Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8506745" data-attributes="member: 7023840">That's an interesting distinction. I think the difference with film is (or can be) this-When a film property is revived (rebooted) after a period of time, you can get something which is as good, or superior. You can have a completely new take (Mad Max) or a visually compelling new chapter (Blade Runner) or even just a story that can now be told in a different fashion due to technology (Dune). More importantly, you almost always have completely different directors or cinematographers or approaches to the work ... Max Max might be a singular exception to that.With literature, you often have a requirement that the original author complete the work- in the few cases I can think of where a fill-in writer came in later due to the death of the original writer, I can't think of a single example of the new writer being considered the equal, or better, than the original (think Herbert, Jordan for example). And a lot of times, writers just don't want to return ... they said what they wanted to say, and when they do return, it is often from either a feeling of obligation (the fans keep demanding it), money (the publisher keeps demanding it) or both. Regardless, the return is rarely compelling, but occasionally succeeds at being comfortable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8506745, member: 7023840"] That's an interesting distinction. I think the difference with film is (or can be) this- When a film property is revived (rebooted) after a period of time, you can get something which is as good, or superior. You can have a completely new take (Mad Max) or a visually compelling new chapter (Blade Runner) or even just a story that can now be told in a different fashion due to technology (Dune). More importantly, you almost always have completely different directors or cinematographers or approaches to the work ... Max Max might be a singular exception to that. With literature, you often have a requirement that the original author complete the work- in the few cases I can think of where a fill-in writer came in later due to the death of the original writer, I can't think of a single example of the new writer being considered the equal, or better, than the original (think Herbert, Jordan for example). And a lot of times, writers just don't want to return ... they said what they wanted to say, and when they do return, it is often from either a feeling of obligation (the fans keep demanding it), money (the publisher keeps demanding it) or both. Regardless, the return is rarely compelling, but occasionally succeeds at being comfortable. [/QUOTE]

Verification