Nextian Chat

Re: Better than the book?

MistyCat — Wed, 23 May 2012 14:10:22 +0200

Know what you mean, know what you mean.

Re: Better than the book?

bunyip — Wed, 23 May 2012 08:46:46 +0200

Actually, if anyone here is old and abtuse enough to remember Monty Python and the interview with Eric Idle who said the script where he accosts Terry Jones in the 'Nudge nudge wink wink' skit was totally unreadable and without any sense. It was only in the performance that the the effect came through. I think it is like many operas where if you read the libretto you think 'what rubbish' but after seeing it performed you have to say 'Yes, but beautifully spoken'.** **Quote taken from Spike Milligan and the Goon Show - the Case of the Missing String , I think. There are probably many screenplays of adaptions of books that are similar in effect.

Re: Better than the book?

bunyip — Wed, 23 May 2012 08:39:32 +0200

Priscilla: Queen of the Dessert a rather sweeter version of the screenplay,

Re: Better than the book?

OB — Sun, 20 May 2012 20:51:22 +0200

Yes they were written in the days when men could be unashamedly macho. I read them as a young woman and thought they were brilliant.Let's hear it once again for pure unashamed blokeishness.

Re: Better than the book?

Bonzai Kitten — Sun, 20 May 2012 16:04:24 +0200

All the 007 movies are better than the books. The books are really very rubbish.

Re: Better than the book?

SkidMarks — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:27:53 +0200

Fun Stuff! John Carter! lots better than the books even if everyone thinks it is a turkey. (This is a heavy hint for anyone struggling in Animal, Vegetable Mineral.)

Re: Better than the book?

SkidMarks — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:21:11 +0200

geg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "In all candor I must say that our field has > gradually and steadily been deteriorating [b]for the > last few years[/b]. Nothing that we have done, > individually or collectively, matches BLADE > RUNNER" > > Or "Your film is better than my book"? the book was written in 1968, the film released in 1982, although the letter is from 1981. I am not sure that Mr Dick was directly comparing the film to HIS book. I suspect that he had lost faith with SF. Certainly his writings by then tended to be more diverse. I would certainly agree that the film (one of my favourites across all genres) is better than a film that closely followed the book would have been, but even if he did mean that he thought the film better than his book, in my opinion he was wrong! Addendum. George Lucas believes that his changes have improved the Star Wars saga...........

Re: Better than the book?

geg — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:00:28 +0200

"In all candor I must say that our field has gradually and steadily been deteriorating for the last few years. Nothing that we have done, individually or collectively, matches BLADE RUNNER" Or "Your film is better than my book"?

Re: Better than the book?

SkidMarks — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:01:43 +0200

geg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Proof, if it were needed, that Bladerunner is > indeed better than the book. > > http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/09/blade-runner- > will-prove-invincible.html Except PKD doesn't compare them in that letter............... I stand by my original comments both are great, but different .

Re: Better than the book?

geg — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:14:42 +0200

Proof, if it were needed, that Bladerunner is indeed better than the book. http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/09/blade-runner-will-prove-invincible.html

Re: Better than the book?

zendao42 — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 06:24:05 +0200

bunyip Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Would a film based on comments on the various > threads on the fforum be better than the comments > themselved? > > Ponder > > Submit answers. ------------------------------------------------------- Depends entirely on the special effects budget...

Re: Better than the book?

annie — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:17:16 +0200

the movie of "the Dark is Rising" was absolutely abysmal...

Re: Better than the book?

CannibalRabbit — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 13:42:15 +0200

Could each of the 39 steps be composed themselves of 39 steps? Yes, Stardust is the one that I meant. Really enjoyed American Gods and Neverwhere read subsequently though.

Re: Better than the book?

Gary Indiana — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 23:10:11 +0200

< Trying to shake MistyCat's fine film out of his eyes. Ears?> < It doesn't work.> < Clears his throat to speak.> Flimsy? ... Filmsy? ... Mimsy? The people who don't like The Thirty-Nine Steps don't realize they've only read the abridged version. Buchan's masterpiece, The Seventy-Eight Steps can still be accessed by jumping once on each of the Thirty-Nine Steps before ascending to the next.

Re: Better than the book?

old boiler — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:58:16 +0200

The Return of MistyCat. Hurrah. We all missed de cat!! It would make a great film. The sequel to "mistycat the secret life of a kiwi"

Re: Better than the book?

SkidMarks — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:44:37 +0200

CannibalRabbit Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I enjoyed Neil Gaiman's Starlight the film, but > found the novel an drag, it almost put me off > Neil's writing altogether! Starlight or Stardust?

Re: Better than the book?

CannibalRabbit — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:19:32 +0200

I enjoyed Neil Gaiman's Starlight the film, but found the novel an drag, it almost put me off Neil's writing altogether!

Re: Better than the book?

MistyCat — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:32:01 +0200

If a printout of various comment threads were to be shredded, emulsified, then sprayed in a fine film on the treehouse walls, would the resultant fine film be a finer film than the movie, or would the filmmaker be fined for filming?

Re: Better than the book?

bunyip — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 01:31:37 +0200

Would a film based on comments on the various threads on the fforum be better than the comments themselved? Ponder Submit answers.

Re: Better than the book?

geg — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:51:06 +0200

Thrown - all these years I thought you were a rabbit. Unsure how to proceed. More disappointing than any book film.

Re: Better than the book?

CannibalRabbit — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:51:43 +0200

No doubt about it the film was better, and yes I am a boy. Monarch of the Glen seemed to gain a life all of it's own on the small screen.

Re: Better than the book?

old boiler — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:19:55 +0200

Dear Cannibal Rabbit, re 39 steps you're probably a boy. E'en so the film was much better than the book, and funny to boot.

Re: Better than the book?

CannibalRabbit — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 11:06:15 +0200

I actually quite enjoyed the 39 steps. Not quality literature granted but not bad filler.

Re: Better than the book?

geg — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 15:07:03 +0200

Now, there's thread we ought to have

Re: Better than the book?

old boiler — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 10:12:56 +0200

Hitchcock's The Thirty nine Steps prompted me to read John Buchan's original. It is the worst book that I have ever read; possibly the worst book ever published

Re: Better than the book?

delacuesta — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 21:13:41 +0200

The Shawshank Redemption.

Re: Better than the book?

ffquizgal05 — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:24:07 +0200

'Notes on a Scandal'- film ending better than book, I think.

Re: Better than the book?

bunyip — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 05:46:20 +0200

Enid Blyton?

Re: Better than the book?

steeljam — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:07:04 +0200

Frankenstein

Re: Better than the book?

Zranoll — Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:40:18 +0200

Fight Club