SFX have an article on unfilmable SF Novels. [www.sfx.co.uk]
Number 4 is The Eyre Affair. I love the Richard Grant comment.
Who would you cast in the rolls for the film?

-----------------------------------------
Joint winner Colouring Competition 2007
and outright winner of the 3 time winner of the Ffestival Dodo Feeding competition.
Fforde Ffiesta Ffotos are here - [www.flickr.com]

I will avoid the cast request as there are quite a few threads already, but would suggest that "Blade Runner" proves that "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" is unfilmable. I love the book and the movie, both with and without commentary, but the film has no connection to the book as far as I am concerned.

Hmm. Unfilmable SF novels. If I could broaden it to speculative fiction, I would say

'Gateway' by Frederik Pohl
'Lord of Light' and 'Creatures of Light and Darkness' by Roger Zelazny
'The 13½ lives of Captain Bluebear' by Walter Moers (except as animation)
'Alice in Wonderland' by Lewis Carroll (often attempted though)
'Flatland' by Edwin Abbott

and many others...

Edited to add:

Practically anything by Stanislaw LEM!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/17/2010 03:34PM by EgonSpengler.

Dune

As much as I would like to see an attempt, Ubik by Philip K Dick. PKD wrote a screenplay himself and a film is in the pipeline but the book is far too mangled to make any sense on the silver screen.

Anything by Robert Rankin I imagine is unfilmable. But I also thought Terry Pratchett's stuff was unfilmable due to all the wordplay. But they did make films (own cnclusions to be drawn).
Also, Hhg2tg.

---

Part time Quantum Elephant hollower

I believe that there is a great film (franchise) to be made from the first four volumes of the RR's Brentford Trilogy and I think that, having heard the radio version of the Brightonomicon, that would also make a great movie. However, the rest? (Please note that I am now 2 behind, but as a steampunkist will read Retromancer - and I do want to read it - soon, just to get to "The Japanese Devil Fish Girl and Other Unnatural Attractions")

The trouble is that "I Will Wear Midnight" is imminent! Can someone pay me vast amounts of money so that I can have time to read all the books I have stacked up?

I am presently reading LOTS of work stuff, plus "Jeremy & Amy" (Brilliant, especially having been to Monkey World), "Hitler's Motor Racing Battles" (a history of the Nazi interference in Mercedes & Auto Union Grand Prix racing - sorry I'm also a petrolhead) and re-reading "Shades of Grey".

I suspect that "CISSP for Dummies" is the most filmable.

Skids, I'm not really sure I understood a word of that, except the "petrolhead" designation. Makes me aware that there is a ton of stuff out there I should read and will likely never get to. If you find that person willing to pay you to read, let me know who it is, maybe they need someone to read the Americanized versions of things...

I have to wonder, though. With the computer graphics getting as good as they are, with some characters being entirely drawn in over footage of real people and settings, how long will it be before nearly anything is able to be put on film?

Practically anything by PG Wodehouse (I class him as science fiction because of Jeeves).

But surely Woodhouse books have been filmed? Or at least parodied by Laurie and Fry?

I was probably being too literal and thinking of feature films.

Those have been done, though.

<hides in the storm cellar>

de Campe and Pratt's 'Compleat Enchanter' would be hard to film.

EgonSpengler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> de Campe and Pratt's 'Compleat Enchanter' would be
> hard to film.


I always thought that they would make great films, but perhaps you are right. They might need the audience to know a bit about literature!

Yes, well, on reading I thought they'd be a little too sweet to translate across. The concept is wonderful though.

You are probably correct, Egon. I would love someone to try, though. Who would have thought that they could film "The Princess Bride"?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2010 05:33PM by SkidMarks.

There are lots of books of fiction that are unfilmable. Mein Kampf, the constitution of the communist party of the soviet union, the Koran, the Bible,
the Yellow pages, the Goon show scripts, most of Stan Freberg, etc.

I once saw 'The Bed Sitting Room' starring Michael Horden(?) as a film and it meant something in its own right but I don't know how close to the book it was.

There are a lot of books that shouldn't be made into film. An enlightened reader creates their own images that are 3 dimensional and seamless. A film has to exclude may things, both in text and in scope, so it is usually less than the book.

The Dam Busters is about the only book I have seen filmed that doesn't jar with the book.

I ultimately think SF novels don't really make good films anyway. Science fiction movies are incredibly rare to begin with and can be seen as too ponderous unless lots of action is added, at which point they kind of stop being genuine science-fiction movies.

In the next two weeks I'll see 'Gattaca' and 'Moon' and see how good they are.

E.

Gattaca is quite good. The architecture is rather fab too. Lots of Frank Lloyd Wright.

---

Part time Quantum Elephant hollower

EgonSpengler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I ultimately think SF novels don't really make
> good films anyway. Science fiction movies are
> incredibly rare to begin with and can be seen as
> too ponderous unless lots of action is added, at
> which point they kind of stop being genuine
> science-fiction movies.

The curious fact is that films of classic/vintage SF (Gulliver's Travels, most of Jules Verne) are abundant and many of them a joy to watch.

So what's wrong with modern SF?