>>But then, Clarke's is not the kind of author that has such a literate style that it is so difficult to translate to a quite linear movie (notice that 2001 went the opposite way -the movie is much more complex than the original short story).

I wouldn't exactly call "2001" a short story. <g>

~~Bonnie




>>>I guess the main problem is trying to translate what works on literature to cinema. As those are radically different languages, the focus should be on different things.
>>>
>>
>>That is one of the big problems. About 10 years ago I talked to Orson Scott Card about doing an Ender's Game movie. He told me it wasn't going to happen because it would be impossible to do it. At that time, it was due to technology limitations. Those have now been removed and a movie is in the works. http://www.frescopictures.com/movies/ender/endersgame_update.html
>
>For some things, technology is an enabler. I remember about 20+ years ago, when I read Arthur Clarke's "Rendevouz with Rama" thinking that it will make a great movie (and I still think that a good director could make a better movie than the book, actually), but at this time, the techniques were too poor to make it really impressive. I know it would be possible now, and I guess that there is some projects going.
>
>But then, Clarke's is not the kind of author that has such a literate style that it is so difficult to translate to a quite linear movie (notice that 2001 went the opposite way -the movie is much more complex than the original short story).
>
>>Because Scott is heavily involved with its production, and knowing Scott's desire for keeping the story intact, I expect this movie to be really good.
>
>Well, sometimes is not enough with the author getting very involved. William Gibson was more or less involved in the two adaptations made from his work (Blue Rose Hotel, Johnny Mnemonic), the result was quite bad, in my opinion, mostly because they tried to translate the petty imagery that works ok on typeface, but can't support a movie.
>
>I still think that the best script could be ruined by a poor director, although a very good director could sometimes survive a deficient script (susually by not respecting it too much <s>).
>
>See you,