I know, I know, everyone does it, but Neil, being the increadible writer and person that he is, ought to be above it. I am referring to the fact that, currently, three of his books are being adapted into films. Three! Now, I respect the fact that he's involved to some degree, but no matter what they cannot be as good as the books. Tolkien was dead, he had nothing to say about the Lord of the Rings, but Neil's alive and could have said no. Is it just me, or does anyone else feel this way? I admit, i'm intrigued by the idea of a Books of Magic film, and a Coraline film, and a Stardust film, but they haven't got a prayer of matching the books and shouldn't even attempt it.

I know what you mean. When other authors let their stuff get optioned, it either really makes me happy when we get lucky (like Fight Club) or really pisses me off when we get screwed (The Beach). But the one thing I really dig about the movie adaptations you mentioned (Coraline and Stardust, at least, I don't know so much about the Books of Magic adaptation; I think Neverwhere is somewhere, too) is that Neil seems to be so "hands on" with them. I don't think they'll be the books, they'll be something different.

But I love going to the movies in general, and seeing someone try to adapt one of Neil's books/comics gets me really curious. Just the idea of seeing a big-budget Neverwhere gives me the chills...

That being said, it seems like there are a lot of people on the boads who feel pretty much the same apprehension that you do about his stuff making its way to the big screen.

quote:

Originally posted by The_Raven:
I know, I know, everyone does it, but Neil, being the increadible writer and person that he is, ought to be above it. I am referring to the fact that, currently, three of his books are being adapted into films. Three! Now, I respect the fact that he's involved to some degree, but no matter what they cannot be as good as the books. Tolkien was dead, he had nothing to say about the Lord of the Rings, but Neil's alive and could have said no. Is it just me, or does anyone else feel this way? I admit, i'm intrigued by the idea of a Books of Magic film, and a Coraline film, and a Stardust film, but they haven't got a prayer of matching the books and shouldn't even attempt it.

If my memory serves, Tolkien sold the film rights to his books when he was alive.

g

Wasn't Neverwhere a tv production before it became a book? I would have to go watch my tape with the interview...which isn't such a bad idea, as I have Christmas prezzies to wrap. I usually watch an old Crowded House concert though.

count me as one of the apprehensive ones. Stardust is up there in my top ten favourite books and I do hope that they do it right.

Yes, Neverwhere was a BBC mini-series before Gaiman wrote it in prose form.

I am not sure about Tolkien selling the rights while he was alive, but if that is true it would very much surprise me.

In as much as Mr. Gaiman is involved with the films, the only way I would be at ease would be if he were scripting them, and, to the best of my knowledge, he is not. Studios generally (not always, but mostly) don't let the authors of the book write the screenplay because they feel that the author will have too much of an attachment to the book to adapt it honestly.

quote:

Originally posted by The_Raven:
Yes, Neverwhere was a BBC mini-series before Gaiman wrote it in prose form.

I am not sure about Tolkien selling the rights while he was alive, but if that is true it would very much surprise me.

In as much as Mr. Gaiman is involved with the films, the only way I would be at ease would be if he were scripting them, and, to the best of my knowledge, he is not. Studios generally (not always, but mostly) don't let the authors of the book write the screenplay because they feel that the author will have too much of an attachment to the book to adapt it honestly.

From a letter to Rayner Unwin -- 7 September 1957
[On 4 September, Tolkien was visited by representatives of the American company which was interested in making an animated film of The Lord of the Rings. He was given a copy of the synopsis of the film, which he agreed to read.]
You will receive on Monday the copy of the 'Story Line' or synopsis of the proposed film version of The Lord of the Rings. I could not get it off yesterday.....
An abridgement by selection with some good picture-wrok would be pleasant, & perhaps worth a good deal in publicity; but the present script is rather a compression with resultant over-crowing and confusion, blurring of climaxes, and general degradation: a pull-back towards more conventional 'fairy-stories'. People gallap about on Eagles at the last provocation; Lorien becomes a fairy-castle with 'delicate minarets', and all that sort of thing.
But I am quite prepared to play ball, if they are open to advice -- and if you decide that the thing is genuine, and worthwhile.

---From "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien" edited by Humphrey Carpenter

Personally, I understand your trepidation, but if you browse this website - as I have, since I'm brand-spanking-new to it - you'll come across Neil's interview with The Onion. He's excited about branching out. It sounds like tv and film are just new extensions of his talent. I've only recently come across Neil's work, but I will admit I'm quite addicted - devouring every book of his I can get my hands on...All I can say, well, for myself anyway, is that it's the journey that counts, really. If his journey to adapt his books into film is something he wants to do, be happy for him. Wait patiently to see who he's collaborated with before you jump to conclusions based on what other adaptations have become on screen...
As an actress and fellow screenwriter, I definitely know that when you surround yourself with great people in the film business, you have more pull as the screenwriter than you can imagine...
Anyway. That's just me. I'm happy for him.

I don't mind what he does as far as making movies. He spends his money wisely and well, supporting good causes like the CBLDF, and if he makes it making crap movies based on his books, I still have his books.

I'm sorry that you're disappointed,but at the end of the day, they are his works, to do with as he wishes.

As Redbunny says, Neil is excited about the movies. I imagine that it's tremendous fun for him see his characters come alive in another medium. He labored so many years in obscurity - he deserves his pleasure here, IMO.

- Cho

If you're that apprehensive, there is always the option of not going and seeing the movies.

It's not like there isn't free will in the matter.

Of course I have the choice not to go see the movies, but I can't do that. Firstly, I review films for a newspaper, so I have to see them, secondly, If they are crap I want to know so that I can warn people away and if they're good then I just plain want to see them. It's a tough choice and the only obvious answer is not to make the film, but they are... Alas, life is difficult sometimes.
I trust Neil with everything, if he's writing a film then it will be brilliant, but if it's merely 'based on' his book, then I have no faith whatsoever.

Tolkien movie rights: anyone remember the animated movies?
adapting a book into a movie is always tricky. but I feel that a book is a book, a movie a movie, etc. and that if anything, you should WANT it to be slightly different, ENJOY it. it's totally like having your cake and eating it too. here's Stardust in book form...now here it is in movie form. pretend, if anything, that you're on another plane of existence, and this is how the story manifests there.

I try, damn it, I try. But it's so hard, an increadible book does not deserve to be made into a B-rate film. I do not mind changes in a story if they are done tastefully and well, or if the film is so amazing that it outweighs the negatives. For example, I hated the changes made to TLOTR, the changes in Faramir's character is one, but it was such an amazing film overall that I still loved it. Yet, despite the fact that it's my favorite film ever, I would say in all honesty that I wish it had never been made.

I can also understand the trepidition. I finished Neverwhere and when I saw the BBC production for sale on the internet, I became very excited. My daughter had just finished Neverwhere as well and did a book report on it for school and when the DVD's arrived, we hunkered down to watch it...and we lasted less than an hour. I thought it was dreadful...The acting was awful, the directing and production was awful, and my daughter had only one thing to say when I turned it off..."What in the hell was THAT???" I love Neil and heartily endorse his books!

I do believe, however, that the Neverwhere mini-series came before the novel. Not to diss the novel, it was a piece of brilliance, but I think that the TV series came first and Gaiman worked on it as well.

Neil wrote Neverwhere the novel as a 'director's' (or in this case, writer's) cut of the miniseries so he could put back cut scenes and not have to deal with low-budget effects

quote:

Originally posted by The_Raven:
I know, I know, everyone does it, but Neil, being the increadible writer and person that he is, ought to be above it. I am referring to the fact that, currently, three of his books are being adapted into films. Three! Now, I respect the fact that he's involved to some degree, but no matter what they cannot be as good as the books. Tolkien was dead, he had nothing to say about the Lord of the Rings, but Neil's alive and could have said no. Is it just me, or does anyone else feel this way? I admit, i'm intrigued by the idea of a Books of Magic film, and a Coraline film, and a Stardust film, but they haven't got a prayer of matching the books and shouldn't even attempt it.

I dont really care if a writer auctions off his work. Neil has sold the rights to quite a bit of his work and most of it never gets made. Books Of magic already seems like its going the same path so i wouldnt expec it to come out. I dont know though.

Anyway, the way i see it is, if the movies look like utter crap, neil already got paid so I dont have to worry about watching them.

I guess this doesn't bother me in the least because I'm not a purist about any particular medium of art. Plus from his activities in the last few years it seems to me that Neil has a genuine interest in film so as long as it's something he's doing because he likes/wants it, that's fine with me.

I agree, so long as it's something 'he's doing,' but he is not writing these film and his involvment is not terribly large (not large enough to save it from the black hole that is Hollywood these days).

Neil can't resist the lure of Hollywood. Nobody's perfect