 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya think either of Clarke's novels will be turned into films? Personally, I remember reading 2061 and HATING it! I also remember reading 3001 and thinking it actually MADE sense, whereas 2061 made no sense whatsoever.... at least to ME!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since Hollywood is in general interesting in milking old properties instead of making new ones that in turn can be milked in fifty years, yes; they'll tap these wells. And they they'll give us the three-part prequels nobody and their grandmother asked for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 23, 2019 - 9:49 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Grecchus
(Member)
|
How is adapting a book to film that has never been adapted before "milking old property"? Just seems like a good, old-fashioned adaption to me, should it happen. Had they been adapted once or twice before, it might have been another issue.
That's a fair point, Thor. I'm reading 3001 again and it seems Clarke was presumably wrapping up the saga because it became chiefly what he was known for. IMO, he did it as a formal nod to his own creation, but I don't think he had any ammo left at that stage to add to the originality of his storyline in any great way. He basically did something very similar to what Ridley Scott did to the Engineers in the Prometheus wrangle. He capped it off with a somewhat disappointing angle and that was the end of it. In fact, that endgame ended up being a chief plot element of Independence Day. It was the dissemination of the virus to distract and shut down the alien menace, before they could get a handle on it so they could be blown away by the good guys. Now, someone will have to correct me if Independence Day ripped off 3001 or vice-versa, it was such a long time ago!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 24, 2019 - 6:43 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Grecchus
(Member)
|
Thanks, ryanpaquet. Independence Day, and 3001's publication seem to be neck to neck, with the film just creeping in front of Clarke's closure to the Monolith saga. But it's that closeness that makes one think - I'd place a bet on the fact Clarke's ending to 3001 got leaked and the movie fraternity gobbled it up and spat it out according to their mission objective. Of course, there's no way of proving that from my standpoint, but I've mentioned the similarities in the 3rd act of both properties before on this board. Yup, it did make me think who really owned precedence on that score, and I'd give the benefit of the doubt to Clarke because it was his invention anyway. He conjured it up in the Odyssey Two plot when HAL's breakdown in performance was attributed to mal-programming - which is another way of saying there were bugs in the system. He just turned that idea almost on its head for the conclusion to 3001.
The interesting thing is Clarke nearly always included a sub-plot involving sabotage somewhere in his stories. To me that says he somehow needed a subversive Luddite element as a counter 'fix' within the narrative. But he was insightful again, wasn't he, because every now and then some software virus comes in from out of the blue and throws a spanner in the works in such a way that some proportion of the planet goes down because the computers have been made to go on the blink. He would have been exceptionally amused with Ed Snowdon, a real life flesh-and-blood entity who couldn't function properly with all the moral contradictions that made him a whistle-blower. Like, there has to be a dent in the pipeline as a matter of course because that's the way things average out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
