# SF masters not treated well by tinseltown



## MikeSoltis (Aug 1, 2003)

Started thinking about this in the 'I Robot' thread, and was wondering...
I can't really think of a good adaptation of any works by the SF great authors, pretty much at all.

Asimov was screwed with 'Nightfall'

Bradbury got clocked by 'The Martian Chronicles' although the short-lived 'Ray Bradbury Theater' (on HBO?) was not too bad.

Clarke...2001 was probably the best adaptation, although Kubrick went way 'off topic' several times

Heinlein...Starship Troopers, while a fun and entertaining film, was not very faithful to the book. Puppet Masters was close, but fell off the rails somewhere (which is hard for me to say because of the Julie Warner  effect)

Can anyone think of any examples which didn't suck?


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

MikeSoltis said:


> Started thinking about this in the 'I Robot' thread, and was wondering...
> I can't really think of a good adaptation of any works by the SF great authors, pretty much at all.
> 
> Asimov was screwed with 'Nightfall'
> ...


Not "Sci-Fi" per se, but "The Exorcist" was a good adaptation. "Fahrenheit 451" was decent.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

In fact, Millennial Man came much closer to being true to I, Robot.


----------



## MikeSoltis (Aug 1, 2003)

Thanks Bogy, I didn't mention Bicentennial Man because a lot of people hated it. Myself, having read and re-read the Asimov shorts the story was based on, I thought it was at times very true to the spirit of the originals.
And I thought Robin Williams, Oliver Platt, and Sam Neill were all pretty good in the film.

I forgot also Farenheit 451, haven't seen it in a while, but it too was close to the original.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

MikeSoltis said:


> Thanks Bogy, I didn't mention Bicentennial Man because a lot of people hated it. Myself, having read and re-read the Asimov shorts the story was based on, I thought it was at times very true to the spirit of the originals.
> And I thought Robin Williams, Oliver Platt, and Sam Neill were all pretty good in the film.
> 
> I forgot also Farenheit 451, haven't seen it in a while, but it too was close to the original.


Shoot. Thanks for correcting me on the title. I liked it, and yes, I thought it was relatively true to Asimov's story.


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

I've always felt "Contact" was the worst possible adaptation ever. They take the premise of Sagan and twist it 180 degrees. In the movie they say there is no sign of God and one must just have faith. In the book God actually proves that He exists in a way even the most skeptical scientist would believe. *boggle*

Philip Dick has a number of adaptations out there. I've even seen his name as being listed as one of the most adapted sci-fi authors ever. However I don't think a single movie has been entirely faithful to his books. 

In "Screamers" (based on the story "Second Variety") they are pretty faithful to the whole story, but then at the last moment change the ending, making it upbeat.

The same goes for "Minority Report", where Hollywood also gave it a happy ending.

Total Recall also seems to miss the point of the book.

From what I've read on fan sites, probably the best Dick adaptation is a little known film called "Barjo". I'm going to try and find it.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

MikeSoltis said:


> Thanks Bogy, I didn't mention Bicentennial Man because a lot of people hated it. Myself, having read and re-read the Asimov shorts the story was based on, I thought it was at times very true to the spirit of the originals.
> And I thought Robin Williams, Oliver Platt, and Sam Neill were all pretty good in the film.
> 
> I forgot also Farenheit 451, haven't seen it in a while, but it too was close to the original.


"Bicentennial Man" is one of my favorite films, probably one of the best Robin Williams performances ever, I think.


----------

