Dean & Movies

[Joe Carlson]

Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.

http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g

[Thomas Martin]

I thought Intensity was a pretty good movie. As for Stephen King I think
his movies are far superior to his books.
Tom
Joe Carlson wrote in message
<11969-37...@newsd-233.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...

[Thomas Martin]

[Chris Freestone]

Hi Joe,

Don't think anyone's really tried hard enough, or bothered to ask Dean for
help in the making. Perhaps his books are just too thought provoking to
appeal to the masses? Film-makers need to produce films which will appeal
to as wide a cross-section of the cinema-going population as possible.
Unfortunately that means the other Joe, Joe Public. Dimwitted, slow, only
able to follow the simplest plot and turned on by special FX and big stars.
See The Phantom Menace for example.

Glad you like our group. Stay awhile, stay forever. Bwahahaha!

Chris

PS: Can you drop the banner link from your .sig? Also, what *is* frat boy
humour?

Joe Carlson <joe...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:11969-37...@newsd-233.iap.bryant.webtv.net...

[The Ranch]

Joe Carlson wrote:
>
> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
>
>
>

> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g

Just stick around long enough and you'll see we can be just as immature
as the other groups! <disgruntled frown>
On to your main point.
There are SK movie adaptations that are just as bad, if not worse than
DK's. One that immediately comes to mind is Pet Semetary.
You have to admit though, that if Stanley Kubrick had directed
Watchers, it might have turned out a little better, no?
Welcome, and post again....

The Ranch

[The Ranch]

<choke> <frothing> Movies....Better than books???? You *must* be
joking! Please give me some examples. <arms akimbo, foot tapping>

Thomas Martin wrote:
>
> I thought Intensity was a pretty good movie. As for Stephen King I think
> his movies are far superior to his books.
> Tom
> Joe Carlson wrote in message
> <11969-37...@newsd-233.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...

[The Ranch]

Which SK books have you read??

[Thomas Martin]

I think I've only read Night Shift and Insomnia. I just can't get into
his writing style. I haven't seen Pet Semetary. However I really enjoyed
Christine, Cujo, Firestarter, Misery, Dolores Claiborne and one other that I
can't recall offhand. Thus I like his movies better than his books. He's the
only author I've ever felt that way about.
I know its a sacrilige for you Tom but I just can't help it. Please
forgive me:(:(
The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7F9A...@worldnet.att.net>...

[The Ranch]

I will forgive you......But only if you read something like IT, or 'The
Stand'! (just kidding)
When it comes to books of short stories, Night Shift is a very good
one!
Insomnia was good, but SK was in some kind of phase that, I feel
detracted from his usual product.
Reading just those two books hardly qualifies you to make an informed
opinion on the quality of his books and movies, but I will concede to
you that you do have a valid argument which I would love to dissect
individually and discard as a whole, but alas, I cannot.
Fire Starter, The Dead Zone, The Shining, Misery, Christine, etc, have
been remarkably blessed with outstanding actors, directors, and
producers, whereas Mr. Koontz has, it seems, gotten the short end of the
deal when it comes to his movie adaptations.
Things seem to be looking up for him lately, and I hope they continue
to do so.
Try to read some of SK's early books and tell us what you think.
I don't particularly like Anne Rice, but have read a lot of her books
so that I could see for sure that I didn't, and give an opinion on why
I thought some were the product of a deranged mind, and why The Mummy
was a very good read.

The Ranch

[Christopher Snow]

Dean's books deals with(mostly) what goes on inside a characters head, and
that makes it a lot more difficult to transfer over onto the big screen(some
smaller than others). Well, that's what I think anyway. Thanks for your
coments about our group, we love it here, why don't you stay?
To find out more about Dean, check out the FAQ.

Snowman

[Thomas Martin]

As soon as I finish all of the Asimov books, I'll get right to SK.:)
While I'll admit that reading just two books from such a prolific author may
not be a good benchmark, it seems rather futile to read more with so many
unread books by so many wonderful authors. I have the bad habit of wanting
to read everything an author has written if I really like his work.
However, time constraints along with my hatred of speed reading assures me
of leaving a lot of unread masterpieces out there.
Tom

The Ranch wrote in message <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[AYOE LANG]

Did Anne Rice write The Mummy, or totally misunderstand you???????

The Ranch skrev i meddelelsen <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Yes, she wrote The Mummy, but probably not the one you're thinking about.
:)
Linda
AYOE LANG wrote in message ...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.
:)
Linda

The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

>Joe Carlson wrote:
>>
>> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
>> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
>> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
>> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
>
>
>

[cjmar...@pop.slkc.uswest.net]

The Ranch wrote:

> > >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
> > >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
> > >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
> > >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> > >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> > >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
> > >>
> > >> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g

I agree with you about Rice. I read The Vampire Lestat when so many people were
raving about it, to see what was up. Didn't like it--she is way too wordy for
me. Takes two pages to say something that could be summed up in a couple of
sentences. Decided to try another one just to make sure it wasn't a fluke, and
felt the same way. Haven't read another one since. --Cindy

[The Ranch]

She wrote a book titled 'The Mummy'. She wasn't of course, the first
to do so, and probably won't be the last either.
This is one of hers that I really enjoyed. She limited her usual
gothic prose, and just told a good story.
She left it open for a sequel (another of her annoying trademarks), but
as far as I know she hasn't written them yet.

The Ranch

AYOE LANG wrote:
>
> Did Anne Rice write The Mummy, or totally misunderstand you???????
>
> The Ranch skrev i meddelelsen <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[The Ranch]

I too have read many of Isaac Asimovs books, but I don't even dare the
feat of reading them *all*. There are so many!
I particularly enjoyed many of his essays on varied subjects.
I have always been a voracious reader that abhors skimming, and up
until about ten years ago my reading materiel consisted of about three
percent fiction. Now fiction comprises about seventy five percent of my
reading.
Anyway, you had better get reading, there are a lot of good books
waiting for you out there! :)
I recently read River God by Wilbur Smith. Ever read any of his stuff?

The Ranch

Thomas Martin wrote:
>
> As soon as I finish all of the Asimov books, I'll get right to SK.:)
> While I'll admit that reading just two books from such a prolific author may
> not be a good benchmark, it seems rather futile to read more with so many
> unread books by so many wonderful authors. I have the bad habit of wanting
> to read everything an author has written if I really like his work.
> However, time constraints along with my hatred of speed reading assures me
> of leaving a lot of unread masterpieces out there.
> Tom
>

> The Ranch wrote in message <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[The Ranch]

cjmar...@pop.slkc.uswest.net wrote:

<snip>

>
> I agree with you about Rice. I read The Vampire Lestat when so many people were
> raving about it, to see what was up. Didn't like it--she is way too wordy for
> me. Takes two pages to say something that could be summed up in a couple of
> sentences. Decided to try another one just to make sure it wasn't a fluke, and
> felt the same way. Haven't read another one since. --Cindy

Yes, it's like she models her books to resemble a gothic Jane Eyre! :)
Try The Mummy, it's a nice departure from her usual style, and a fine
story.

The Ranch

[The Ranch]

Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The Sun
Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.
> :)
> Linda
>
> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >Joe Carlson wrote:
> >>

> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
> >
> >
> >

[ld...@ibm.net]

Did you really like that book? I thought is was a pretty gooshy love story.
Anne's books have gotten more and more weird, I would recommend that you
read The Feast of All Saints. It is my favorite of her books. I've read
them all, up to Pandora, the last one I read. After that I just got
stalled. I bought them but I can't seem to subject myself to them. That's
how I'm feeling about them right now, that they would be a chore to read.
Violin almost did me in, Pandora sealed it. I'm sure I'll relent and get on
with her books, like you said earlier I suffer from the Author's Curse,
Koontz, King, Rice, Straub, Patterson, etc. I guess there are worse things
that could happen.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B0D8C1...@worldnet.att.net>...

>She wrote a book titled 'The Mummy'. She wasn't of course, the first
>to do so, and probably won't be the last either.
> This is one of hers that I really enjoyed. She limited her usual
>gothic prose, and just told a good story.
> She left it open for a sequel (another of her annoying trademarks), but
>as far as I know she hasn't written them yet.
>
>The Ranch
>
>AYOE LANG wrote:
>>
>> Did Anne Rice write The Mummy, or totally misunderstand you???????
>>

>> The Ranch skrev i meddelelsen <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[ld...@ibm.net]

I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird. Are you
thinking of Four Past Midnight?
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...

>Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
> There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The Sun
>Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>> :)
>> Linda
>>

>> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >Joe Carlson wrote:
>> >>

>> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
their
>> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
>> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
King
>> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
>> >
>> >
>> >

[The Ranch]

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Did you really like that book? I thought is was a pretty gooshy love story.

I liked it, yes. Maybe the gooshy love parts did it for me. At least
she didn't have the female protagonist having sexual intercourse with
her newborn child/hybrid as she did in her witch books! <gag>

> Anne's books have gotten more and more weird, I would recommend that you
> read The Feast of All Saints. It is my favorite of her books. I've read
> them all, up to Pandora, the last one I read. After that I just got
> stalled. I bought them but I can't seem to subject myself to them. That's
> how I'm feeling about them right now, that they would be a chore to read.
> Violin almost did me in, Pandora sealed it.

Weird might be putting it lightly! She has genuine talent but she seems
to excel in the gross out.

> I'm sure I'll relent and get on
> with her books, like you said earlier I suffer from the Author's Curse,
> Koontz, King, Rice, Straub, Patterson, etc. I guess there are worse things
> that could happen.
> :)
> Linda

I hope you didn't list them in order of preference! :)
Mine would be: Koontz, King, Straub, Patterson, ........Oh, yeah Rice
is somewhere there. Over by the poetry I think. :)
I'll look for The Feast of All Saints.

The Ranch

> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0D8C1...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >She wrote a book titled 'The Mummy'. She wasn't of course, the first
> >to do so, and probably won't be the last either.
> > This is one of hers that I really enjoyed. She limited her usual
> >gothic prose, and just told a good story.
> > She left it open for a sequel (another of her annoying trademarks), but
> >as far as I know she hasn't written them yet.
> >
> >The Ranch
> >

<snip>

[The Ranch]

Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two past.

The Ranch

[Christopher Snow]

The poster was cool.

Snowman

ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b0...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

[H. Austin Hummel]

In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
|> Joe Carlson wrote:
|> >
|> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
|> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
|> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
|> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
|> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
|> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
|> >
|> >
|> >

The main difference between DK's books and SK's books, is that DK tries to
develop the relationship of the characters of the book where SK just kills
them off. My opinion only.

the movie makers, never try to build the relationship just film the horror
there for the films suck (even Phantoms was an OK film, but still left
out the relationships - sister to sister, woman to sherif, Sheriff to
deputy, etc.) just the horror. Films quicker.

Good Day!
--
========================================================================
Austin Hummel email: ahu...@siemens-psc.com
========================================================================

[ld...@ibm.net]

Ranch,

The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely enjoyed to
book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the history,
and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.

The Feast of All Saints is about the "free people of color" living in New
Orleans before the Civil War. It's a very interesting study of a mixed race
aristocracy living in the French Quarter during the 1840's. She has created
a very entertaining story with a lot of historical information woven into
it. I read it back in 1980 and it's still my favorite of her books...no
vampires, mummies, or witches.

And just FYI you got the order of those authors right.
:)
Linda

The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FCF1...@worldnet.att.net>...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Well, like MD, I think you count too.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...

>Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two past.
>
> The Ranch
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird. Are you
>> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>> :)
>> Linda

>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
>> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The Sun
>> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>> >
>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >>

>> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>> >> :)
>> >> Linda
>> >>
>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

>> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
>> their
>> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
the
>> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
>> King
>> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
undertones.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>

[ld...@ibm.net]

Well, that's *something* good about the movie then.
:)
Linda
Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b10...@203.29.167.224>...

>The poster was cool.
>
>Snowman
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b0...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

[Thomas Martin]

Welcome to the group Austin! I feel the same way about the DK and SK
differences. How do you feel about the King movies on the whole?
Tom

H. Austin Hummel wrote in message <7os3hi$gj4$4...@daymark.empros.com>...

>In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
<tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

>|> Joe Carlson wrote:
>|> >
>|> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
their
>|> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
>|> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
King
>|> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>|> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>|> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
>|> >
>|> >
>|> >
>

[The Ranch]

Yes, the apparitional, avuncular Julian was interesting, and I *did*
like the psuedo-historical Talamasca excerpts, and you're right about
the ending. A book that large should have had at least a little bit of
closure near the end, but she made the ending like a weekly series would
be done.
I'm usually very mild mannered, but after turning the final page, I
threw the book down in disgust! ( the whole house shook!)
I still read her stuff when I feel like a little self-flagellation, if
only to have ready ammunition for when I am feeling particularly nasty
while talking to one of her numerous fans. :)
I'll try the book you recommended sometime in the future and get back
to you about it.

The Ranch

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Ranch,
>
> The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely enjoyed to
> book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the history,
> and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
>
> The Feast of All Saints is about the "free people of color" living in New
> Orleans before the Civil War. It's a very interesting study of a mixed race
> aristocracy living in the French Quarter during the 1840's. She has created
> a very entertaining story with a lot of historical information woven into
> it. I read it back in 1980 and it's still my favorite of her books...no
> vampires, mummies, or witches.
>
> And just FYI you got the order of those authors right.

> :)
> Linda
>

[The Ranch]

You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting my
nose! :)

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

> :)
> Linda

> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two past.
> >
> > The Ranch
> >
> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>
> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird. Are you
> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

> >> :)
> >> Linda

> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The Sun
> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >> >
> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >>

> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

> >> >> :)
> >> >> Linda
> >> >>
> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
> >> their
> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
> the
> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
> >> King
> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> undertones.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>

[The Ranch]

Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included, it
would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book of
origin.
Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just made
more refuse!
DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside of
a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time they
are wavelengths apart.
If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has done
some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The Tommyknockers',
'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.

The Ranch

H. Austin Hummel wrote:
>
> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
> |> >
> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in their
> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of the
> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen King
> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
> |> >
> |> >
> |> >
>

[ld...@ibm.net]

She's done pretty good for a child who's parents named her Howard.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B21AEB...@worldnet.att.net>...

>> :)
>> Linda
>>

[ld...@ibm.net]

Ha ! I've got you beat, I can count to twenty three!
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...

>You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting my
>nose! :)
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>> :)
>> Linda

>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two past.
>> >
>> > The Ranch
>> >
>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird. Are you
>> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>> >> :)
>> >> Linda

>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
>> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The
Sun
>> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>> >> >
>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>> >> >> :)
>> >> >> Linda
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

>> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed
in
>> >> their
>> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any
of
>> the
>> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume.
Stephen
>> >> King
>> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it
about
>> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
way....no
>> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
>> undertones.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>

[ld...@ibm.net]

Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I hope I still
count for something.

[ld...@ibm.net]

The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book was "To
Kill a Mockingbird".
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...

>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included, it
>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book of
>origin.
> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just made
>more refuse!
> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside of
>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time they
>are wavelengths apart.
> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has done
>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The Tommyknockers',
>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
>
> The Ranch
>
>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
>>
>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
<tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
>> |> >
>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
their
>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
the
>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
King
>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious undertones.
>> |> >
>> |> >
>> |> >
>>

[The Ranch]

:) two nicely shaped :)'s

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Ha ! I've got you beat, I can count to twenty three!
> :)
> Linda

> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting my
> >nose! :)
> >
> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

> >> :)
> >> Linda

> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two past.
> >> >
> >> > The Ranch
> >> >
> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird. Are you
> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

> >> >> :)
> >> >> Linda

> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled The
> Sun
> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

> >> >> >> :)
> >> >> >> Linda
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

> >> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed
> in
> >> >> their
> >> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any
> of
> >> the
> >> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume.
> Stephen
> >> >> King
> >> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it
> about
> >> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
> way....no
> >> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> >> undertones.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>

[The Ranch]

you lost me at twent three!

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I hope I still
> count for something.

[ld...@ibm.net]

I'm counting my nose too!
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...

[The Ranch]

<blank look>!

[Dawn Bissonnette]

I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for vampires.
So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
"live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs and
tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.

Dawn

The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:37B21AEB...@worldnet.att.net...

> > :)
> > Linda
> >

[ld...@ibm.net]

If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new* math
the kids are learning these days.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...

><blank look>!
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> I'm counting my nose too!

>> :)
>> Linda

>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >you lost me at twent three!
>> >
>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I hope I
>> still
>> >> count for something.

>> >> :)
>> >> Linda

>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting my
>> >> >nose! :)
>> >> >
>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>> >> >> :)
>> >> >> Linda

>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
past.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > The Ranch
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
Are
>> you
>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>> >> >> >> :)
>> >> >> >> Linda
>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

<37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled
The
>> >> Sun
>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>> >> >> >> >> :)
>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

[AYOE LANG]

I'm thinking about the new film, The Mummy, but by the way you just answered
me, I guess that's not the one....:)

ld...@ibm.net skrev i meddelelsen <37b0...@news1.us.ibm.net>...
>Yes, she wrote The Mummy, but probably not the one you're thinking about.
>:)
>Linda
>AYOE LANG wrote in message ...

[The Ranch]

Read 'Salems Lot' by Stephen King and it will cure you about thinking
being a vampire is a fun filled glamorous existence.
A couple of other good vampire books are: Those Who Hunt the Night,
Can't remember the authors name. And, The Vampire Tapestry, Can't
remember that authors name either!

[ld...@ibm.net]

Read Lost Souls by Poppy Z. Brite. It's been a while since I read it, but
the book did make an impression on me.
:)
Linda
Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

[blaise]

Dawn
If you like vampire books try A Taste of Blood Wine by Freda Warrington and
They Thirst by Robert McGammon. these are both 2 vampires books i highly
recommend, I have a thing for vampires too :-)
tarra
blaise

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Nothing beats Bram Stoker. I read another but can't remember the title.
The vampires seemed to pass the torch every 100 years or so. They lived in
a spooky old house on the outskirts of a town. The heroin of the story was
about to become the current vampire's bride. Pretty goofy.

Dawn

The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:37B36D4B...@worldnet.att.net...

> Read 'Salems Lot' by Stephen King and it will cure you about thinking
> being a vampire is a fun filled glamorous existence.
> A couple of other good vampire books are: Those Who Hunt the Night,
> Can't remember the authors name. And, The Vampire Tapestry, Can't
> remember that authors name either!
>
> Dawn Bissonnette wrote:
> >

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Thanks, I'll look for that one.

Dawn

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b3...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> Read Lost Souls by Poppy Z. Brite. It's been a while since I read it,
but
> the book did make an impression on me.
> :)
> Linda

> Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

I was disappointed in the film. I was expecting to be scared. But it was
more of an adventure movie. Shortly after, my boyfriend bought me the
computer game "The Mummy". Cool adventure game. It also included a video
of the original movie with Boris Karloff. Now, that was scary. I was
really impressed with the level of special effects for such an old movie.
I love Egyptian history. I have also dabbled in seeing the future using the
sight of the ancient gods. It's worked a couple of times. Spooky!

Dawn

AYOE LANG <ayoe...@get2net.dk> wrote in message
news:e9Es3.646$e92...@news.get2net.dk...

[ld...@ibm.net]

I'm sure we'll get it worked out without having to resort to show and tell.
:)
Linda
Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b43...@203.29.167.224>...
>This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)
>
>Snowman
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

<37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
>>past.
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> > The Ranch
>>>> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
>>Are
>>>> you
>>>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?
>>>> >> >> >> :)
>>>> >> >> >> Linda

>>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
>>>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
titled
>>The
>>>> >> Sun
>>>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.
>>>> >> >> >> >> :)
>>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>>> >> >> >> >>

>>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>>> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>> >> >> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
>>>> >> >> >> >> >>

>>>> >> >> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally
>>>> failed
>>>> >> in
>>>> >> >> >> their
>>>> >> >> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt
>>if
>>>> any
>>>> >> of
>>>> >> >> the
>>>> >> >> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their
>resume.
>>>> >> Stephen
>>>> >> >> >> King
>>>> >> >> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what
>is
>>it
>>>> >> about
>>>> >> >> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by
the
>>>> >> way....no
>>>> >> >> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
>>>> >> >> undertones.
>>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>>> >> >>
>>http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >> >
>>>> >> >> >> >> >

[Luke Croll]

In article <37b1...@news1.us.ibm.net>, ld...@ibm.net writes

>Ranch,
>
>The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely enjoyed to
>book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the history,
>and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
>

'The Witching Hour', 'Lasher' and 'Taltos' - what superb books! I really
wish there would be a 4th.

>The Feast of All Saints is about the "free people of color" living in New
>Orleans before the Civil War. It's a very interesting study of a mixed race
>aristocracy living in the French Quarter during the 1840's. She has created
>a very entertaining story with a lot of historical information woven into
>it. I read it back in 1980 and it's still my favorite of her books...no
>vampires, mummies, or witches.
>
>And just FYI you got the order of those authors right.

>:)
>Linda
>

--
Luke Croll

[Chris Freestone]

Well, nothing's perfect is it?

Chris

Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> wrote in message
news:7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net...

> I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for vampires.
> So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
> "live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs
and
> tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.
>
> Dawn
>
> The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:37B21AEB...@worldnet.att.net...
> > Yes, the apparitional, avuncular Julian was interesting, and I *did*
> > like the psuedo-historical Talamasca excerpts, and you're right about
> > the ending. A book that large should have had at least a little bit of
> > closure near the end, but she made the ending like a weekly series would
> > be done.
> > I'm usually very mild mannered, but after turning the final page, I
> > threw the book down in disgust! ( the whole house shook!)
> > I still read her stuff when I feel like a little self-flagellation, if
> > only to have ready ammunition for when I am feeling particularly nasty
> > while talking to one of her numerous fans. :)
> > I'll try the book you recommended sometime in the future and get back
> > to you about it.
> >
> > The Ranch
> >
> > ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> > >

> > > Ranch,
> > >
> > > The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely
enjoyed
> to
> > > book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the
> history,
> > > and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
> > >

[Chris Freestone]

I have to agree with you Ranch, there are too many to read but I'd never be
interested in the non-fiction stuff. Never really enjoyed non-fiction at
all, except the bizarre stuff like Fortean Times and their spin off books.

Chris

The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:37B0DB11...@worldnet.att.net...
> I too have read many of Isaac Asimovs books, but I don't even dare the
> feat of reading them *all*. There are so many!
> I particularly enjoyed many of his essays on varied subjects.
> I have always been a voracious reader that abhors skimming, and up
> until about ten years ago my reading materiel consisted of about three
> percent fiction. Now fiction comprises about seventy five percent of my
> reading.
> Anyway, you had better get reading, there are a lot of good books
> waiting for you out there! :)
> I recently read River God by Wilbur Smith. Ever read any of his stuff?

>
> The Ranch
>
> Thomas Martin wrote:
> >

> > As soon as I finish all of the Asimov books, I'll get right to SK.:)
> > While I'll admit that reading just two books from such a prolific author
may
> > not be a good benchmark, it seems rather futile to read more with so
many
> > unread books by so many wonderful authors. I have the bad habit of
wanting
> > to read everything an author has written if I really like his work.
> > However, time constraints along with my hatred of speed reading assures
me
> > of leaving a lot of unread masterpieces out there.
> > Tom
> >
> > The Ranch wrote in message <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

[Chris Freestone]

I think Ranch was counting a part he has that you don't have Linda. However
you have two other parts he doesn't have by rights you should be able to
count up to one more than him.

If you still can't work this out, perhaps you should try that new biology
that kids are learning these days. Maybe even those elusive facts of life
as well?

;)

Chris

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

<37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
> past.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > The Ranch
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
> Are
> >> you
> >> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?
> >> >> >> >> :)
> >> >> >> >> Linda

> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
> >> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
titled
> The
> >> >> Sun
> >> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.
> >> >> >> >> >> :)
> >> >> >> >> >> Linda
> >> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally
> >> failed
> >> >> in
> >> >> >> >> their
> >> >> >> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt
> if
> >> any
> >> >> of
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their
resume.
> >> >> Stephen
> >> >> >> >> King
> >> >> >> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what
is
> it
> >> >> about
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by
the
> >> >> way....no
> >> >> >> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> >> >> >> undertones.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >

[ld...@ibm.net]

Just because he has a finger doesn't mean I don't have a thumb. Does that
make any sense at all?
:)
Linda
Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vr$2tt$6...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...

[jck]

I read one or two of her vampire books a few years ago and decided I just
wasn't enjoying them enough to continue to read her. Her topics seem too
weird to me. ( And I generally like weird.)

Carol
<snip>
>
> I agree with you about Rice. I read The Vampire Lestat when so many
people were
> raving about it, to see what was up. Didn't like it--she is way too wordy
for
> me. Takes two pages to say something that could be summed up in a couple
of
> sentences. Decided to try another one just to make sure it wasn't a
fluke, and
> felt the same way. Haven't read another one since. --Cindy
>

[jck]

I've only read one of SK's books - The Dark Half - and I didn't like it
nearly as much as Dean Koontz. DK has a wonderful undercurrent of optimism
that runs through the story. I only started reading DK a couple of months
ago and now I only have two books left (that are readily available) to read.
After reading this NG, I'll have to try some SK again.

Carol

The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Try IT. I know it looks *huge* but it's a very good book.
:)
Linda
jck wrote in message <1F0t3.6137$lL2.3...@typ12.nn.bcandid.com>...

[ld...@ibm.net]

After all these years, I may have to join you.
:)
Linda
jck wrote in message <0F0t3.6136$lL2.3...@typ12.nn.bcandid.com>...

[jck]

I'll try "IT". I'm *always* looking for books with plenty of pages.

Carol

You know when people see a cat's litter box, they always say, "Oh, have you
got a cat?"
Just once I want to say, "No, it's for the company."

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> Try IT. I know it looks *huge* but it's a very good book.

> :)
> Linda

[The Ranch]

Your right! Mr. Stoker has also written some other entertaining novels
and short stories too.

[The Ranch]

I've read some stuff by here but I can't remember if that was one of
them. I'll look for it

ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>
> Read Lost Souls by Poppy Z. Brite. It's been a while since I read it, but
> the book did make an impression on me.
> :)
> Linda
> Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

[The Ranch]

As Far As Human Eye Could See is an excellent book of essays on the
various technological fields of today. It was quite good!

Chris Freestone wrote:
>
> I have to agree with you Ranch, there are too many to read but I'd never be
> interested in the non-fiction stuff. Never really enjoyed non-fiction at
> all, except the bizarre stuff like Fortean Times and their spin off books.
>
> Chris
>

> The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

[The Ranch]

Anne Rice takes weird to a new level!

[The Ranch]

No, I'm afraid not! :)

> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> ><37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
> >> past.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > The Ranch
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
> >> Are
> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?
> >> >> >> >> >> :)
> >> >> >> >> >> Linda

> >> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >> <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
> though.
> >> >> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
> >titled
> >> The
> >> >> >> Sun
> >> >> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> :)
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Linda
> >> >> >> >> >> >>

> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >> >> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

[The Ranch]

I have read almost all of MC's stuff, and I have to say in my opinion
your friend is wrong about The Lost World being his best. It was good,
though.
I don't think there is a book called Twister. He did write the
screenplay.

The Ranch

Christopher Snow wrote:
>
> Try Misery, Disclosure and Twister. They were so close to the books that
> reading may not be required after the film. By the way, I just been to an
> advance screening of 13th Warrior, based on Michael Crichton's Eaters of the
> Dead. It was excellent, now I might try the book. Never read much of
> Crichton, but my best friend is a big fan and he highly recommends Lost
> World, he says that it's Crichton's best.

>
> Snowman
>
> ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book was
> "To
> >Kill a Mockingbird".
> >:)
> >Linda
> >The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...

> >>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included, it
> >>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book of
> >>origin.
> >> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just made
> >>more refuse!
> >> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside of
> >>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time they
> >>are wavelengths apart.
> >> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
> >>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has done
> >>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The Tommyknockers',
> >>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
> >>
> >> The Ranch
> >>

> >>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch

> ><tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> >>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
> >their
> >>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
> >the
> >>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
> >King
> >>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
> >>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
> >>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> undertones.
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> >
> >>>

> >>> The main difference between DK's books and SK's books, is that DK tries
> >to
> >>> develop the relationship of the characters of the book where SK just
> >kills
> >>> them off. My opinion only.
> >>>
> >>> the movie makers, never try to build the relationship just film the
> >horror
> >>> there for the films suck (even Phantoms was an OK film, but still left
> >>> out the relationships - sister to sister, woman to sherif, Sheriff to
> >>> deputy, etc.) just the horror. Films quicker.
> >>>
> >>> Good Day!
> >>> --
> >>> ========================================================================
> >>> Austin Hummel email: ahu...@siemens-psc.com
> >>> ========================================================================
> >
> >

[The Ranch]

Try The Stand by SK.

jck wrote:
>
> I've only read one of SK's books - The Dark Half - and I didn't like it
> nearly as much as Dean Koontz. DK has a wonderful undercurrent of optimism
> that runs through the story. I only started reading DK a couple of months
> ago and now I only have two books left (that are readily available) to read.

> After reading this NG, I'll have to try some SK again.
>
> Carol

>
> The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

> news:37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net...

[Christopher Snow]

My fellow workers at Blockbuster got to see an advance screening of The
Mummy and they all said it rocked. It's de to released in September down
here in NZ. While they were watching an insanely kickass film, I was looking
after the store(never been lucky with drawing straws). :-(

Snowman

AYOE LANG wrote in message ...
>I'm thinking about the new film, The Mummy, but by the way you just
answered
>me, I guess that's not the one....:)
>
>
>ld...@ibm.net skrev i meddelelsen <37b0...@news1.us.ibm.net>...
>>Yes, she wrote The Mummy, but probably not the one you're thinking about.
>>:)
>>Linda
>>AYOE LANG wrote in message ...
>>>Did Anne Rice write The Mummy, or totally misunderstand you???????
>>>
>>>

>>>The Ranch skrev i meddelelsen <37AFA876...@worldnet.att.net>...

>>>>> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
>>>their
>>>>> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
>>the
>>>>> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
>>>King
>>>>> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>>>>> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>>>>> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
undertones.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>

>>http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Christopher Snow]

They don't come in many flavours, do they? :-)

Snowman

Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...
>I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for vampires.
>So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
>"live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs and
>tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.
>
>Dawn
>

>The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

[Christopher Snow]

This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)

Snowman

ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
>total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new* math
>the kids are learning these days.

>:)
>Linda

>The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
>><blank look>!
>>
>>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm counting my nose too!

>>> :)
>>> Linda

>>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >you lost me at twent three!
>>> >
>>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I hope
I
>>> still
>>> >> count for something.

>>> >> :)
>>> >> Linda

>>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting
my
>>> >> >nose! :)
>>> >> >
>>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>>> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...

>>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
>past.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > The Ranch
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
>Are
>>> you
>>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>>> >> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting, though.
>>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel titled
>The
>>> >> Sun
>>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>>> >> >> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >> >> >> >Joe Carlson wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >> >>

>>> >> >> >> >> >> Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally
>>> failed
>>> >> in
>>> >> >> >> their
>>> >> >> >> >> >> transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt
>if
>>> any
>>> >> of
>>> >> >> the
>>> >> >> >> >> >> actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their
resume.
>>> >> Stephen
>>> >> >> >> King
>>> >> >> >> >> >> can be equally successful in print or on film, but what
is
>it
>>> >> about
>>> >> >> >> >> >> Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
>>> >> way....no
>>> >> >> >> >> >> overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
>>> >> >> undertones.
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>http://banners.wunderground.com/banner/gizmotimetempbig/US/CA/Lompoc.g
>>> >> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >> >

[Christopher Snow]

Try Misery, Disclosure and Twister. They were so close to the books that
reading may not be required after the film. By the way, I just been to an
advance screening of 13th Warrior, based on Michael Crichton's Eaters of the
Dead. It was excellent, now I might try the book. Never read much of
Crichton, but my best friend is a big fan and he highly recommends Lost
World, he says that it's Crichton's best.

Snowman

ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book was
"To
>Kill a Mockingbird".

>:)
>Linda
>The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...

>>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included, it
>>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book of
>>origin.
>> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just made
>>more refuse!
>> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside of
>>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time they
>>are wavelengths apart.
>> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
>>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has done
>>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The Tommyknockers',
>>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
>>
>> The Ranch
>>

>>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
><tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

>>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
>>> |> >
>>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
>their
>>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any of
>the
>>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume. Stephen
>King
>>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it about
>>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the way....no
>>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
undertones.
>>> |> >
>>> |> >
>>> |> >
>>>

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Yes, I too have been disappointed lately. The last Rice novel I read was
Violin. Seemed like she wasn't completely conscious when she wrote it.

Dawn

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> After all these years, I may have to join you.

> :)
> Linda
> jck wrote in message <0F0t3.6136$lL2.3...@typ12.nn.bcandid.com>...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

I did not know that. For some reason I thought Dracula was the only one.

So many books to read!

Whispers and Ticktock are due back at the library next week. I'm reading as
fast as I can. But I have to admit, I get sick of reading after a while.
Mostly because my exams are coming fast and I'm studying like mad! Where
does the time go?

Dawn

The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:37B4BB69...@worldnet.att.net...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

More books to read! I've written these titles down.
I swear, I spend more time reading (for pleasure and for school) than I do
sleeping or eating. Trust me, I can eat!

Dawn

blaise <fi...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:7p0kjb$6b08h$1...@titan.xtra.co.nz...
> Dawn
> If you like vampire books try A Taste of Blood Wine by Freda Warrington
and
> They Thirst by Robert McGammon. these are both 2 vampires books i highly
> recommend, I have a thing for vampires too :-)
> tarra
> blaise

> Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Luke Croll <Lu...@mills1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:itOPmNCj...@mills1.demon.co.uk...

> In article <37b1...@news1.us.ibm.net>, ld...@ibm.net writes

> >Ranch,
> >
> >The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely enjoyed
to
> >book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the
history,
> >and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
> >
>

> 'The Witching Hour', 'Lasher' and 'Taltos' - what superb books! I really
> wish there would be a 4th.

I accidentally read them out of order and they were still pretty good.

> --
> Luke Croll

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Doesn't matter Snow. Even if she posts them now, you won't be able to see
them! Or, did you get your eyes fixed?

Dawn

Christopher Snow <fort_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:37b43...@203.29.167.224...

> This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)
>

> Snowman
>
> ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
> >total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new*
math
> >the kids are learning these days.

> >:)
> >Linda

> >The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >><blank look>!
> >>
> >>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'm counting my nose too!

> >>> :)
> >>> Linda

> >>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>> >you lost me at twent three!
> >>> >
> >>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I
hope
> I
> >>> still
> >>> >> count for something.

> >>> >> :)
> >>> >> Linda

> >>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting
> my
> >>> >> >nose! :)
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

> >>> >> >> :)
> >>> >> >> Linda
> >>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

<37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
> >past.
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> > The Ranch
> >>> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
> >Are
> >>> you
> >>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

> >>> >> >> >> :)
> >>> >> >> >> Linda
> >>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> ><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
though.
> >>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
titled
> >The
> >>> >> Sun
> >>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >>> >> >> >> >
> >>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

> >>> >> >> >> >> :)
> >>> >> >> >> >> Linda
> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >>> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

I lost the book sometime around the middle of the story. That was years ago
when it first came out. I've not had the patience to re-read it.

Dawn

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> Try IT. I know it looks *huge* but it's a very good book.

> :)
> Linda
> jck wrote in message <1F0t3.6137$lL2.3...@typ12.nn.bcandid.com>...

> >I've only read one of SK's books - The Dark Half - and I didn't like it
> >nearly as much as Dean Koontz. DK has a wonderful undercurrent of
optimism
> >that runs through the story. I only started reading DK a couple of
months
> >ago and now I only have two books left (that are readily available) to
> read.

> >After reading this NG, I'll have to try some SK again.
> >
> >Carol

> >
> >The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

> >news:37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net...

[Dawn Bissonnette]

Lost World was a superb novel. It's too bad they made a movie with the same
name. I wouldn't say that they "made a movie from it" because that wouldn't
be true. I think the movie "The Lost World" should have been named "Dino
Buffet". Simply because all the dinosaurs did was eat people. It lacked
the punch that the first movie had and totally eliminated the human factor.
People were just food, not characters.
Another good dinosaur book is "Raptor". I can't remember the author's name.
It's narrated by the raptor herself. Very good. You could almost believe
that that's how they would think and behave.

Dawn

Christopher Snow <fort_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:37b43...@203.29.167.224...

> Try Misery, Disclosure and Twister. They were so close to the books that
> reading may not be required after the film. By the way, I just been to an
> advance screening of 13th Warrior, based on Michael Crichton's Eaters of
the
> Dead. It was excellent, now I might try the book. Never read much of
> Crichton, but my best friend is a big fan and he highly recommends Lost
> World, he says that it's Crichton's best.
>

> Snowman
>
> ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book was
> "To
> >Kill a Mockingbird".

> >:)
> >Linda
> >The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...

> >>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included, it
> >>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book of
> >>origin.
> >> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just made
> >>more refuse!
> >> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside of
> >>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time they
> >>are wavelengths apart.
> >> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
> >>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has done
> >>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The Tommyknockers',
> >>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
> >>
> >> The Ranch
> >>

> >>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
> ><tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

> >>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed in
> >their
> >>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if any
of
> >the
> >>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume.
Stephen
> >King
> >>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it
about
> >>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
way....no
> >>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> undertones.
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> >
> >>> |> >
> >>>

[Chris Freestone]

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that the first Jurassic film had
punch. It used the old scare tactic on a regular basis but the characters
were extremely wooden (in particular Laura Dern and Sam Neill) and the plot
wasn't all that great either.

Great special effects but that doesn't make a movie IMO.

Chris

Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> wrote in message
news:7p3lcu$bgm$1...@news.igs.net...

[Christopher Snow]

They can't get a bitchin' tan like we can either. That's has got to suck!

Snowman

Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vi$2tt$4...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>Well, nothing's perfect is it?

>
>Chris
>
>Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> wrote in message

>news:7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net...

>> I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for vampires.
>> So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
>> "live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs
>and
>> tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.
>>
>> Dawn
>>

>> The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

>> news:37B21AEB...@worldnet.att.net...
>> > Yes, the apparitional, avuncular Julian was interesting, and I *did*
>> > like the psuedo-historical Talamasca excerpts, and you're right about
>> > the ending. A book that large should have had at least a little bit of
>> > closure near the end, but she made the ending like a weekly series
would
>> > be done.
>> > I'm usually very mild mannered, but after turning the final page, I
>> > threw the book down in disgust! ( the whole house shook!)
>> > I still read her stuff when I feel like a little self-flagellation, if
>> > only to have ready ammunition for when I am feeling particularly nasty
>> > while talking to one of her numerous fans. :)
>> > I'll try the book you recommended sometime in the future and get back
>> > to you about it.
>> >
>> > The Ranch
>> >
>> > ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> > >

>> > > Ranch,
>> > >
>> > > The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely
>enjoyed
>> to
>> > > book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the
>> history,
>> > > and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
>> > >

>> > > The Feast of All Saints is about the "free people of color" living in
>> New
>> > > Orleans before the Civil War. It's a very interesting study of a
>mixed
>> race
>> > > aristocracy living in the French Quarter during the 1840's. She has
>> created
>> > > a very entertaining story with a lot of historical information woven
>> into
>> > > it. I read it back in 1980 and it's still my favorite of her
>books...no
>> > > vampires, mummies, or witches.
>> > >
>> > > And just FYI you got the order of those authors right.

>> > > :)
>> > > Linda
>> > >

[Christopher Snow]

Do show, but don't tell. :-)

Snowman

ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net>...
>I'm sure we'll get it worked out without having to resort to show and tell.
>:)
>Linda
>Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b43...@203.29.167.224>...

>>This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)
>>

>>Snowman
>>
>>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>>>If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
>>>total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new*
>math
>>>the kids are learning these days.

>>>:)
>>>Linda

>>>The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>><blank look>!
>>>>
>>>>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm counting my nose too!

>>>>> :)
>>>>> Linda

>>>>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>> >you lost me at twent three!
>>>>> >
>>>>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I
hope
>>I
>>>>> still
>>>>> >> count for something.

>>>>> >> :)
>>>>> >> Linda

>>>>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two counting
>>my
>>>>> >> >nose! :)
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>>>>> >> >> :)
>>>>> >> >> Linda
>>>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

><37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
>>>past.
>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>> >> >> > The Ranch
>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too weird.
>>>Are
>>>>> you
>>>>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>>>>> >> >> >> :)
>>>>> >> >> >> Linda
>>>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
though.
>>>>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
>titled
>>>The
>>>>> >> Sun
>>>>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation, IMHO.

>>>>> >> >> >> >> :)
>>>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>>>> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

[Christopher Snow]

Hehehehe!

Snowman

Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vr$2tt$6...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...

>I think Ranch was counting a part he has that you don't have Linda.
However
>you have two other parts he doesn't have by rights you should be able to
>count up to one more than him.
>
>If you still can't work this out, perhaps you should try that new biology
>that kids are learning these days. Maybe even those elusive facts of life
>as well?
>
>;)
>
>Chris
>

><ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net...

[Thomas Martin]

Remember Snowman you're not supposed to be getting a tan.:)
Tom

Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b4e...@203.29.167.224>...

>They can't get a bitchin' tan like we can either. That's has got to suck!
>

>Snowman
>

>>> > > :)
>>> > > Linda
>>> > >

>>> > > >> The Ranch wrote in message

[Bianca]

<crossing my fingers for your exams>
When will it be?
--
~~~~~Bianca~~~~~
http://hjem.get2net.dk/biggi/

*..Hope is the destination that we seek..
..Love is the road that leads to hope..
..Courage is the motor that drives us..
..We travel out of darkness into faith..*

Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> skrev i en
nyhedsmeddelelse:7p3kpn$b39$2...@news.igs.net...

> I did not know that. For some reason I thought Dracula was the only one.
>
> So many books to read!
>
> Whispers and Ticktock are due back at the library next week. I'm reading
as
> fast as I can. But I have to admit, I get sick of reading after a while.
> Mostly because my exams are coming fast and I'm studying like mad! Where
> does the time go?

> The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

> news:37B4BB69...@worldnet.att.net...
> > Your right! Mr. Stoker has also written some other entertaining novels
> > and short stories too.

> > Dawn Bissonnette wrote:
> > > Nothing beats Bram Stoker. I read another but can't remember the
title.
> > > The vampires seemed to pass the torch every 100 years or so. They
lived
> in
> > > a spooky old house on the outskirts of a town. The heroin of the
story
> was
> > > about to become the current vampire's bride. Pretty goofy.

> > > The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

[ld...@ibm.net]

Does teenagers in New Orleans ring a bell?
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B4BBC5...@worldnet.att.net>...

>I've read some stuff by here but I can't remember if that was one of
>them. I'll look for it
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> Read Lost Souls by Poppy Z. Brite. It's been a while since I read it,
but
>> the book did make an impression on me.
>> :)
>> Linda

>> Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

>> >I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for
vampires.
>> >So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
>> >"live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs
and
>> >tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.
>> >

>> >Dawn

>> >
>> >The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

[ld...@ibm.net]

This newsgroup takes a major bite out of my reading time, but I enjoy it so
much that I'll just have to cut out something else, say like, mopping the
floors until we start sticking to them!
:)
Linda
Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7p3kpq$b39$3...@news.igs.net>...

>More books to read! I've written these titles down.
>I swear, I spend more time reading (for pleasure and for school) than I do
>sleeping or eating. Trust me, I can eat!
>
>Dawn
>
>blaise <fi...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:7p0kjb$6b08h$1...@titan.xtra.co.nz...
>> Dawn
>> If you like vampire books try A Taste of Blood Wine by Freda Warrington
>and
>> They Thirst by Robert McGammon. these are both 2 vampires books i highly
>> recommend, I have a thing for vampires too :-)
>> tarra
>> blaise

[ld...@ibm.net]

They're not getting that bitchin' skin cancer either.
:)
Linda

Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b4e...@203.29.167.224>...
>They can't get a bitchin' tan like we can either. That's has got to suck!
>
>Snowman
>
>Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vi$2tt$4...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>>Well, nothing's perfect is it?
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> wrote in message
>>news:7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Weren't you confused about what was going on. I guess since I read them in
order, I didn't pay attention to how she explained what went before in the
later books.
:)
Linda
Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7p3l3b$bf7$1...@news.igs.net>...

>
>Luke Croll <Lu...@mills1.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:itOPmNCj...@mills1.demon.co.uk...
>> In article <37b1...@news1.us.ibm.net>, ld...@ibm.net writes

>> >Ranch,
>> >
>> >The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely enjoyed
>to
>> >book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the
>history,
>> >and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
>> >
>>

>> 'The Witching Hour', 'Lasher' and 'Taltos' - what superb books! I really
>> wish there would be a 4th.
>
>I accidentally read them out of order and they were still pretty good.
>
>
>>

>> --
>> Luke Croll
>
>

[ld...@ibm.net]

Did that book drag on and on or what!? There were parts of it I enjoyed but
I was wearing hip boots by the time I got to them.
:)
Linda
Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7p3kpj$b39$1...@news.igs.net>...

>Yes, I too have been disappointed lately. The last Rice novel I read was
>Violin. Seemed like she wasn't completely conscious when she wrote it.
>
>Dawn
>
><ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net...
>> After all these years, I may have to join you.

>> :)
>> Linda

[ld...@ibm.net]

You certainly couldn't say it was to an art form.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B4BD0D...@worldnet.att.net>...
>Anne Rice takes weird to a new level!

[ld...@ibm.net]

MR. SNOWMAN *may* I remind you that you are newly engaged and while that
doesn't make you dead, I would think your imagination would be focused on
that little blonde of your own.

:)
Linda
Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b4e...@203.29.167.224>...

>Do show, but don't tell. :-)
>
>Snowman
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net>...
>>I'm sure we'll get it worked out without having to resort to show and
tell.

>>:)
>>Linda

>>Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b43...@203.29.167.224>...
>>>This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)
>>>
>>>Snowman
>>>
>>>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>>>>If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
>>>>total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new*
>>math
>>>>the kids are learning these days.

>>>>:)
>>>>Linda

>>>>The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>><blank look>!
>>>>>
>>>>>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm counting my nose too!

>>>>>> :)
>>>>>> Linda

>>>>>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>>> >you lost me at twent three!
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I
>hope
>>>I
>>>>>> still
>>>>>> >> count for something.

>>>>>> >> :)
>>>>>> >> Linda

>>>>>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two
counting
>>>my
>>>>>> >> >nose! :)
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>>>>>> >> >> :)
>>>>>> >> >> Linda
>>>>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>><37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
>>>>past.
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> > The Ranch
>>>>>> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too
weird.
>>>>Are
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>>>>>> >> >> >> :)
>>>>>> >> >> >> Linda
>>>>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>>><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
>though.
>>>>>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
>>titled
>>>>The
>>>>>> >> Sun
>>>>>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>>>>>> >> >> >> >
>>>>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation,
IMHO.

>>>>>> >> >> >> >> :)
>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

[ld...@ibm.net]

Okay, I'm going to have to break out Gray's anatomy.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B4BD66...@worldnet.att.net>...
>No, I'm afraid not! :)
>
>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>
>> Just because he has a finger doesn't mean I don't have a thumb. Does
that
>> make any sense at all?
>> :)
>> Linda

>> Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vr$2tt$6...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>> >I think Ranch was counting a part he has that you don't have Linda.
>> However
>> >you have two other parts he doesn't have by rights you should be able to
>> >count up to one more than him.
>> >
>> >If you still can't work this out, perhaps you should try that new
biology
>> >that kids are learning these days. Maybe even those elusive facts of
life
>> >as well?
>> >
>> >;)
>> >
>> >Chris
>> >

>> ><ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net...

[ld...@ibm.net]

I thought the grandchildren handled their roles very well.
:)
Linda
Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p3n00$85m$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>...

>I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that the first Jurassic film had
>punch. It used the old scare tactic on a regular basis but the characters
>were extremely wooden (in particular Laura Dern and Sam Neill) and the plot
>wasn't all that great either.
>
>Great special effects but that doesn't make a movie IMO.
>

>Chris
>
>Dawn Bissonnette <da...@renc.igs.net> wrote in message

>> > Snowman
>> >
>> > ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>> > >The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book
>was
>> > "To
>> > >Kill a Mockingbird".

>> > >:)
>> > >Linda

>> > >The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...
>> > >>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included,
it
>> > >>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's book
>of
>> > >>origin.
>> > >> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just
>made
>> > >>more refuse!
>> > >> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the outside
>of
>> > >>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time
they
>> > >>are wavelengths apart.
>> > >> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
>> > >>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has
>done
>> > >>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The
>Tommyknockers',
>> > >>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
>> > >>
>> > >> The Ranch
>> > >>
>> > >>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
>> > ><tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

>> > >>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
>> > >>> |> >
>> > >>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally failed
>in
>> > >their
>> > >>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if
any
>> of
>> > >the
>> > >>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume.
>> Stephen
>> > >King
>> > >>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is it
>> about
>> > >>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
>> way....no
>> > >>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
>> > undertones.
>> > >>> |> >
>> > >>> |> >
>> > >>> |> >
>> > >>>

[ld...@ibm.net]

When you're out of Koontz' to read, try it again. It really is very good.
Pennywise gave me the major creeps.
:)
Linda
Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7p3lcv$bgm$2...@news.igs.net>...

>I lost the book sometime around the middle of the story. That was years
ago
>when it first came out. I've not had the patience to re-read it.
>
>Dawn
>
><ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net...
>> Try IT. I know it looks *huge* but it's a very good book.

>> :)
>> Linda

>> jck wrote in message <1F0t3.6137$lL2.3...@typ12.nn.bcandid.com>...
>> >I've only read one of SK's books - The Dark Half - and I didn't like it
>> >nearly as much as Dean Koontz. DK has a wonderful undercurrent of
>optimism
>> >that runs through the story. I only started reading DK a couple of
>months
>> >ago and now I only have two books left (that are readily available) to
>> read.

>> >After reading this NG, I'll have to try some SK again.
>> >
>> >Carol

>> >
>> >The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

>> >news:37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net...

[ld...@ibm.net]

Even though it's kind of dated now, I would also recommend Salem's Lot.
:)
Linda
The Ranch wrote in message <37B4BEAD...@worldnet.att.net>...
>Try The Stand by SK.

[Thomas Martin]

I follow you Linda but unless you have a really big "thumb" it really
shouldn't count.
Tom

ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

>Just because he has a finger doesn't mean I don't have a thumb. Does that
>make any sense at all?

>:)
>Linda

>Chris Freestone wrote in message <7p20vr$2tt$6...@news4.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>>I think Ranch was counting a part he has that you don't have Linda.
>However
>>you have two other parts he doesn't have by rights you should be able to
>>count up to one more than him.
>>
>>If you still can't work this out, perhaps you should try that new biology
>>that kids are learning these days. Maybe even those elusive facts of life
>>as well?
>>
>>;)
>>
>>Chris
>>
>><ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net...
>>> If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things, for a
>>> total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that *new*
>>math
>>> the kids are learning these days.

>>> :)
>>> Linda

>>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> ><blank look>!
>>> >
>>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm counting my nose too!

>>> >> :)
>>> >> Linda

>>> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >you lost me at twent three!
>>> >> >
>>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I
>hope
>>I
>>> >> still
>>> >> >> count for something.

>>> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...

>>> >> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two
counting
>>my
>>> >> >> >nose! :)
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

>>> >> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>><37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not Two
>>> past.
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> > The Ranch
>>> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too
weird.
>>> Are
>>> >> you
>>> >> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

>>> >> >> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>> <37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> >> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
>though.
>>> >> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
>>titled
>>> The
>>> >> >> Sun
>>> >> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
>>> >> >> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation,
IMHO.

>>> >> >> >> >> >> :)
>>> >> >> >> >> >> Linda
>>> >> >> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

>>> >> <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>...

[ld...@ibm.net]

It feels like it should.
:)
Linda
Thomas Martin wrote in message <7p4uv5$qdr$1...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...

[blaise]

I love sleeping but...had to cut right back once i found books though!
tarra blaise

Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7p3kpq$b39$3...@news.igs.net>...
>More books to read! I've written these titles down.
>I swear, I spend more time reading (for pleasure and for school) than I do
>sleeping or eating. Trust me, I can eat!
>
>Dawn
>
>blaise <fi...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:7p0kjb$6b08h$1...@titan.xtra.co.nz...
>> Dawn
>> If you like vampire books try A Taste of Blood Wine by Freda Warrington
>and
>> They Thirst by Robert McGammon. these are both 2 vampires books i highly
>> recommend, I have a thing for vampires too :-)
>> tarra
>> blaise

>> Dawn Bissonnette wrote in message <7ougki$7gk$1...@news.igs.net>...

>> >I'm not sure if I am a fan of hers, but I've got this thing for
vampires.
>> >So mysterious, so inviting. What an interesting concept to be able to
>> >"live" for thousands of years. To experience all of the great triumphs
>and
>> >tragedies of the human race. The blood sucking thing is the drawback.
>> >
>> >Dawn
>> >

>> >The Ranch <tntr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

>> >news:37B21AEB...@worldnet.att.net...
>> >> Yes, the apparitional, avuncular Julian was interesting, and I *did*
>> >> like the psuedo-historical Talamasca excerpts, and you're right about
>> >> the ending. A book that large should have had at least a little bit
of
>> >> closure near the end, but she made the ending like a weekly series
>would
>> >> be done.
>> >> I'm usually very mild mannered, but after turning the final page, I
>> >> threw the book down in disgust! ( the whole house shook!)
>> >> I still read her stuff when I feel like a little self-flagellation,
if
>> >> only to have ready ammunition for when I am feeling particularly nasty
>> >> while talking to one of her numerous fans. :)
>> >> I'll try the book you recommended sometime in the future and get back
>> >> to you about it.
>> >>
>> >> The Ranch
>> >>
>> >> ld...@ibm.net wrote:
>> >> >

>> >> > Ranch,
>> >> >
>> >> > The ending of The Witching Hour really pissed me off. I truely
>enjoyed
>> >to
>> >> > book (I especially like Uncle Julian), the detail, New Orleans, the
>> >history,
>> >> > and them *whammy* the sorriest ending of any book I've ever read.
>> >> >

>> >> > The Feast of All Saints is about the "free people of color" living
in
>> >New
>> >> > Orleans before the Civil War. It's a very interesting study of a
>mixed
>> >race
>> >> > aristocracy living in the French Quarter during the 1840's. She has
>> >created
>> >> > a very entertaining story with a lot of historical information woven
>> >into
>> >> > it. I read it back in 1980 and it's still my favorite of her
>> books...no
>> >> > vampires, mummies, or witches.
>> >> >
>> >> > And just FYI you got the order of those authors right.

>> >> > :)
>> >> > Linda
>> >> >

>> >> > >> The Ranch wrote in message

[Chris Freestone]

I've got a little blonde of my own and that hasn't stopped me.

;-)

Chris

Christopher Snow <fort_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:37b6c...@203.29.167.224...
> You're right. I'll leave it to Ranch and Stoner to haunt you about the
> picture thing. :-) I'm out of the game.
>
> Snowman
>
> ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b5...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >MR. SNOWMAN *may* I remind you that you are newly engaged and while that
> >doesn't make you dead, I would think your imagination would be focused on
> >that little blonde of your own.
> >:)
> >Linda
> >Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b4e...@203.29.167.224>...
> >>Do show, but don't tell. :-)
> >>
> >>Snowman
> >>

> >>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b4...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >>>I'm sure we'll get it worked out without having to resort to show and
> >tell.
> >>>:)
> >>>Linda
> >>>Christopher Snow wrote in message <37b43...@203.29.167.224>...
> >>>>This conversation may take us back to the photo thing. :-)
> >>>>

> >>>>Snowman
> >>>>
> >>>>ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >>>>>If you can count to twenty two, I'm only counting two more things,
for
> a
> >>>>>total of 24. If this doesn't make sense maybe I better try that
*new*
> >>>math
> >>>>>the kids are learning these days.

> >>>>>:)
> >>>>>Linda

> >>>>>The Ranch wrote in message <37B240AC...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>>>>><blank look>!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm counting my nose too!

> >>>>>>> :)
> >>>>>>> Linda

> >>>>>>> The Ranch wrote in message <37B23582...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>>>>>> >you lost me at twent three!
> >>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>>>>> >>
> >>>>>>> >> Wait a minute, wait a minute....make that twenty four! Geez, I
> >>hope
> >>>>I
> >>>>>>> still
> >>>>>>> >> count for something.

> >>>>>>> >> :)
> >>>>>>> >> Linda
> >>>>>>> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> <37B21BD5...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>>>>>> >> >You're right! I can count to twenty one! Well, twenty two
> >counting
> >>>>my
> >>>>>>> >> >nose! :)
> >>>>>>> >> >
> >>>>>>> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>>>>> >> >>
> >>>>>>> >> >> Well, like MD, I think you count too.

> >>>>>>> >> >> :)
> >>>>>>> >> >> Linda
> >>>>>>> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >>><37B0FDD0...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>>>>>> >> >> >Damn! I *hate* math!! You are right. It was Four past not
> Two
> >>>>>past.
> >>>>>>> >> >> >
> >>>>>>> >> >> > The Ranch
> >>>>>>> >> >> >
> >>>>>>> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>>>>> >> >> >>
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> I enjoyed the book. Especially the Elvis complex, too
> >weird.
> >>>>>Are
> >>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> thinking of Four Past Midnight?

> >>>>>>> >> >> >> :)
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> Linda
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

> >>>>><37B0DD57...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >Yes.....Yes, it was. The book was rather interesting,
> >>though.
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> > There is another story that is a prelude to this novel
> >>>titled
> >>>>>The
> >>>>>>> >> Sun
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >Dog. It's in the book 'Two Past Midnight'.
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >ld...@ibm.net wrote:
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Needful Things was another pretty bad SK adaptation,
> >IMHO.

> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >> :)
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >> Linda
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >>
> >>>>>>> >> >> >> >> The Ranch wrote in message

[Chris Freestone]

Yes, they did. But that doesn't really save the film in any way. It was
still stilted and bland. The book was much better.

I have to say that, as actors, I really can't stand the two leads, Laura and
Sam. They are always wooden in films. I really don't think they have any
acting ability to speak of. Jeff Goldblum's a different matter.

I thought the film Twister was diabolical.

Chris

<ld...@ibm.net> wrote in message news:37b5...@news1.us.ibm.net...

> I thought the grandchildren handled their roles very well.

> :)
> Linda

> >> Christopher Snow <fort_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> >> news:37b43...@203.29.167.224...
> >> > Try Misery, Disclosure and Twister. They were so close to the books
> that
> >> > reading may not be required after the film. By the way, I just been
to
> >an
> >> > advance screening of 13th Warrior, based on Michael Crichton's Eaters
> of
> >> the
> >> > Dead. It was excellent, now I might try the book. Never read much of
> >> > Crichton, but my best friend is a big fan and he highly recommends
Lost
> >> > World, he says that it's Crichton's best.
> >> >

> >> > Snowman
> >> >
> >> > ld...@ibm.net wrote in message <37b2...@news1.us.ibm.net>...

> >> > >The *only* movie I have *ever* seen that even came close to the book
> >was
> >> > "To
> >> > >Kill a Mockingbird".

> >> > >:)
> >> > >Linda
> >> > >The Ranch wrote in message <37B21F74...@worldnet.att.net>...

> >> > >>Without making it a five and a half hour epic with a meal included,
> it
> >> > >>would be difficult for *any* movie to adequately represent it's
book
> >of
> >> > >>origin.
> >> > >> Some have done a brilliant job, whilst others have, it seems just
> >made
> >> > >>more refuse!
> >> > >> DK and SK are like the two reflections on the inside and the
outside
> >of
> >> > >>a soap bubble. Sometimes their styles cross, but most of the time
> they
> >> > >>are wavelengths apart.
> >> > >> If given the choice I would say that Mr. Koontz has given me more
> >> > >>thought provoking concepts, and vivid characters, but Mr. King has
> >done
> >> > >>some excellent character analysis too! Take 'IT', 'The
> >Tommyknockers',
> >> > >>'The Dead Zone', and several others as examples.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The Ranch
> >> > >>

> >> > >>H. Austin Hummel wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> In article <37AF7E79...@worldnet.att.net>, The Ranch
> >> > ><tntr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

> >> > >>> |> Joe Carlson wrote:
> >> > >>> |> >
> >> > >>> |> > Why do you think that Dean Koontz' books have generally
failed
> >in
> >> > >their
> >> > >>> |> > transfer to film? "Phantoms" wasn't too bad, but I doubt if
> any
> >> of
> >> > >the
> >> > >>> |> > actors will be thrilled to have it appear on their resume.
> >> Stephen
> >> > >King
> >> > >>> |> > can be equally successful in print or on film, but what is
it
> >> about
> >> > >>> |> > Dean's books that baffles filmmakers? Nice group, by the
> >> way....no
> >> > >>> |> > overt sexual titterings, no frat-boy humor, no lacivious
> >> > undertones.
> >> > >>> |> >
> >> > >>> |> >
> >> > >>> |> >
> >> > >>>