Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9648631" data-attributes="member: 6799660">There was. I can sympathize with this. My perspective, though, is that they just plain aren't the same fictions. The name is the same; and the premise of guy who talks to bird of prey, large cat, and two rodents; and that's about it. Different characters, different setting, different tone, and most importantly different genres (space western vs. barechested fantasy). Starship Troopers* had the temerity to keep the characters, settings, adversaries, and premise the same; and most importantly keeping the genre political military sci fi -- all while completely changing important facets of the story and premise and political message. Even M*A*S*H had the book, movie, and tv series all be absurdist satires -- despite the slow shift from Catch-22-esque absurdist satire of the novel to lighthearted sitcom or the later tv series. These two... just aren't enough of the same creature to me for one to be a pale immitation of the other. I guess I could be upset that the existence of the movie(/much later series) means we were less likely to get a film adaptation of the book**. However, I don't think that was likely in the first place. The novel is mostly noted for its ties to the movie (itself famous and infamous in equal measure), and I think Norton is mostly know for her Witchworld series (or maybe her Quag Keep material among D&D fans). So, for me at least, it's not unlike the I, Robot movie -- yeah kinda silly that they took the name and just a miniscule amount of the plot, but it's hard to treat them as the same thing for comparison purposes. *another IP noted for a movie that could be seen as barely an adaptation. **although the series already had an alternate title at the ready with Lord of Thunder, which honestly might work better</blockquote>

Verification