The Best Sci-Fi Film Never Made

[Razgovory]

I'm not saying they were bad.  They were certainly better then me, but they weren't great word smiths.

I just wonder to whom you're comparing them?  Shakespeare?  Melville?  Fitzgerald?  I mean, I guess they don't rank that highly.  The only SF writers I can think of offhand that are treated to serious respect in literary circles (and even then not unanimously) are Orwell and Houllebecq.  Heinlein might be included in that number too--even though I find Clarke far more appealing.  I'm unsure as to how well-regarded Lem is.

Oh, and there's that pretentious chick who wrote The Handmaid's Tale, whose book I'll never read because the author isn't English-proficient enough to even understand what the words "speculative fiction" mean.

Eh, I just mean I find them somewhat dry.  I have stayed away from Heinlein's later work.  His latest book I read was the one about the moon revolt.

Also I think Malthus is Atwoods nephew or something.

[Ideologue]

For some reason, I kept picturing Wee Malthus and his auntie Margaret Thatcher.

In fairness, she changed/clarified/softened her position in later interviews, and I somewhat misrepresent her for the sake of the joke.

Everything I've read about Handmaid's makes it sound like it takes place in an extremely far-fetched and unbelievable alternate history such as Tim could not even accept.  But on the other hand, I gather that the plausibility of her scenario isn't the point?  I dunno, but if there's no factual basis in the dystopia, isn't it just victimhood porn?

Edit: I actually have a bit of the same criticism of 1984, which I have actually read as opposed to just the Wikipedia page thereof, but at least Orwell was writing at a time that such regimes did seem possible, and perhaps did his own small part in making them impossible, versus, you know, writing a story about how Mormons and/or Muslims suck in 1985.  But maybe I minimize the importance of adding one's voice, in a compelling way, to the already-existing consensus within Western civilization that such a dystopia would be pretty awful.

Open question--would reading Handmaid's disabuse me of my prejudice?

[Eddie Teach]

My new pet theory is that his aunt is Margaret Cho. 

[Caliga]

Clarke was a good writer, with a clean style, real sense of wonder, good sense of humor, and, depending on what he was trying to do, capable of good characterization.  Heinlein was good, too, but suffered badly from bizarre writing tics, character types, and of course a all-encompassing ideological bias.

Rendezvous with Rama would make an interesting sci-fi movie.

[Brazen]

I used to adore the Stainless Steel Rat books. I had no idea the early ones were written so long ago or that Harry Harrison is still churning them out aged 86! They even had me learning Esperanto for a bit!

Would they make a good film? Don't know, maybe better as an animation?

Oh and while a great novel Rendezvous with Rama would make a very tedious film.

[grumbler]

I used to adore the Stainless Steel Rat books. I had no idea the early ones were written so long ago or that Harry Harrison is still churning them out aged 86! They even had me learning Esperanto for a bit!

Would they make a good film? Don't know, maybe better as an animation?

Yes, unfortunately, Harrison is still ruining the rep of a formerly-great series.  They were going to make a SSR movie but apparently ran into some intellectual property issues with the The Saint concept and dropped it.

Oh and while a great novel Rendezvous with Rama would make a very tedious film.

Clarke did a script for the movie, then there were many re-writes by a number of people, and the conclusion of the studios was that you are right:  the movie would be a gorgeous-looking snoozefest.  No movie.

[Razgovory]

Edit: I actually have a bit of the same criticism of 1984, which I have actually read as opposed to just the Wikipedia page thereof, but at least Orwell was writing at a time that such regimes did seem possible, and perhaps did his own small part in making them impossible, versus, you know, writing a story about how Mormons and/or Muslims suck in 1985.  But maybe I minimize the importance of adding one's voice, in a compelling way, to the already-existing consensus within Western civilization that such a dystopia would be pretty awful.

I don't think Orwell ever visited the Soviet Union and his only direct experience with it was when his communist allies purged his militia.  While not all the elements of 1984 were true in Stalinist Russia, many of the themes were seen in later communist states.  Extreme surveillance in East Germany, the simplification of society in Cambodia, the use of a fake war to justify shortages in North Korea.  Though in 1984 it's implied that the war exists to create shortages rather then the war existing to explain the shortages.  In some ways, no totalitarian regime was ever as bad as the one in 1984.  In other ways many were far, far worse.

[Caliga]

Clarke did a script for the movie, then there were many re-writes by a number of people, and the conclusion of the studios was that you are right:  the movie would be a gorgeous-looking snoozefest.  No movie.

Imagine how OSSUM it would be if Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer produced it. Rendezvous with Hot Chicks and Fiery Explosions on Rama.

[dps]

I don't think I'd even heard of Houllebecq before this thread. Does that make me an uncultured barbarian?

Yes, and choosing Harry Turtledove and John Ringo over the finer options available to you doesn't help.

Seriously, he's a reasonably new author.  He's only written four novels; the first, Extension of the Domain of the Struggle aka Whatever in its utterly lame English-edition title was published in 1994.  That said, he's really pretty famous.  He was sometimes hailed as the new Camus, which I suspect is probably a reasonably accurate prediction of his legacy--he shook shit up, to be sure, and I personally think he's a better writer, but I don't think he'll have as large a place in literary history.  He writes a lot about fucking and meaninglessness, though, so he was bound to be my favorite author.

Explains why I wasn't familiar with him either--I haven't read much fiction in the last 15 or so years, and a lot of what I have read in that time was a matter of catching up on stuff I had been meaning to read for a long time. 

Speaking of the distinction between fiction and non-fiction, while I enjoy Asimov's work, overall I think I prefer his non-fiction essays to his novels, especially his later novels.

[Malthus]

I would also like to know more about that book.

Use of Weapons is one of Iain (M.) Banks' best works.  Great science fiction.

My favourite by that authour is still his first - The Wasp Factory.

I particularly liked my edition of it. He put all of the truly negative reviews on the back, like "this book is total trash, that will only appeal to the purient interest of the degenerate". 

[grumbler]

Speaking of the distinction between fiction and non-fiction, while I enjoy Asimov's work, overall I think I prefer his non-fiction essays to his novels, especially his later novels.

Agree completely.  He was much better at explaining the universe than trying to create a credible character.  I never understood why he kept writing bad SF for so long when writing good science had finally started to pay.

[Kleves]

I wouldn't at all mind seeing The Chronicle of Amber filmed, but it would be tough to do it properly.  In terms of scope, a TV mini-series would be best, but then the budget might not be there to get the effects right.

HBO could do it. 

I think that Altered Carbon would be fairly easy to make into a cool film.

[Ed Anger]

I demand more Gor.

[Caliga]

Another novel for TEH LIST: Darwin's Radio.

[grumbler]

I demand more Gor.

And get Norman to do the screenplay and dialogue.