Somewhat OT

[Torx]

We watched a couple of episodes of a new BBC series called "Around The
World in 80 Days" Didn't a bloke called Jules Verne write a book with
the same name and a similar but different story/plot? They used the
same character names and changed the sex of one of the more important
ones, gave him/her a different career thus changing an important element
of the story?

[Roderick Stewart]

From what I've read about this I decided not to bother watching it.

There's also a series in the afternoon called "Father Brown", by
coincidence the same as the name of the central character in some
stories I remember reading by G K Chesterton, but I don't think
Chesterton would recognise any of it.

Rod.

[John Hall]

In message <4c8ctg1uobl0hg4ff...@4ax.com>, Roderick
Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> writes

>On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 18:22:04 +0000, Torx <to...@torx.org> wrote:
>
>>We watched a couple of episodes of a new BBC series called "Around The
>>World in 80 Days" Didn't a bloke called Jules Verne write a book with
>>the same name and a similar but different story/plot? They used the
>>same character names and changed the sex of one of the more important
>>ones, gave him/her a different career thus changing an important element
>>of the story?
>
>From what I've read about this I decided not to bother watching it.

I've never read the book or even seen the David Niven film, but I've
been enjoying the new series. Yes, it's nonsense, but entertaining
nonsense. Incidentally, though it's being shown on the BBC, it seems to
be a co-production from a number of European broadcasters, in which the
BBC played only a minor part.

>
>There's also a series in the afternoon called "Father Brown", by
>coincidence the same as the name of the central character in some
>stories I remember reading by G K Chesterton, but I don't think
>Chesterton would recognise any of it.

I watched the first few episodes in the first series, before giving up.
As you say, the plots and setting bear no relation to Chesterton's
ingenious short stories. It's a pity, as I thought Mark Williams was
excellent as Father Brown.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

[Roderick Stewart]

On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 09:46:14 +0000, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

Yes. It's well acted and well presented, and an enjoyably anodyne
afternoon drama series in its own right, with some gorgeous shooting
locations. But nothing about it resembles Chesterton's original in any
way, except the name. They could simply have chosen a different name
and then it would have been an original drama itself.

Rod.

[NY]

"John Hall" <john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote in message
news:uwHgclFmpr1hFwAi@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk...

> In message <4c8ctg1uobl0hg4ff...@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart
> <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> writes
>>On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 18:22:04 +0000, Torx <to...@torx.org> wrote:
>>
>>>We watched a couple of episodes of a new BBC series called "Around The
>>>World in 80 Days" Didn't a bloke called Jules Verne write a book with
>>>the same name and a similar but different story/plot? They used the
>>>same character names and changed the sex of one of the more important
>>>ones, gave him/her a different career thus changing an important element
>>>of the story?
>>
>>From what I've read about this I decided not to bother watching it.
>
> I've never read the book or even seen the David Niven film, but I've been
> enjoying the new series. Yes, it's nonsense, but entertaining nonsense.
> Incidentally, though it's being shown on the BBC, it seems to be a
> co-production from a number of European broadcasters, in which the BBC
> played only a minor part.

The plot does differ in places from Jules Verne's book. I believe the scenes
where everything flammable was burnt to make steam was on a trans-Atlantic
(or trans-Pacific) liner, rather than on a steam train that needed to get a
boy to hospital, but it still worked well.

I think making Fix female and a newspaper reporter works and adds a
dimension that was missing in the book - a potential relationship between
Fix and Passepartout.

I've only seen the first two episodes so far. I need to watch the two from
last Sunday before this Sunday's episode.

I need to read (or listen to on Audible) the book again to remind me of the
differences.

[Jim Lesurf]

In article <4c8ctg1uobl0hg4ff...@4ax.com>, Roderick Stewart

He'd have recognised some of the plots and basic characters in the early
episodes. However I can't say that it bothers me that the TV 'version'
isn't the same as the stories. I've found them entertaining. Can't be
bothered if they fail to be perfect replicas of the books, because I can
read them anyway! :-)

Not watched the 'roung the world' yet so no idea if I'll like it or not at
this point. But not too bothered if they've 'changed it'. I did read that
many years ago in translation, but can't recall how well the film followed
the book. Suspect that diverged as well. Seems usual for films and TV progs
to vary from the 'book'.

It's (meant to be) entertainment, not a 'set text' followed by an exam! :-)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

[JNugent]

Something similar was recently done with an HG Wells book called "The
War of The Worlds".

[John Hall]

In message <j3odlv...@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
<jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes

The big difference being that what they've done with Around the World
has the virtue of being entertaining, whilst their War of the World's
was profoundly depressing. OK, given the context of an alien invasion it
was never going to be a bundle of laughs, but it didn't need to be quite
so unremittingly bleak.

[Indy Jess John]

On 06/01/2022 16:58, John Hall wrote:
> In message<j3odlv...@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
> <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>> On 05/01/2022 06:22 pm, Torx wrote:
>>
>>> We watched a couple of episodes of a new BBC series called "Around
>>> The World in 80 Days" Didn't a bloke called Jules Verne write a book
>>> with the same name and a similar but different story/plot? They used
>>> the same character names and changed the sex of one of the more
>>> important ones, gave him/her a different career thus changing an
>>> important element of the story?
>>
>> Something similar was recently done with an HG Wells book called "The
>> War of The Worlds".
>>
>
> The big difference being that what they've done with Around the World
> has the virtue of being entertaining, whilst their War of the World's
> was profoundly depressing. OK, given the context of an alien invasion it
> was never going to be a bundle of laughs, but it didn't need to be quite
> so unremittingly bleak.

I read the book by John Wyndham "The Day Of The Triffids". As a set of
words to spark the imagination it was a well written gripping story.

When it was made into a film, what had been my imagination had turned
into a visual experience with dialogue and sound. It still made a
reasonable attempt to portray the events in the book, but the choice of
scenery and sound effects accidentally turned the gripping story into a
hilarious film. When the entire cinema audience laughed at what in the
book had created tension, the screen writers had very clearly got it wrong.

Jim

[Java Jive]

On 06/01/2022 23:39, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
> I read the book by John Wyndham "The Day Of The Triffids".  As a set of
> words to spark the imagination it was a well written gripping story.
>
> When it was made into a film, what had been my imagination had turned
> into a visual experience with dialogue and sound.  It still made a
> reasonable attempt to portray the events in the book, but the choice of
> scenery and sound effects accidentally turned the gripping story into a
> hilarious film.  When the entire cinema audience laughed at what in the
> book had created tension, the screen writers had very clearly got it wrong.

Yes, the book was quite good, the film dire.

Ditto the Hornblower film starring, IMS, Gregory Peck, and I wasn't too
keen on the recent dramatisations either. They made the absurd mistake
of introducing personal vendettas, which hadn't been in the book, into
the episode I watched, so he wasn't just fighting the enemy but watching
his back against fellow officers as well, utterly absurd; the episode
was based on 'Mr Midshipman Hornblower', in which in fact he does fight
a duel at the beginning of that book with a fellow midshipman, but then
leaves that ship to join another and that character never features again
in that or any other book. Also they too obviously felt that they had
to introduce feminine interest for a modern audience, but, with the
exception of Maria in Lieutenant Hornblower (or was it the next one
chronologically, 'Hornblower And The Hotspur'?), and Lady Barbara
Wellesley in 'The Happy Return', the end of 'Flying Colours' when she
becomes his second wife, and various mentions later, mostly in
'Hornblower In The West Indies', there is virtually no feminine interest
in the books, yet they're very readable.

Another film that made a mess of a book was 'A Town Like Alice', which
missed out literally half of Nevil Shute's original story! Also to a
lesser extent another based on another of his novels which explored the
phenomenon of metal fatigue; IMS the book was called 'No Highway' but
the film was given another name and starred James Stewart.

The BBC's serialisation of 'North & South' also seemed to miss out huge
chunks of the original novel by Elizabeth Gaskell, despite being a
serialisation rather than a film, and their serialisation of Charles
Dickens' 'Bleak House' was just plain terrible, with silly
video-game-like sound effects every time a scene changed. It was so
tiresomely puerile that I switched it off within about 10 minutes of
beginning the first episode and downloaded the book instead.

I would nearly always recommend people to read books rather than watch
dramatisations. The pictures (in your own head) tend to be so much
better, and at least you are guaranteed to stick to the original
storyline! There are exceptions, there's a scene in the book of Jane
Austen's 'Sense And Sensibility' that just doesn't work for me, where
the baddie Willoughby comes to the house where Marianne is lying, it is
feared, at death's door, and has an awkwardly unlikely conversation with
Elinor, who, in real life, would certainly either have refused him entry
or else have bawled him out before she sent him packing. Wisely, in my
opinion, Emma Thompson, who wrote the screenplay for the film version in
which she played Elinor, left it out.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

[Robin]

On 07/01/2022 00:44, Java Jive wrote:
<snip>

> Also they too obviously felt that they had
> to introduce feminine interest for a modern audience, but, with the
> exception of Maria in Lieutenant Hornblower (or was it the next one
> chronologically, 'Hornblower And The Hotspur'?), and Lady Barbara
> Wellesley in 'The Happy Return', the end of 'Flying Colours' when she
> becomes his second wife, and various mentions later, mostly in
> 'Hornblower In The West Indies', there is virtually no feminine interest
> in the books, yet they're very readable.

He had an affair with the widowed Vicomtesse de Gracay in Flying Colours
and renewed it in Lord Hornblower (when he was thinking about leaving
his wife to live with her in France).

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

[Brian Gaff (Sofa)]

No Father Brown is quite funny though. I'm not sure about basing things on
famous writers creations. What do you make of Endeavour for example. Some
are good yarns but to be honest nothing clicks about they young Morse
character with me, and just like with the Original Morse series they take a
couple of hours telling a story that would fit into 1.
Vera is perhaps better in this respect. Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Roderick Stewart" <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4c8ctg1uobl0hg4ff...@4ax.com...

[Java Jive]

That's not my recollection of either book, but it was many years ago
since I last read them. My recollection is that in 'Flying Colours' he
had feelings for a woman called Marie, a daughter of the aristocratic
family that had taken them in after their boat went over a waterfall,
but he didn't allow anything much to happen; I don't recall that she was
a widow, but she might have been. In Lord Hornblower, I don't remember
him wishing to leave his wife, by then Lady Barbara Wellesley, but I do
remember that in one of the books of that period in his fictional life,
he dines at a Russian banquet, and was put under the 'guidance' of a
Russian duchess. The scene that I remember is that they go into a vast
room where there are all sorts of victuals on offer, he eats his fill,
turns to his companion and says: "I have dined exceedingly well!", she
gives him a funny look, and then they go into another vast hall where
the dining tables are laid out. He'd bloated himself up on the starters!

[Robin]

Vicomtesse de Graçay = Marie Ladon

https://hornblower.fandom.com/wiki/Marie_Ladon

[JNugent]

The 1960s film with Howard Keel was amusingly far from the book.

What was the French escapade about? In the book all action takes place
in England.

And the ice-cream van with the irritating chimes recording (played on a
guitar)?

Let's not even mention the lighthouse and its eventual "Wizard of Oz"
fire-bucket moment...

[JNugent]

On 07/01/2022 12:44 am, Java Jive wrote:

> On 06/01/2022 23:39, Indy Jess John wrote:
>
>> I read the book by John Wyndham "The Day Of The Triffids".  As a set
>> of words to spark the imagination it was a well written gripping story.
>
>> When it was made into a film, what had been my imagination had turned
>> into a visual experience with dialogue and sound.  It still made a
>> reasonable attempt to portray the events in the book, but the choice
>> of scenery and sound effects accidentally turned the gripping story
>> into a hilarious film.  When the entire cinema audience laughed at
>> what in the book had created tension, the screen writers had very
>> clearly got it wrong.
>
> Yes, the book was quite good, the film dire.

The BBC made a better version (as a 6-part serial, IIRC) in about 1981.
John Duttine and Emma Relph (whatever happened to her?).

It was set in the then-present-day rather than the 1950s but that didn't
hamper the story.

[ ... ]

> Another film that made a mess of a book was 'A Town Like Alice', which
> missed out literally half of Nevil Shute's original story!

Agreed. As well-acted as this fragment may have been, the foreshortening
of the story even made the title irrelevant. The parts set in "Alice"
weren't dealt with.

There was a more recent television version (well, forty years ago) which
encompassed the whole story. It was much better for it.

<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081949/>

>  Also to a
> lesser extent another based on another of his novels which explored the
> phenomenon of metal fatigue; IMS the book was called 'No Highway' but
> the film was given another name and starred James Stewart.

"No Highway In The Sky". Presumably to tell potential audiences that it
was about air-travel. At that time, UK films often featured an American
lead actor. They wanted to sell them in the USA too! Marlene Dietrich
also took part.

[Jim Lesurf]

In article <32aaabef-8b29-73c3...@outlook.com>,

Robin <r...@outlook.com> wrote:
> >>> Also they too obviously felt that they had to introduce feminine
> >>> interest for a modern audience, but, with the exception of Maria in
> >>> Lieutenant Hornblower (or was it the next one chronologically,
> >>> 'Hornblower And The Hotspur'?), and Lady Barbara Wellesley in 'The
> >>> Happy Return', the end of 'Flying Colours' when she becomes his
> >>> second wife, and various mentions later, mostly in 'Hornblower In The
> >>> West Indies', there is virtually no feminine interest in the books,
> >>> yet they're very readable.

I must read the Hornblower books again. Been ages since I did.

More recently I have read the 'Honor Harrington' books which, in a way, are
based on them, and are also excellent in a different way.

[John Hall]

In message <sr82cq$b9e$1...@dont-email.me>, Java Jive
<ja...@evij.com.invalid> writes
<big snip>

>I would nearly always recommend people to read books rather than watch
>dramatisations. The pictures (in your own head) tend to be so much
>better,

The pictures in one's head can be very good with radio dramatisations
too. I listened to the radio version of Douglas Adams' "Highthiker's
Guide to the Galaxy" - which of course preceded all the other versions -
and the pictures were far better than in the BBC's subsequent TV
version. Bizarrely, they were so proud of Zaphod Beeblebrox's second
head, made out of rubber or some such material, that ISTR it was even
featured on "Tomorrow's Word". It was terrible, hanging limply on the
actor's shoulder and easily distinguishable from his real head.

Back in the 1970s, BBC Radio also did a superb dramatisation of "Lord of
the Rings", IIRC in 13 one-hour parts. The pictures were better than in
Peter Jackson's films, even though he had a much bigger budget to work
with than BBC TV had had for Hitchhiker. And it was much more faithful
to the books than the films had been, even retaining a lot of the poetry
and songs.

> and at least you are guaranteed to stick to the original storyline!

I think the big mistake may be to read a book before watching the film,
when one might have enjoyed the film a lot more if one had done it the
other way round.

[Vir Campestris]

You watched a couple?

We managed one. My wife has more patience than me, I'd have stopped
before the end of it.

Andy

[Roderick Stewart]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 18:25:00 +0000, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

><big snip>
>>I would nearly always recommend people to read books rather than watch
>>dramatisations. The pictures (in your own head) tend to be so much
>>better,
>
>The pictures in one's head can be very good with radio dramatisations
>too. I listened to the radio version of Douglas Adams' "Highthiker's
>Guide to the Galaxy" - which of course preceded all the other versions -
>and the pictures were far better than in the BBC's subsequent TV
>version. Bizarrely, they were so proud of Zaphod Beeblebrox's second
>head, made out of rubber or some such material, that ISTR it was even
>featured on "Tomorrow's Word". It was terrible, hanging limply on the
>actor's shoulder and easily distinguishable from his real head.

Agreed, though I think the BBC visualisation of Marvin the paranoid
android was far better then the one in the movie. I suppose the movie
makers felt obliged to do something different to avoid accusations of
plagiarism, but the TV dramatisation had the advantage of being first,
and having got it exactly right, their effort couldn't really be
improved upon.

Rod.

[Jim Lesurf]

In article <9mkZM4E8VI2hFwqo@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall

<john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:

> Back in the 1970s, BBC Radio also did a superb dramatisation of "Lord of
> the Rings", IIRC in 13 one-hour parts. The pictures were better than in
> Peter Jackson's films, even though he had a much bigger budget to work
> with than BBC TV had had for Hitchhiker. And it was much more faithful
> to the books than the films had been, even retaining a lot of the poetry
> and songs.

You've reminded me that I have that series on tape! I enjoyed it. But i
also enjoyed the films, particularly the special edition versions, etc.
Given the sheer level of detail and incident in all Tolkien's books it
would be practically impossible to get it into films. He essentially
created a world with its own mythologies, languages, etc.

[Max Demian]

I agree. Thought the TV Marvin did appear in the film as a subsidiary
robot in one scene. Maybe they made it but decided they couldn't use it
for some reason, perhaps legal.

--
Max Demian