Sound Of Music TP style
sophster
I've just been watching Sound Of Music on DVD, and it got me thinking...
What would that film have been like if rather than Julie Andrews becomming
the Von Trapp family governess they had hired Susan, the anti-maria, or a
sort of reverse Mary Poppins.
If the family had started off @ the beginning of the film the way the ended
up in the real version, all singing and all dancing, dressed in their best
curtains, after a few months would they have ended up as the model children
that we see at the start of the film, polite, quite, and NOT SINGING.
Was thinking that it might make a good DW book, and they have to escape
from some power crazed Uberwald warewolves at the end...
What do you think?
Sophie
sophster
> Was thinking that it might make a good DW book, and they have to escape
> from some power crazed Uberwald warewolves at the end...
>
werewolves representing the Nazis
Sophie
Square Bear
news:oprtrw78...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
Doesn't sound like a bad idea......
Susan Sto Helit is who i would choose to. :)
But there might be an opening the witches....
Could you work in the witches as the other 'sisters'?
Magrat Garlik could be Maria too, BUT that wouldn't be nearly as fun as
Susan.
Maybe get Gaspode in as the family "pet"
Just crazy thoughts.....
Bear
Mole Man
> Hi,
> I've just been watching Sound Of Music on DVD, and it got me thinking...
*speculation snipped*
I probably won't be the first to tell you this, but at least I'll spare
you the beating. This sort of thing is rather discouraged on this
newsgroup, for several reasons, including that the author hangs around
here, and that he can't use ideas posted by well-meaning fans. There
are legal ramifications, I understand, as well as a certain pride that
creative people take in writing their books all by themselves, without help.
So don't do it again *wagging finger*
Regards
Allen
Diane L.
> "sophster" <sophie...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:oprtrw78...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
<snip>
Please don't post speculation here. I know it's fun to talk about
what you'd like to see in the books and to think about how you'd
like things to develop, but speculation is specifically mentioned
as a no-no in the FAQs for a very good reason. Terry has does not
want to be accused of getting his ideas from his fans (just think of
the fun some of the press could have with an accusation like that),
and at least once a speculation on one of the Pratchett newsgroups
has come close enough to one of his ideas for future books that
he had to change his plans. On that occasion Terry stopped
participating in the groups for several months, and only came back because
of a strict prohibition against *any* speculation offering
details of possible future developments.
If you really want to see the story, maybe you could write it. There
is a mailing list for fan fiction that Terry takes care to avoid (the
details are on http://www.lspace.org/faqs/afp-faq.g.html). But if
you want Terry to continue to read and post here, please keep
speculation away from afp and abp.
Diane L.
sophster
>
> So don't do it again *wagging finger*
>
>
Sophie
Square Bear
news:106067421...@eunomia.uk.clara.net...
OOPS, Sorry :$
Terry Pratchett
<squar...@hotmail.com> writes
>"sophster" <sophie...@operamail.com> wrote in message
>news:oprtrw78...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> >
>> > Was thinking that it might make a good DW book, and they have to escape
>> > from some power crazed Uberwald warewolves at the end...
>> >
>> In case its not blindingly obvious, or you haven't seen the film, the
>> werewolves representing the Nazis
>>
>> Sophie
>
>Doesn't sound like a bad idea......
Indeed not. There are not a huge number of stories with a governess in
the centre of them and I was rather looking forward to writing that one.
Thank you, people, for ensuring that I don't.
--
Terry Pratchett
Wally Anglesea™
DAMN! doesn't ANYONE read the goddamn FAQ's before they shoot off
their stupid mouth?
--
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm
"You can't fool me, it's turtles all the way down."
Peter Ellis
[snip suggestion for "DW does Sound of Music"]
>
>Indeed not. There are not a huge number of stories with a governess in
>the centre of them and I was rather looking forward to writing that one.
>
>
>Thank you, people, for ensuring that I don't.
I honestly don't think "DW does Sound of Music" is much of a leap,
especially given the set-up you've already provided with the werewolves/SS
and Susan (a governess) as a major character. It's hardly as if any book
could be hugely similar to the film, unless it's the Korean version where
they cut the songs because the running time was too long. It's certainly
not enough of an unusual idea that thousands of people couldn't have idly
wondered it at some stage.
Has the situation changed? Going by previous postings of yours, I
was under the impression that (while discouraged) ideas this vague
wouldn't stop you writing what you liked, since they're pretty much ten a
penny, and anyone with an ounce of sense can come up with half a dozen in
an hour.
I quote:
***************************
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=q9ir9MABhBE%2BEAn6%40unseen.demon.co.uk
>
>The Librarian is a man turned
>into an ape, wouldn't it be fun if he turned into a man again... I've
>come close to that with Greebo. It's not a whole lot further down the
>line than 'do a book about football'. This, with respect to all here,
>is not a story idea as such, it's a conceit. But it'd start to be a
>potential problem for me if people came up with all the subsidiary ideas
>that put it in context: why it happened, where, what happened next...
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=JSIXaBAmwlL2EwoR%40unseen.demon.co.uk
>
>So I'm taking this view now: there's hundred of people out there with a
>good working knowledge of DW, and on the newsgroup they're postulating
>all kinds of stuff. Fine. But I know a lot about DW too, and I've got
>fat files of characters, ideas, situations and lines which have occurred
>to me over the years. I'm not going to knowingly pinch anyone's idea,
>but neither am I going to cross stuff out because someone else has
>independently suggested it.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dG6sXDAf6Dg1Ewex%40unseen.demon.co.uk
>
>I ought to be clear what I mean by 'ideas'. People posting 'It'd be
>kewl to have a DW novel about newspapers/football/the Millennium
>Bug/whatever', well, that's not a problem. Nor is it an idea. It's
>just a concept. I can dream up a dozen a minute.
***************************
If things are different now, it would be nice to have some kind of clearer
guideline as to what is and isn't acceptable - to be honest, I don't think
there's any way short of making both newsgroups moderated to avoid this
happening again, and I'd hate to think we were circumscribing your freedom
to write what the heck you want.
However, just to make sure:
"Why don't we have a Discworld version of "Debbie Does Dallas"? We could
have Cheery lining up to reward the all-Copperhead Dwarf Croissant Hurling
team."
That should put paid to that plotbunny, thank Om.
Peter
Square Bear
"Terry Pratchett" <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
<snip>
> Indeed not. There are not a huge number of stories with a governess in
> the centre of them and I was rather looking forward to writing that one.
>
>
> Thank you, people, for ensuring that I don't.
>
> --
> Terry Pratchett
Hangs head in shame
goes off to read FAQ
Terry Pratchett
<Pine.SOL.4.44.03081...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk>, Peter
Ellis <pj...@cam.ac.uk> writes
>I honestly don't think "DW does Sound of Music" is much of a leap,
>especially given the set-up you've already provided with the werewolves/SS
>and Susan (a governess) as a major character.
This is true, but so what? The fact that a couple of known DW themes so
easily combine in this doesn't change much. Saying 'anyone could have
had the idea' probably sounds shrill and whiny in face of the fact that
someone else was the first to 'publish' it.
>Has the situation changed? Going by previous postings of yours, I
>was under the impression that (while discouraged) ideas this vague
>wouldn't stop you writing what you liked, since they're pretty much ten a
>penny,
The situation changes all the time. Two long threads recently on
rec.arts.sf. written, about copyright and fanfic, lead me to believe
that the laid-back approach I've tried to evolve and maintain isn't very
safe.
I don't think for one moment that anyone on this thread is going to sue
or cause trouble. But 'The Sound of Music' is pretty specific,
especially when others start to speculate further. With respect, it's
not in the same category as 'one about football'.
--
Terry Pratchett
Shadowcory
> > "sophster" <sophie...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> > news:oprtrw78...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Terry has does not
> want to be accused of getting his ideas from his fans (just think of
> the fun some of the press could have with an accusation like that),
> and at least once a speculation on one of the Pratchett newsgroups
> has come close enough to one of his ideas for future books that
> he had to change his plans.
Something similar happened a while ago on the sluggy forums
(www.sluggy.com). Somebody speculated about what they thought would
happen next, and by fluke got it right. Of course, rising to the
occasion, the poster went nasty and accused Pete of stealing her
ideas. She kept on insisting that she put in there first, so he must
have stolen the idea from her. :S
Urquharts
<tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Indeed not. There are not a huge number of stories with a governess in
>the centre of them and I was rather looking forward to writing that one.
>
>
>Thank you, people, for ensuring that I don't.
>
>--
>Terry Pratchett
Excuse me, Sir. I couldn't help overhearing.
I understand your concern, but at this stage it may not be too late to
undo the damage.
If I strolled up you at a party and said something like "how about a
story where the witches go to the opera, maybe with overtones of the
Phantom" would that have made it impossible for you to have written
Maskerade?
Surely there is a world of difference between suggesting an idea for a
book and the actual production of one of your masterpieces. I've read
a fair number of books containing dedications like 'to my wife Gladys,
who suggested the idea'; at no time was it suggested that the
copyright lay with Gladys.
In the case of The Sound of Music, it's not as if the idea is
original; the intellectual property is surely in what you make of it.
I suspect you would have made something marvellous.....
As a long time and fervent Pratchettian, I'd hate to think that we may
have lost a masterpiece because of an inadvertent blurt from a newbie.
I hope you allow the offending post to drop into the background noise
of the web, and not allow it to interfere with your plans for future
books.
Regards
Doug Urquhart
James Eagle
[snip]
> I understand your concern, but at this stage it may not be too late to
> undo the damage.
>
> If I strolled up you at a party and said something like "how about a
> story where the witches go to the opera, maybe with overtones of the
> Phantom" would that have made it impossible for you to have written
> Maskerade?
>
> Surely there is a world of difference between suggesting an idea for a
> book and the actual production of one of your masterpieces. I've read
> a fair number of books containing dedications like 'to my wife Gladys,
> who suggested the idea'; at no time was it suggested that the
> copyright lay with Gladys.
>
> In the case of The Sound of Music, it's not as if the idea is
> original; the intellectual property is surely in what you make of it.
> I suspect you would have made something marvellous.....
>
> As a long time and fervent Pratchettian, I'd hate to think that we may
> have lost a masterpiece because of an inadvertent blurt from a newbie.
> I hope you allow the offending post to drop into the background noise
> of the web, and not allow it to interfere with your plans for future
> books.
>
> Regards
>
> Doug Urquhart
I just wanted to second that last post.
2 points:
-Wouldn't it be enough for the offending poster to post another message
here renouncing copyright of the idea & undertaking not to sue for
plagiarism? Or would that not be legally binding?
-Since the Discworld is Pterry's intellectual property, can anyone sue
Pterry for "plagiarising" a *specifically Discworld* idea?
After all, it's not a question here of someone suggesting a very general
plot, suitable for any fictional setting, which could be taken and
reworked into a Discworld idea - it's a question of someone suggesting a
plot idea set *specifically* in the Discworld universe with Discworld
characters. Since that universe and those characters all belong to
Pterry, surely no-one else can legally lay claim to an idea they come up
with which uses his characters and setting?
I'm not a lawyer, though (swords don't glow blue in my presence or
anything) so I'd be interested to hear from anyone who knows better on
the subject.
James
Len Oil
> 2 points:
>
> -Wouldn't it be enough for the offending poster to post another message
> here renouncing copyright of the idea & undertaking not to sue for
> plagiarism? Or would that not be legally binding?
Even if it were, reputation could still be lost. 10 years from now, the
talk about how "Terry pinched the idea from..." would be circulating. I
mean, they might even dig that up in the "Century of Pratchett" 3D
HoloViewer programme on the Terran Non-reality-show Network in their
Reminiscences From The Old Planet stream...
Legality might be definable, even judged upon, either in a court or by an
proclomation by the Great And Powerful Mekon, but the possibility of
straying into something that can't be controlled in anything less than an
Orwellian vision (and, even then, not really) is the dangerous bit.
Best safe than sorry, IMHO. I just hope I don't inadvertently fall into
that trap (which is why I generally stick to meaningless banter, unless
that's just me in general...)
--
AFP Code 2.0: AC$/>M-UK d@(--) s:+>- a- UP+ R+++ F++ h- P3x= OSD+:-- ?C M--
L pp--- I->** W+ c@ B+ Cn::::+ CC- PT+>+++ Pu* 5+>++ X-- MT++ eV+(++-) r*
y+ end
Terry Pratchett
<jee...@yahoo.com> writes
>-Wouldn't it be enough for the offending poster to post another message
>here renouncing copyright of the idea & undertaking not to sue for
>plagiarism? Or would that not be legally binding?
>
>-Since the Discworld is Pterry's intellectual property, can anyone sue
>Pterry for "plagiarising" a *specifically Discworld* idea?
Look, let's not go too far here.
What this is about is not perfectly understandable fannish speculation,
or any real legal charge of plagiarism.
It's about perceptions, and what gets remembered. As an aside, those
interested might like to Google on Marion Zimmer Bradley and the
infamous fanfic case and see if they can work out who did what to who.
As someone said, there are about five 'definitive' accounts of a spat
which *apparently* led to the publishers refusing to publish a book
because of the fear of legal action, and they don't agree.
No, no one can sue me, and I don't think that anyone in this thread
would contemplate it for a moment. But you don't have to be
particularly imaginative so see how a problem might occur in a few
years' time.
We actually have had the overture to something like this already -- it
was stopped in its tracks because the writer had no concept of how far
ahead of publication date a book, in solid, signed -for form, is with
the publisher.
An accusation that no one in fandom would take seriously for a moment
*would* nevertheless get publicity from journalists that don't know,
and don't care, how fandom works.
And consider my rep. 'He steals blatantly' was a phrase used in The
Independent in a friendly article about me (an enemy wouldn't have
dared). What was *meant* was he 'borrows gloriously from our cultural
heritage', which was a phrase used about JKR some months earlier. Both
journalists meant exactly the same thing, but the choice of words was
instructive and is now on file.
Then stir into this mess the huge growth in fanfic in general, which has
got to the point where commercial publication without the permission of
the 'source' author has been contemplated, and you end up with ...a
mess.
Supposing someone had posted, a few years before Maskerade:'Hey, imagine
the witches getting involved in a Phantom of the Opera plot -- I'd bet
Granny Weatherwax would sort out the Phantom!' No, nothing there that's
anything but innocent...but recalled after Maskerade it might take a
different spin. You *know* I'm right.
However, look on the bright side. The very existence of this thread
means that I probably *can* go ahead:-)
--
Terry Pratchett
Simon Crowder
(And probably unintentional) mishap(s) that seem to (have) occur(ed).
~Simon
"Terry Pratchett" <tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:rwz$8UAq20O$EA...@unseen.demon.co.uk...
Square Bear
"Simon Crowder" <webm...@direrealms.com> wrote in message
news:0IK_a.117$Xq3...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
> Thanks for continuing to post on this newsgroup, despite the unfortunate
> (And probably unintentional) mishap(s) that seem to (have) occur(ed).
>
for. (I did not know what I was doing)
Terry, keep up the awesome work. Who am I to tell the master how to do his
work?
I hope that this doesn't turn you away from the group.
One thing I treasure as special about AFP is that we actually get to
interact with our beloved author as well as eachother. I hope I have not
been a cause for his leaving.
Humbly
Square Bear
Guvnor
Dear All:
I've been following this thread with the same certain horrid facination
as one watchs a slow motion car crash - you know it's going to end in
tears, someone's going to get hurt and its too late afterwards to say
'sorry'.
The worst possible outcome would be for Pterry to say, roughly, 'It's
just too risky to keep reading/posting, I'll have to stop.' This would
be a monumental disaster, I can't tell you the thrill I get when
opening the news group to see that Pterry's posted something, no matter
how light or trivial. He is always polite (often under severe
provocation) invariably instructive and frequently illuminating. And
THAT'S what you are all risking by not complying with Pterry's
perfectly reasonable, politely expressed, request not to speculate. We
nearly lost him some time ago and over EXACTLY the same issue.
For Gods' sake have you already forgotton JKR's battle with that
lunatic over 'muggle'?? God know's what it cost in legal fees, lost
productive creative time and sheer bloody aggravation. Do any of us
want to even risk our favourite author being concieveably exposed to
the faintest chance of that?
Having said that, I would have thought that if anyone objects to The
Sound of So Helit it should have been the late Maria Von Trapp rather
than some pimply mouth breathing newbie.
Love, light and happiness
Douglas
Terry Pratchett
<squar...@hotmail.com> writes
>I apologise again for all the grief that I have been partially responsible
>for. (I did not know what I was doing)
Don't worry about it. As I've said, I think the way the thread has
developed will solve the problem. Maybe history will recall it as
:'Someone started speculating on a plot TP was working on and he went
harlan' :-)
It's unfortunate we should have to act like this, but events suggest
that for an author rich enough to be a target a little paranoia is
probably not enough.
--
Terry Pratchett
Lesley Weston
tprat...@unseen.demon.co.uk wrote on 14/08/2003 1:51 AM:
> In article <bheh7e$l56$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk>, James Eagle
> <jee...@yahoo.com> writes
>> -Wouldn't it be enough for the offending poster to post another message
>> here renouncing copyright of the idea & undertaking not to sue for
>> plagiarism? Or would that not be legally binding?
>>
<snip>
>
> However, look on the bright side. The very existence of this thread
> means that I probably *can* go ahead:-)
That's good news. This thread is archived for ever on Google, and possibly
elsewhere, so there can be no possibility of anyone doubting the originality
of your work if you do go ahead. It sounds like something that would be fun
to write [1] and even more fun to read.
[1] Even if it does involve work
Lesley Weston.
Square Bear
Thanks Pterry!!!!! (exclamation marks are deliberate to show the level of my
insane happiness) You have made a long time fan very happy! I look forward
to reading Monstrous Regiment!
Huge although exteremeley humbled fan
Square Bear
Square Bear
"Guvnor" <mun...@tnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:140820032347342453%mun...@tnet.com.au...
Long ago I was a pimply, mouth breathing newbie, I actually am a little like
Susan Sto Helit myself, being a Teacher ( I realised early in life that I
had no talent whatsoever) (although my lessons don't usually involve first
hand experience) I apoligise AGAIN to Perry and the group for my part in
this fiasco
I don't need a seeing eye dog, I need a thinking brain dog!
Square bear
Sophie
> <squar...@hotmail.com> writes
>> I apologise again for all the grief that I have been partially
>> responsible
>> for. (I did not know what I was doing)
> Don't worry about it. As I've said, I think the way the thread has
> developed will solve the problem. Maybe history will recall it as
> :'Someone started speculating on a plot TP was working on and he went
> harlan' :-)
> It's unfortunate we should have to act like this, but events suggest that
> for an author rich enough to be a target a little paranoia is probably
> not enough.
> -- Terry Pratchett
I've been away for a few days and only just come back to find out what a
monumental disaster I caused.
I am really sorry for any upset I have caused anyone, particularly Terry...
I would never ever mean to do anything like that intentionally, and in
future will read the faq all the way through before posting and more
inportantly will not post at 5:30Am whilst very drunk again if i can
possibly help it... after seeing the fallout effects a night of watching
nostalgic films whilst drinking copious amounts of beer, i'm going T-total.
Yours VERY APPOLOGETICALLY
Sopihe
p.s.
To the lovelly person who emailed me to check that i was alright after the
on-slaught... thanks so much it was really kind and thoughtful of you
Soph
xx
rich hammett
häntä, Square Bear yllätti tuomarin todistamalla:
I can understand, too, that just seeing somebody else talking
about the idea can be enough to take the fun out of it (I think
Terry mentioned that, but this was a long thread...). At least
He doesn't do too much "punch-line" writing. I've been reading
an anthology of Arthur C Clarke's 1950's writing. EVERY STORY
so far has ended in a punch line. The "surprise" ending. I'm
assuming he grew out of this...I don't remember this in his later
work.
rich
--
-to reply, it's hot not warm
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
\ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
\ ..basketball [is] the paramount
/ synthesis in sport of intelligence, precision, courage,
\ audacity, anticipation, artifice, teamwork, elegance,
/ and grace. --Carl Sagan
Trevor Marsh
<snip>
>
> I can understand, too, that just seeing somebody else talking
> about the idea can be enough to take the fun out of it (I think
> Terry mentioned that, but this was a long thread...). At least
> He doesn't do too much "punch-line" writing. I've been reading
> an anthology of Arthur C Clarke's 1950's writing. EVERY STORY
> so far has ended in a punch line. The "surprise" ending. I'm
> assuming he grew out of this...I don't remember this in his later
> work.
>
> rich
>
> --
> -to reply, it's hot not warm
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> \ Rich Hammett http://home.hiwaay.net/~rhammett
> \ ..basketball [is] the paramount
> / synthesis in sport of intelligence, precision, courage,
> \ audacity, anticipation, artifice, teamwork, elegance,
> / and grace. --Carl Sagan
Clark stuck with the "punchline" ending through pretty much all his short
stories and novellas, thankfully its something he didn't use in his Novels,
not that I can recall anyway. Mind you I have stopped reading Clark after
Rama II, and one other I can't remember, that was co-written with Gentry.
Clark on his own is a wonderful read, with Gentry, however he's not so good.
IMHO of course.
Trev
Graycat
<ghj...@xxxxlycos.co.uk> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>
>> I can understand, too, that just seeing somebody else talking
>> about the idea can be enough to take the fun out of it (I think
>> Terry mentioned that, but this was a long thread...). At least
>> He doesn't do too much "punch-line" writing. I've been reading
>> an anthology of Arthur C Clarke's 1950's writing. EVERY STORY
>> so far has ended in a punch line. The "surprise" ending. I'm
>> assuming he grew out of this...I don't remember this in his later
>> work.
>Clark stuck with the "punchline" ending through pretty much all his short
>stories and novellas, thankfully its something he didn't use in his Novels,
>not that I can recall anyway. Mind you I have stopped reading Clark after
>Rama II, and one other I can't remember, that was co-written with Gentry.
>Clark on his own is a wonderful read, with Gentry, however he's not so good.
>IMHO of course.
It's easy to do with short stories, you have a limited length, limited
plot and it can be very effective to use the punch-line approach. For
a full lenght novel, it's just not as good.
--
Elin
The Tale of Westala and Villtin
http://www.student.lu.se/~his02ero/index.html
From adress valid, but rarely checked. Use Reply-To to contact me
rich hammett
>><snip>
>>>
>>> I can understand, too, that just seeing somebody else talking
>>> about the idea can be enough to take the fun out of it (I think
>>> Terry mentioned that, but this was a long thread...). At least
>>> He doesn't do too much "punch-line" writing. I've been reading
>>> an anthology of Arthur C Clarke's 1950's writing. EVERY STORY
>>> so far has ended in a punch line. The "surprise" ending. I'm
>>> assuming he grew out of this...I don't remember this in his later
>>> work.
>>Clark stuck with the "punchline" ending through pretty much all his short
>>stories and novellas, thankfully its something he didn't use in his Novels,
>>not that I can recall anyway. Mind you I have stopped reading Clark after
>>Rama II, and one other I can't remember, that was co-written with Gentry.
>>Clark on his own is a wonderful read, with Gentry, however he's not so good.
>>IMHO of course.
> It's easy to do with short stories, you have a limited length, limited
> plot and it can be very effective to use the punch-line approach. For
> a full lenght novel, it's just not as good.
I guess that the worst problem is that after 50 years, character
study and social commentary can hold up better than punch lines.
Unfortunately, also, some of Clarke's punch-lines have become
cliches (the opening to 2001 was originally a short story) and
some are even false cliches (suicidal lemmings).
I like Clarke's ideas, though, some of them are amazingly ingenious.
Trevor Marsh
wrote:
Not the opening but the basis for the whole story. It was based an a
short story called either Sentinal or The Sentinal, I can't remember at the
moment and all my Clark books are in the loft so I can't look it up.
Although in (The) Sentinal the "object" was a pryamid rather than a
monolith, and the concept was developed one heck of a lot from the original
short story.
Trev
--
Remove "X's" to reply
grahamafforda...@hotmail.com
On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 19:15:07 GMT, Trevor Marsh
<ghj...@xxxxlycos.co.uk> wrote:
>> the opening to 2001 was originally a short story
>
>Not the opening but the basis for the whole story. It was based an a
>short story called either Sentinal or The Sentinal,
It was called The Sentinel.
>the concept was developed one heck of a lot from the original short story.
After Stanley Kubrick first contacted Arthur C Clarke with the idea of
writing "the proverbial good SF film", they went through practically
the entirity of Clarke's works for ideas before finally settling on
The Sentinel.
Cheers,
Graham.
Trevor Marsh
I always think it's a shame that no one has made a film of Clarks
"Childhoods End". One of the best SF novels I have read, and done properly
would make a great film, and I recommend it to any SF "fan" that hasn't
read it yet.
William Black
"gra...@affordable-leather.co.ukDELETETHIS"
<grahamafforda...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> After Stanley Kubrick first contacted Arthur C Clarke with the idea of
> writing "the proverbial good SF film", they went through practically
> the entirity of Clarke's works for ideas before finally settling on
> The Sentinel.
There's a book around somewhere of all the various ideas they came up with,
aliens with mouths in their stomachs, alien landscapes that might work,
loads of horribly 1950's style ideas, all of which were rejected.
--
William Black
------------------
On time, on budget, or works;
Pick any two from three
grahamafforda...@hotmail.com
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 09:19:11 GMT, Trevor Marsh
<ghj...@xxxxlycos.co.uk> wrote:
>> After Stanley Kubrick first contacted Arthur C Clarke with the idea of
>> writing "the proverbial good SF film", they went through practically
>> the entirity of Clarke's works for ideas before finally settling on
>> The Sentinel.
>
> I always think it's a shame that no one has made a film of Clarks
>"Childhoods End".
Probably because just like the Merkins said "Lose the Death angle"
when the proposed filming Mort...
<Spoiler warning for Childhood's End>
They probably also said "Great book, but can we lose the 'Devil' angle
because the church lobby won't like it"...!
Cheers,
Graham.
grahamafforda...@hotmail.com
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:25:41 +0000 (UTC), "William Black"
<black_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> After Stanley Kubrick first contacted Arthur C Clarke with the idea of
>> writing "the proverbial good SF film", they went through practically
>> the entirity of Clarke's works for ideas before finally settling on
>> The Sentinel.
>
>There's a book around somewhere of all the various ideas they came up with,
It's called "The Lost Worlds of 2001" and it's in the box of books on
the shelves behind me! :-)
Cheers,
Graham.
Trevor Marsh
Your probably right there, but that would ruin a major plot line. Still a
great read though.
Jess Bennett
<ghj...@xxxxlycos.co.uk> writes
>
> I always think it's a shame that no one has made a film of Clarks
>"Childhoods End". One of the best SF novels I have read, and done properly
>would make a great film, and I recommend it to any SF "fan" that hasn't
>read it yet.
>
properly' it would make a great film, but can you imagine how awful it
would be not done properly? Perhaps it's not worth the risk...
--
Jess
Greg Zywicki
It would make an interesting film, but can extrapolating from Jung's
more, um, unusual theories be described as _science_ fiction?
Greg Zywicki
Andrew Hickey
Possibly not. But it *can* be described as *speculative* fiction...
--
http://stealthmunchkin.com
Stealth Munchkin play the Cavern, Liverpool in October
As part of International Pop Overthrow. More details shortly
Steve James
> In article <o4_Za.51$t53....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>, Square Bear
> <squar...@hotmail.com> writes
> >"sophster" <sophie...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> >news:oprtrw78...@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
> >> >
> >> > Was thinking that it might make a good DW book, and they have to escape
> >> > from some power crazed Uberwald warewolves at the end...
> >> >
> >> In case its not blindingly obvious, or you haven't seen the film, the
> >> werewolves representing the Nazis
> >>
> >> Sophie
> >
> >Doesn't sound like a bad idea......
>
> Indeed not. There are not a huge number of stories with a governess in
> the centre of them and I was rather looking forward to writing that one.
>
>
> Thank you, people, for ensuring that I don't.
>
> --
> Terry Pratchett
>
It occurred to me on first reading the opening postings for this thread, not knowing the first poster
sophster <sophie...@operamail.com> and seeing that she had not followed the tagging
rules that what we had was a terrorist.
It seems to me all too easy to pick a newsgroup where an author is known to read and carpet
bomb it with story lines.
For instance (and off the top of my head) posting a plot line into alt.fan.rowling that V is in
fact Harry's father and that he killed off the family to avoid the CSA could cause interesting ripples.
And that Tom Champagne is the father of the Worst Which.
Steve (Steeljam) *BF DAcFD (UU) *
Resident Opsimath in Redivivus Studies