to Gibson's prose--but damn if it isn't great prose!
@Anekanta: Agreed! The synesthesia effect is definitely something that I don't think could be translated to film, mainly because it's hard enough to process in print.
I think you could make a movie following the basic story of Neuromancer, sure, but feel like it would definitely be lacking something in mood and tone. Plus, I bet it would look just like Blade Runner visually.
@bookling: Yes, indeed. Cities that look like Blade Runner, cyberspace that looks like Tron.
It'll probably make for a decent film, but I doubt that it can really come close to the book. I suppose it's cliche to say that, but in this case it seems like the book and the film will be entirely different experiences.
@bookling: I agree with both of you, a Neuromancer movie can't just be the main plot or it would just be like a sequel to Blade Runner.
Jonas Akerlund did some interesting shots in "Spun" to visually depict the effects of crystal meth on the protagonist. A movie of Neuromancer would be heightened if it could translate some of those metaphors and synesthetic effects to film. Why not show him pop the speed tablet, followed by his eyes turning to crystal and his spine turning into a steel rod?
while I am a big movie fan, and part of me is dying to see Snow Crash or Cryptonomicon on the big screen, I don't know of anyone, even Peter Jackson, who could do those books justice. Or most of the Neal Stephenson oeuvre. I always get stuck on that one chapter in cryptonomicon, which is basically just Randy eating Cap'n Crunch. Even a decent slo mo cereal commercial shot wouldn't do that justice. on the other hand, the road trip through the Philippines to see the gold would be an awesome filmed sequence. Pig shit FTW!
@the_deliverator:
I always thought Snow Crash would work quite well as a movie. It's already very "action-movie" cinematic with it's sword fights, motorcycle chases and BFG.
The only tough part would be the librarian's ancient history info dumps, but the right director could make it work.
@the_deliverator: Cryptonomicon could make an awesome film, but they'd have to cut so much that I'd dread it. like the Cap'n Crunch scene...ah, genius.
Snow Crash could work, but the Metaverse is a bit too close to Second Life now to be cutting-edge.
@the_deliverator: I'd never eaten Cap'n Crunch until I read CRYPTONOMICON. I had to go right out and buy a box and put a carton of milk in the freezer. Now it's a staple at the Palatial Overclock Estate.
09/03/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
08/20/09
And kudos to Jeremy and Johnathan for getting that piece of vintage SF art by Richard Powers for the cover. Nice touch.
08/20/09
08/20/09
...or go to Amazon.
07/24/09
"The Godfather," for example, is considered by many to be the greatest film ever made. I found that, but for a subplot or two, the book was almost identical the to the movie. I wouldn't call the book the greatest book ever, but it was quite enjoyable. I don't believe anything was lost in the adaptation. In this case, it seems to me that the adaptation was so successful that it superseded the novel. I suppose the same could be said for "Gone With the Wind." I've never seen the movie or read the book, but I imagine I could just watch the movie to save time and not miss anything from the novel.
Similar to "The Godfather," I saw "Fight Club" before reading the book. Once again, but for some minor details, I found that they were quite similar. So similar, in fact, that after some time had passed, I found I couldn't remember the differences anymore.
Which reminds of the main problem I have with film adaptations: after seeing one, it seems to erase the way I had imagined the book version. Put a gun to my head right now and I wouldn't be able to tell you how main battle of The Two Towers played out in the book. The only difference I remember in "Contact" is that more than one person went on the interplanetary subway. The only versions of Dexter, Frankenstein, Interview With the Vampire, Catch-22, A Scanner Darkly and several others that I remember are the filmed versions. It's for this reason that I refuse to watch the Harry Potter movies: for fear of losing the books as imagined in my head. Thus is the power of the visual medium.
This brings me back to my main point: good adaptations seem to take the essence of a book and the most important points and make them work. I think this is why I forget the little details that have been excised from the filmed versions. The films that I can clearly differentiate in my memory are the ones that had serious departures from the original work: the end of "A Clockwork Orange," the completely different "I Am Legend," "Jumper,"etc.
So, if I had to give advice to someone trying to adapt a book, I would give these pointers:
1. Understand the essence of the source material.
2. Be careful to keep the main points intact.
3. Don't significantly change things!
(As long as this post is, it only scratches the surface of what makes a good adaptation work. I should mention that I saw the first Harry Potter film and was utterly bored by it. Perhaps because it was more a literal translation instead of an adaptation.)
07/24/09
One book I'd like to see re-made into a movie is Naked Lunch, only do it low budget, independent, and preferably made in a country that has a lenient attitude towards obscenity. I actually liked the version that was made but it felt like a surreal take on the real life story of the writing of the book. I'd be happier with something that does justice to the fucked up humor of the book and a bit of the shit-eating ickiness of it. And the bits that offend Muslims - no ethnicity on teh planet should ever be beyond ridicule. Ever. Someone should suggest it to Peter Jackson.
07/24/09
I am glad you mentioned -- even passing -- David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest, which is one of my favourite books, somewhere in my top five, and which is technically a science fiction novel. It does have a very idiosyncratic approach to its narrative. But even as I was reading it, I kept thinking how I'd adapt it for film or TV.
I think it'd make a great twelve-part HBO series, actually. I reckon you could do it.
Likewise, some people here have mentioned House of Leaves. Obviously, you could film it, but you'd have to find a way to express what the book says in a way that exploits the visual in the way that the book exploits the textual.
If you know what I mean.
07/24/09
I am a fan of Enders game, and I just finished listening to the new Audio book and card does a great 40 minute recap of the, How Enders Game came to be and where it is going, discussing specifically how he writes, Enders game becoming a movie, and how the first few screen plays he wrote failed, but after writing Enders Shadow, he was able to rewrite a screenplay for Enders that he liked and sold the rights for, to movie people he trusted and felt understood the actor, had to be young and had to act... something he struggled with while dealing with movie studios ... It was a great synopsis by Card and is worth the listening to, very informative on his style process and history of the story.
07/23/09
The question is how close a work in one medium (film) can maintain the spirit of a work from another medium (literature), without stinking of its own accord.
That being said I'd like to see some poor soul attempt a treatment of Greg Egan's "Diaspora". Unless the screenwriter had a Math or Physics doctorate (maybe both), I'd expect their head to explode.
07/23/09
And they're going to try at it again. I wonder if they'll actually leave all the different stories.
07/23/09
07/23/09
07/23/09
So, some books may not submit to projection onto the screen in the manner of Jackson's Lord of the Rings cycle, but a great 'unfilmable' book could still serve as a subject for a great filmmaker, with many things lost and many things gained in translation. Naked Lunch is another great film in this mode.
07/23/09
The sky over the Chiabatsu was the colour of television tuned to a dead channel.
It's a perfect metaphor for the entire story.
Film makes use of visual metaphors, it's true, but it always seemed to me that you couldn't recreate that literary metaphor without either seeming cheesy or bizarre (as with a voice-over or a visual effect), or losing the image entirely.
Neuromancer is filled with poetry like that, which can only be communicated in words. How about this one?
His mouth filled with an aching taste of blue. His eyes were eggs of unstable crystal, vibrating with a frequency whose name was rain and the sound of trains, suddenly sprouting a humming forest of hair-fine glass spines...
I am not sure how "his mouth filled with an aching taste of blue" can be properly translated into film, but I guess we'll see how this new movie turns out... Maybe I'm too attached to Gibson's prose--but damn if it isn't great prose!
07/23/09
I think you could make a movie following the basic story of Neuromancer, sure, but feel like it would definitely be lacking something in mood and tone. Plus, I bet it would look just like Blade Runner visually.
07/23/09
It'll probably make for a decent film, but I doubt that it can really come close to the book. I suppose it's cliche to say that, but in this case it seems like the book and the film will be entirely different experiences.
07/23/09
Jonas Akerlund did some interesting shots in "Spun" to visually depict the effects of crystal meth on the protagonist. A movie of Neuromancer would be heightened if it could translate some of those metaphors and synesthetic effects to film. Why not show him pop the speed tablet, followed by his eyes turning to crystal and his spine turning into a steel rod?
07/23/09
07/23/09
I always thought Snow Crash would work quite well as a movie. It's already very "action-movie" cinematic with it's sword fights, motorcycle chases and BFG.
The only tough part would be the librarian's ancient history info dumps, but the right director could make it work.
07/23/09
Snow Crash could work, but the Metaverse is a bit too close to Second Life now to be cutting-edge.
Now, how's about The Baroque Trilogy?:)
07/23/09