LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for SF-LIT Archives


SF-LIT Archives

SF-LIT Archives


SF-LIT@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SF-LIT Home

SF-LIT Home

SF-LIT  July 2004

SF-LIT July 2004

Subject:

Hollywood and Science Fiction

From:

Dennis Fischer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science Fiction and Fantasy Listserv <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:15:02 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (162 lines)

July 14, 2004
A Sci-Fi Shy Hollywood
Far-out literature, even the classics of the genre, often gets lost in a
cinematic black hole, even though galactic films are loved.

  By Lewis Beale



It's not as if "I, Robot" had "cinematic" written all over it. First
published in 1950, Isaac Asimov's classic science fiction novel is a series
of interlocking short stories about the development of robot technology and
the nuances of the Three Laws of Robotics, the rules governing robot
behavior. It's visionary, to be sure, but also talky and clumsily written.

So when the film version of "I, Robot" opens Friday, don't be surprised if,
other than a reliance on the Three Laws as a plot device (the First Law says
a robot can't harm a human or, through inaction, allow a human to come to
harm), the story bears little resemblance to Asimov's work. The film, which
stars Will Smith as a detective investigating a murder that may have been
committed by a robot, simply "takes its inspiration from Isaac Asimov's
vision of a robotic future," says co-producer John Davis.


In other words, Hollywood loves science fiction movies, but it's seriously
conflicted about science fiction books.

Of the 51 novels that have won the Hugo Award, science fiction's highest,
only two  "Dune" and "Starship Troopers"  have ever been filmed, to mixed
results. And even though 15 of the 25 top-grossing films of all time are
works of fantasy or science fiction, just seven of them are based on
previously published material (five of those are either "Lord of the Rings"
or "Harry Potter" titles, the others are "Spider-Man" and "Jurassic Park").

Still out there in limbo, either not optioned or in a development stalemate
that has lasted for decades, are classics like Robert Heinlein's "Stranger
in a Strange Land," Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness," Orson
Scott Card's "Ender's Game," Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End" and
William Gibson's "Neuromancer."

"I don't think Hollywood thinks of print science fiction" when it looks for
properties, says Patrick Neilsen Hayden, a senior editor at Tor Books, a
major publisher of science fiction and fantasy titles. "Hollywood is a
machine that reaches out into the culture to determine what's hot and what
they can mass market. They don't think of print science fiction at all,
because they're not tuned to that level of discrimination."

Well, sometimes they are. Certainly, Ray Bradbury has long been a cinematic
favorite. Films have been made of "The Illustrated Man," "Something Wicked
This Way Comes" and "Fahrenheit 451," and a remake of the latter is in the
works, with Frank Darabont ("The Shawshank Redemption") set to direct.

Then there's Philip K. Dick, the current "it" boy of sci-fi (even though he
died in 1982), whose obsessive novels and short stories about the nature of
consciousness have been the basis for "Blade Runner," "Total Recall,"
"Minority Report" and other films. "A Scanner Darkly," the latest Dick
adaptation, starring Keanu Reeves and directed by Richard Linklater,
recently finished production and is tentatively set for a fall 2005 release.

Dick's current popularity, says author Greg Bear, stems from the fact that
most of his works are set in the present or near future, so "they're not
that expensive to make and the ideas are about paranoia and loss of self,
which have always been a Hollywood staple."

But Bradbury and Dick are simply planetoids in a very large literary
universe. When it comes to sci-fi projects, the studios seem to prefer
original visions like "The Matrix" or "Star Wars," comic book adaptations or
films based on popular video games. Literature is sucked into a black hole.
And the reasons for this have as much to do with the perils of adapting any
written material as they do the particularities of the science fiction
genre.

Novels too complex?

Simply put, "it's tough to turn a novel into a movie," says Bear, who has
had several of his futuristic works optioned but never produced. "A book
like 'Stranger in a Strange Land' is almost 200,000 words long and has a lot
of incidents in it. How do you pare that down?"

"The stories are complex," adds Bonnie Hammer, president of cable TV's Sci
Fi Channel, which has been aggressively pursuing literary properties like
"Dune" and Le Guin's "Earthsea" for adaptation as miniseries. "Because of
their complexity," she says, many of these books have stories that "often
can't unfold well in two hours."

It's also what the books themselves are about. You'd hardly know it from a
lot of what appears on screen, which tends to ape either "Star Wars" space
opera or "Alien" slime thing horror, but current literary sci-fi is
concerned with issues of race, gender, sex, religion and technology's effect
on humanity. Which is not what Hollywood seems to be interested in.

"Science fiction can be awfully abstract," says Hayden. "It's more
conceptual than filled with big colorful cinematic imagery."

"The thing that makes science fiction cinema is special effects," says
author Bruce Sterling. "People who want to make top-grossing Hollywood films
want to use sophisticated effects to produce something that looks
spectacular on the big screen. But science fiction is also about futurism,
trend-spotting and a lot of other items that are of no use to Hollywood."

'A carnival mirror'

Akiva Goldsman, the Oscar-winning screenwriter ("A Beautiful Mind") who has
co-written the "I, Robot" screenplay with Jeff Vintar, believes another
factor affecting sci-fi adaptations is that "science fiction has a tendency
to be less than conventional in terms of narrative. It holds up a carnival
mirror to ourselves and that innovation exists in the world and the
narrative structure. So when you combine an unconventional narrative with an
enormous price tag, that might not be the best idea."

It's not that these works aren't being optioned. Hayden estimates 20% of his
top titles are picked up, but almost none make it to the local multiplex.
Undoubtedly, they fall by the wayside for the same reasons thousands of
other projects do: There isn't a good screenplay, no top director or star is
attached or they're simply too expensive to produce.

And for all too many of them, there's simply a lack of brand-name
recognition. "Studios love pre-sold titles," like famous comic characters,
"because it takes the risk out of making a movie," says "Robot" producer
Davis, "and it's easier to market them."

Explanation can be 'dull'

Then there are books like the Nebula Award-winning "Ender's Game." Card's
1985 novel, about a genius child trained in high-tech war games who saves
Earth from an alien invasion, has been translated into dozens of languages,
sold more than 5 million copies worldwide and is a staple of junior and
senior high school reading lists. It has marketability to spare.

Card says that if the book, which has had steady, if not spectacular, sales
over the years, "had sold as fast as 'Harry Potter,' they would have made it
into a film that fast too." Instead, "Ender" has been optioned several times
and has been a tough sell because, says Card, "you have child protagonists
and it has technical explanation."

The project is currently at Warner Bros., with Wolfgang Peterson attached to
direct, and a finished screenplay is expected later this year for what Card
hopes will be a 2005 production date.

"The problems that have plagued 'Ender's Game' are the same that have
plagued other award-winning science fiction books," he says. "Science
fiction is set in a world contrary to our reality, so you have to have an
explanation. And explanation time on screen is unbelievably dull."

Still, the genre refuses to go away. And as long as the publishing industry
keeps pumping out speculative fiction, there is hope that some of it will
find favor with the studios.

"I think Hollywood finds a vein of ore and taps into it, and that's happened
recently with the Marvel comics [Spider-Man, X-Men etc.]," says Goldsman.
"That happened to Philip K. Dick. At a certain point, it will happen to
science fiction novels in a broader way."

Adds Tor Books' Hayden: "It seems Hollywood always lags behind print science
fiction by a generation or so, but it does seem to be progressing. The
quality of stories that Hollywood has tried to screw up recently has
improved considerably."

_________________________________________________________________
Planning a family vacation? Check out the MSN Family Travel guide!
http://dollar.msn.com

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager