Possible movie
Francis Burton
However, I have been pondering on the possibility of one of IMB's
books being turned into a film. Having just read Matter (and been
thoroughly entertained, despite not understanding everything yet
- though sometimes a little flummoxation can be enjoyable too!),
and replaying various scenes in my mind, I reckon it would make a
brilliant sci-fi movie - if done right. Certainly, given a big
enough budget, the technical challenge of recreating visuals can
be met these days with CGI. But could the plot and the ideas be
presented intelligently? Is there too much background information
about the Culture and Minds to convey to make it understandable
for a typical viewer who hasn't read any of Banks' books?
If not Matter, which of the other books could be adapted most
successfully for the cinema? Would love to hear people's views!
Francis
Jim
> If not Matter, which of the other books could be adapted most
> successfully for the cinema? Would love to hear people's views!
"Player of Games" would be the easiest to film, I think.
Jim
--
'Cloverfield' in nine words: "What is it?!" "We're gonna die!" BOOM!
Roll credits.
http://www.ursaminorbeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/greyareauk
Paul D
opportunities for some wonderful effects sequences. Done right it
could be a fantastic, *intelligent* space-opera if the moral choices
of the protagonist and the rights/wrongs of the war are handled
properly.
Jim
It's an interesting question posed by the OP, because you first of all
have to filter out the ones that simply wouldn't make good films.
'Excession' would be a good example of that, despite its being probably
my favourite Culture novel. "Inversions" I'd catagorise as 'Impossible',
simply because it wouldn't make a good film (IMHO). It's a Culture
geek's book.
Once we've elimated the impossible (or effectively impossible to do
justice to) books, we're left with an "easy <----> hard" list.
I'd place "Player of Games" at the "Easy" end, as it's not a complicated
book. "Consider Phlebas" isn't easy, but probably falls in the
midsection. Certain portions (the attack on the Temple of Light) might
have to be lost as they effectively don't add much. "Look to Windward"
would, however, make a rather good sequel and probably could be done.
"Use of Weapons" would be tricky. Not because it's impossible to do
(think of a sort of sci-fi "Pulp Fiction") but because it would be hard
to do _well_.
"Matter" might be interesting. Again, large parts would have to be
altered/lost, but it's got 'screenplay' written all over it.
Paul D
> Paul D <pddug...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Certain portions (the attack on the Temple of Light) might
> have to be lost as they effectively don't add much.
I'd already edited that part out of the screenplay in my head. Also
the Eaters. As enjoyable as it was to read it's a not-very-relevant
aside as far as the plot's concerned.
I think there are big problems with UoW in terms of being 'fair' but
still making the revelation as shocking as it needs to be.
I have reservations about the PoG. I'm not sure why an audience would
really care very much about the events. I think the flash-bang
potential of CP makes it 'easier'.
PhilHibbs
> No, I haven't heard any rumours - sorry to disappoint! :-/
Bah.
> If not Matter, which of the other books could be adapted most
> successfully for the cinema? Would love to hear people's views!
Well, so far I've only read Phlebas, Player, Excession, Weapons, one
third of Feersum, and two thirds of Inversions. I think any Banks book
is going to be hard to convert into a screenplay, because he hides his
mysteries behind words. The words "white chair" is a mystery, curious
at first but horrifying in the revelation. How could you possibly
translate that into a visual? There are so many sections where you
just have no idea who is being written about, it's all just "he" or
"she" or "the <whatever>". If that's an actor on the screen, you have
to give away a lot more information.
If you want to see Banks done well on the big screen, then hope that
he writes something new specifically for that medium.
Phil Hibbs.