You're approached by a Hollywood exec...

The book series by David Weber follows the military and political career of a woman named Honor Harrington (along with her empathic sentient six-legged treecat). Many elements of the setting parallel events in early-19th-century Europe: the main character is very clearly and intentionally modeled on Horatio Hornblower - she's an officer in the Space Navy of the Star Kingdom of Manticore (Brittania in spaaaace) and although the setting is various flavors of space opera, the tech and ship-to-ship space battles are definitely hard military sci-fi.
In the extended universe, the stories about character other than Honor range widely in tone - they've dipped into everything from Les Mis to James Bond to westerns.
It's a good read if you like a bit of meat on your stories but not too much.
I think "Brittania in spaaaace" has already been done, with a great deal of accuracy.

 

log in or register to remove this ad




Barsoom - certainly a failed thing to redeem
While I think John Carter of Mars is a better movie than its box office take would indicate, it still fell short of the source material. Seeing a proper adaptation would be great. I think one of the problems adaptations of pulp works runs into (see also the Momoa Conan the Barbarian) is that we've frequently seen filmmakers insert a Big Plot Device into it where none is needed.

When Gravity Fails
Heck yeah! In a lot of ways, When Gravity Fails was ahead of its time. And it wouldn't take a huge budget to bring to life, either.
 

While I think John Carter of Mars is a better movie than its box office take would indicate, it still fell short of the source material. Seeing a proper adaptation would be great. I think one of the problems adaptations of pulp works runs into (see also the Momoa Conan the Barbarian) is that we've frequently seen filmmakers insert a Big Plot Device into it where none is needed.
The movie is better than the take, yes (Taylor Kitsch is also a better actor than he appears to be in it), but the fundamental problem with John Carter is that the books don't have anything "special" about them, beyond their status as a historical artefact, and being somewhat influential. Also the audience that grew up reading them is now, um, a little past it and was never huge.

Partly this is because they've been influential re: steampunk-y depictions of Mars. I think someone mentioned this re: some of Moorcock's works, where they've been influential enough that some of them would also seem pretty "expected" or not terribly exciting - Von Bek would probably read like a Warhammer Fantasy fan novel, even though the opposite it true (Elric you could certainly still do).

Carter himself is also not as interesting a lead as say, Frodo or even Conan. He's a pretty straight-down-the-line male lead, and we still don't have a shortage of straightforward male leads (c.f. Netflix/Prime movies being churned out by the dozen). He doesn't have a strong ensemble cast to rely on. Sure the titular princess is considerably more interesting than him but she's not got the role that she might have.

So what are you left with? A fairly straightforward Isekai with a boring central character? Cut-rate Avatar? I mean, would there be Avatar without John Carter? Maybe, maybe not, but that shows more like what it would need to be to cut it today.
 

The movie is better than the take, yes (Taylor Kitsch is also a better actor than he appears to be in it), but the fundamental problem with John Carter is that the books don't have anything "special" about them, beyond their status as a historical artefact, and being somewhat influential. Also the audience that grew up reading them is now, um, a little past it and was never huge.

Partly this is because they've been influential re: steampunk-y depictions of Mars. I think someone mentioned this re: some of Moorcock's works, where they've been influential enough that some of them would also seem pretty "expected" or not terribly exciting - Von Bek would probably read like a Warhammer Fantasy fan novel, even though the opposite it true (Elric you could certainly still do).

Carter himself is also not as interesting a lead as say, Frodo or even Conan. He's a pretty straight-down-the-line male lead, and we still don't have a shortage of straightforward male leads (c.f. Netflix/Prime movies being churned out by the dozen). He doesn't have a strong ensemble cast to rely on. Sure the titular princess is considerably more interesting than him but she's not got the role that she might have.

So what are you left with? A fairly straightforward Isekai with a boring central character? Cut-rate Avatar? I mean, would there be Avatar without John Carter? Maybe, maybe not, but that shows more like what it would need to be to cut it today.
And that's the problem with the truly seminal works of speculative fiction; even when done right, people will think they're derivative of something else, rather than that something else being inspired by them. I mentioned "Lensmen." Most people would just think it's a Star Wars rip-off, these days.
 

And that's the problem with the truly seminal works of speculative fiction; even when done right, people will think they're derivative of something else, rather than that something else being inspired by them. I mentioned "Lensmen." Most people would just think it's a Star Wars rip-off, these days.
I think that's mostly true though I'd nuance it a bit.

If it's seminal and incredibly good or sufficiently special, it's probably hard enough to replicate and unique enough that it still stands up. I say this because things like LotR and Conan do pretty much stand up - and I think something like A Wizard of Earthsea would probably stand up too if they didn't bloody insist on enwhitening it or genericising it (Sci-Fi channel did both of course).

But if it's just regarded as seminal because it "got there first", or just came up with an aesthetic or concept and not much else, then I think it's pretty common for the situation to unfold as described. This is partly why, I think Von Bek is hit by this in a way Elric probably isn't. Both characters/settings have been very influential and much-copied (Elric has spawned countless imitations or loosely-similar characters, whether it's The Witcher or Malazan's truly ludicrous almost literal Elric-on-steroids, Anomander Rake), but Von Bek is fundamentally (imho) less interesting and has less to say than Elric.
 

I think that's mostly true though I'd nuance it a bit.

If it's seminal and incredibly good or sufficiently special, it's probably hard enough to replicate and unique enough that it still stands up. I say this because things like LotR and Conan do pretty much stand up - and I think something like A Wizard of Earthsea would probably stand up too if they didn't bloody insist on enwhitening it or genericising it (Sci-Fi channel did both of course).

But if it's just regarded as seminal because it "got there first", or just came up with an aesthetic or concept and not much else, then I think it's pretty common for the situation to unfold as described. This is partly why, I think Von Bek is hit by this in a way Elric probably isn't. Both characters/settings have been very influential and much-copied (Elric has spawned countless imitations or loosely-similar characters, whether it's The Witcher or Malazan's truly ludicrous almost literal Elric-on-steroids, Anomander Rake), but Von Bek is fundamentally (imho) less interesting and has less to say than Elric.
The problem with "sufficiently good and special" is that those special things are what ends up making derivative works good as well. Beyond that, what comes later has the advantage of seeing what worked for the public and what didn't. I'm not sure that Superman would exist as he does, today, without the "higher gravity = higher strength" from John Carter. I suppose it could easily be argued that the true seminal work, in this genre, would be Twin's "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court."

The SyFy "Earthsea" miniseries was a true waste of a good property. Whitewashed and genericized indeed. To top it off they crammed two books into the same series. I would certainly like to see it done right, with the concept of True Names front and centre, but people would probably think something like it's a rip-off of Harry Potter.
 
Last edited:

I'm not sure that Superman would exist as he does, today, without the "higher gravity = higher strength" from John Carter.
Wait wait wait, is THAT why Superman is strong originally? Krypton had higher gravity? I thought it was because of much more bizarre "Earth's Yellow Sun" reason? Which I'd see as non-derivative and in fact a little bit insane but causative of a lot of derivation of its own. But is Earth's Yellow Sun a retcon itself you're saying?

I would certainly like to see it done right, with the concept of True Names front and centre, but people would probably think something like it's a rip-off of Harry Potter.
I think it's sufficiently well-known that maybe they would, but only briefly, due to armies of nerds on the internet. Like when all those young 20-something TikTokers and Instagrammers were complaining about people dropping "spoilers" about the Odyssey movie before being educated that it was a perhaps 3000+ year old story.

The problem with "sufficiently good and special" is that those special things are what ends up making derivative works good as well.
I could see that happening, but I guess when I think of LotR and the many derivative works based on LotR, very few of them managed to capture the unusual-ness of Frodo as a protagonist, or the "vibes" of the fellowship, or the mournful tone about a world passing. Some of them are good, of course - like Tad Williams' heavily LotR-derivative Memory, Sorrow and Thorn series, but usually for different reasons than the original. In my experience anyway.
 

Remove ads

Top