Splicer:
You misunderstand me. I don't believe that anyone should be precluded
from
TRYING to make a bad movie. :-) Gods know, it hasn't stopped anyone
else.
Nor do I think that any bad movie "ruins" the reading experience; I do
think, however, that a bad movie can deter people from *attempting* the
reading experience, whilst a good or great movie can bring new readers to
the book that was the genesis for the film, witness TLOTR-movies' success
in
driving (new) book sales. <shrug>. Ditto Blade Runner for DADOES - and
we
all know that the disparity there was quite great. I've said here before
(zoiks...nearly 12 freaking years ago!!) that I somewhat like the Lynch
film, despite its myriad flaws, and that I thought it had brought numerous
new readers to the Chronicles, which was a good thing.
I admit being less enthusiastic about the two mini-series; perhaps I was
simply jaded by the time they arrived.
Lastly, I also suspect that Berg is more interested in Dune as an Iraq War
allegory, and less about the sci-fi. JMHO. Nothing wrong with Dune as
political commentary - after all, it IS political commentary - but I
prefer
it as FH's political commentary, not someone else's spin thereupon.
Hitch
"Splicer" <nomail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Xns9A1B4153432A0Splicer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Hitch" <hitch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote on 04 Jan 2008:
>
>> There are some things that simply aren't meant or
>> intended to be watered down.
>>
>
> All that you say in the last post may be true but I don't think that
> precludes anyone from trying (nor should it). As far as I'm concerned,
> there is nothing that is so sacrosanct or untouchable, certainly no
> written work, that deserves to be left alone lest the bad movie that
> results from it "ruin" the reading experience somehow. Is a bad
> interpretation disappointing? Yes. However, I think it then merely
becomes
> a curiosity or simply forgotten while the book remains in its original
> form ready to enjoy.
|
