ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/glencook-fans/archive/v01.n161

Internet Message Format | 2002-01-28 | 18KB

From: [e-mail] (glencook-fans-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: glencook-fans-digest V1 #161
Reply-To: glencook-fans-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


glencook-fans-digest     Monday, January 28 2002     Volume 01 : Number 161




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 16:53:30 -0400
From: Richard Chilton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Speaking of supporting authors...

Igor Filippov wrote:
>
> "Heroic fantasy movies don't make significant amounts of money" -
> how about "Mummy" and "Tomb Raider" and "Indiana Jones" and many,
> many more ?

There's a difference between pulp and heroic fantasy.  Pulp action
movies make money while heroic fantasy (with few exceptions) don't.
Dragonslayer, Ladyhawk, and others of that type don't make the money
Mummy did.

Putting it another way - change the mummies to international terrorists
and shift the setting a bit and you still have the same fight scene -
the special effects might be a bit different, but the thing driving the
movie (action) is the same.

Take a classic like Lord of the Rings with a huge build in audience.
This Lord of the Rings may make money, but the last attempt at the
project (mixing animation and live action shots) didn't.  It tanked and
took the film's creator's career down the toilet.

> The thing is - imho - it's hard to make a _good_ fantasy movie
> and not to fall into cliche. Much easier to make Titanics and harvest
> oscars.
>

(Note - I'm not in the movie industry but I think most people who are
will agree with the stuff below.)

Not only is it hard to make the movie it's very hard to get money to
make one.  Tell someone you'll making "war movie meets Tatanic" and
they'll bankroll something like Pearl Habour and watch the money roll
in.  Tell them you want to make a heroic fantasy movie and if it's not
action pulp it won't get funded.  There's reasons why Lord of the Rings
wasn't made by a big Hollywood studio - and one of them is called
"Dungeons and Dragons the Movie".  The studio heads take one look at the
bottom line of past failures and either kill the project or scale it
back to a small budget B movie.

Thinking of the first Black Company book, I can't see how it can be made
into a movie.  The characters don't have enough scenes where they shine,
and when they done they are usually driven by horrific "you can't film
it that way" situations.
The cold blooded killing of Raven's wife - I can't see that in a movie.
Not without so much of a build up to explain it that Raven's character
is revealed when he joins the Black Company.  Croaker's pity for the
dead babies, that might get in.  Raven's cold heart being touched by
watching a little mute girl being raped - the rape scene would never
make it so they'd need another way to introduce Darling.
Heck even the Black Company raping and burning at Whisper's camp would
have to be cut - and without scenes like those the heart is gone from
the story.  Worse, the villians in the first book (Limper, Soulcatcher
at the end) aren't pure black.
Cook's characters are in some cases too complicated, too morally grey to
be the focus of a movie with a decent budget - unless you try a long
movie like Dune.  That leaves it as a small budget production which
means little for sets and costume and not enough filming time to get the
perfect shot.

It could work as an animated venture - in a few years when process that
made Final Fantasy becomes more affordable a small production company
might be able to make a series out of the Black Company or a long
movie.  One problem would be finding an audience.  One of speciality
channels might handle it but if it's too explicit, violent, or doesn't
fit the tastes of the day it might be a straight to video release (if
that).

Richard

=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 17:29:09 -0600
From: Steve Harris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Speaking of supporting authors...

Igor,

"how about "Mummy" and "Tomb Raider" and "Indiana Jones""

Not heroic fantasy, any of them.  One of the chief defining points of
heroic fantasy is that it be in a strictly non-industrial context,
roughly the same technology level as medieval Europe (or earlier); it is
highly important to each of those movies that the hero/ine be a 20th
century figure, the better to engage the empathies of the audience.

It's the distancing effect of a non-industrial society that is one of
the major reasons that heroic fantasy doesn't do Really Well for general
audiences--with the very welcome exception of LotR!  I think that comes
of Tolkien's genius in making such an engaging story, combined with
Jackson's extraorinarily fine realization.  (Yeah, it would be neat to
have Jackson to "BC the Movie"...)

Steve

=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 18:26:29 -0500
From: "C.L. Yona" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

>I loved Sandkings--thought the Showtime adaptation was lame, though.
>
>I'm just 100 pages into the Game of Thrones, and it's not wowing me.  Does
>it get better?

Stick with it.  I gave up in the first 100 pages too until someone
practically ordered me to pick it up again.  I'm thankful they did.
With the Black Company finished I'd say it's the best series
currently being written.

yer dog
www.thegriffin.com
Reviews and previews of all things fantasy

=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:02:08 -0600
From: "Dr. Elmo" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

Lawrence Jenab wondered aloud to the group:
 >I'm just 100 pages into the Game of Thrones, and it's not wowing me.  Does
 >it get better?

I feel obliged to give a countervailing opinion.  No, it does not get
better. In fact, in at least one significant respect, it gets worse: It has
no ending.  Like the worst of the rest of the giant fantasy trilogies
Martin is consciously emulating, the end of volume I is not the end of a
story, it's just the place where he hit his contractually-mandated wordcount.

That's something that Cook's original Black Company series got right: each
book of the trilogy ended a story, even as threads continued on.

Martin is capable of innovation, insight, and real human drama.  I can't
fault him intellectually for setting that aside to make a pile of money by
writing books that might as well be stamped "David Drake" or "David
Farland" or "Terry Brooks" or "L.E. Modisette Jr.", but I can still fault
him creatively.  The world did not need another Wonder Bread fantasy
series, and it definitely needs more George R. R. Martin stories.
- --
"The museum boasted owning the original version of Beethoven's unfinished
basement."--Steve Connelly

[e-mail]                       http://www.whiterose.org/dr.elmo/
Stratagem Ideaware        http://monstereditor.sourceforge.net/Stratagem.html


=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:27:29 -0600
From: "PrimalChrome" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

Is that Troll I smell, or do you honestly feel that any story written should
fit between the bindings of a single book?  I like it when a book closes an
aspect of a storyline, but I also realize that an author's work shouldn't be
constrained by the requirements of his publisher.  Sure, a fair amount of
epic fantasy is drek....or meat coated in a lot of filler....but condemning
an entire style of storytelling seems a bit myopic.  Martin's series may not
close the curtains with the final page, but it does do a good job of dimming
the lights until the next one appears on the shelves.  It's far from
perfect, but no where close to the cookie cutter story you're attempting to
make it out to be...



- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Elmo" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159


> Lawrence Jenab wondered aloud to the group:
>  >I'm just 100 pages into the Game of Thrones, and it's not wowing me.
Does
>  >it get better?
>
> I feel obliged to give a countervailing opinion.  No, it does not get
> better. In fact, in at least one significant respect, it gets worse: It
has
> no ending.  Like the worst of the rest of the giant fantasy trilogies
> Martin is consciously emulating, the end of volume I is not the end of a
> story, it's just the place where he hit his contractually-mandated
wordcount.
>
> That's something that Cook's original Black Company series got right: each
> book of the trilogy ended a story, even as threads continued on.
>
> Martin is capable of innovation, insight, and real human drama.  I can't
> fault him intellectually for setting that aside to make a pile of money by
> writing books that might as well be stamped "David Drake" or "David
> Farland" or "Terry Brooks" or "L.E. Modisette Jr.", but I can still fault
> him creatively.  The world did not need another Wonder Bread fantasy
> series, and it definitely needs more George R. R. Martin stories.
> --
> "The museum boasted owning the original version of Beethoven's unfinished
> basement."--Steve Connelly
>
> [e-mail]
http://www.whiterose.org/dr.elmo/
> Stratagem Ideaware
http://monstereditor.sourceforge.net/Stratagem.html
>
>
> =======================================================================
>  To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
>  visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.
>


=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:42:53 -0700
From: Eric Herrmann <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

on 1/28/02 8:27 AM, PrimalChrome at [e-mail] wrote:

> Is that Troll I smell, or do you honestly feel that any story written should
> fit between the bindings of a single book?  I like it when a book closes an
> aspect of a storyline, but I also realize that an author's work shouldn't be
> constrained by the requirements of his publisher.  Sure, a fair amount of
> epic fantasy is drek....or meat coated in a lot of filler....but condemning
> an entire style of storytelling seems a bit myopic.  Martin's series may not
> close the curtains with the final page, but it does do a good job of dimming
> the lights until the next one appears on the shelves.  It's far from
> perfect, but no where close to the cookie cutter story you're attempting to
> make it out to be...

Let's remember what the main topic of this list is. Compare and contrast
authors of authors is acceptable as long as one of them is Cook.

- --
Eric Herrmann
<[e-mail]>
<[e-mail]>


=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:06:27 -0600
From: "Dr. Elmo" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

PrimalChrome wondered aloud to the group:
 >Is that Troll I smell, or do you honestly feel that any story written should
 >fit between the bindings of a single book?

I would prefer to phrase it a different way: Anything between a single pair
of book covers should have at least one beginning, middle, and end.  That's
what a story is.  If I'm plunking down $6.99, I want a story.  It can be
part of a larger story--it is often the mark of a entertaining writer that
he leaves us wanting to know what happens next--but it should have
something about it that can be identified as complete.

Innovation in craft is in supplying the necessary elements of a story in an
unexpected or unfamiliar way.

The middle book of trilogies is tough to do.  Compare, say, book two of Tad
Williams' "Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn" to "Shadows Linger".  Not only can I
not remember the name of Williams' book, I have absolutely no recollection
of where the book starts or ends.

Cook's book, on the other hand, stands on its own.  It introduces the story
of the malevolent castle, advances it, and wreaks profound changes in the
characters and circumstances before ending.  At the same time, it bridges
the first and last stories in the trilogy, a dual accomplishment that is
the mark of a writer in command of his craft.

 >condemning an entire style of storytelling seems a bit myopic.

At least some aspect of my rhetoric is devoted to challenging complacency.
It's easy to just sit down and read without thinking. I often do it myself,
but I like to think that I can, when I want to.  When I go off on a rant, I
expect people to disagree with me--art is personal--but I want folks to
disagree with me because they're thinking about the work.  I like arguing
with smart people :-)

In the particular case of the Giant Fantasy Trilogy Rant, I do think that
there has been a hard swing of the fantasy market (since Robert Jordan and,
further back, since Eddings) to highly-promoted best-sellers that are
deliberately generic.

"David Farland", for example, is a pseudonym for an author who was a B-list
SF writer; he and his publisher sat down and concocted "The Runelords"
precisely to get a piece of the brick-shaped fantasy tome market.  Art
could not have been a significant concern in that endeavor.

It is, of course, still possible to do art (innovative, entertaining, or
both) even in this overworked genre.

 >  Martin's series may not
 >close the curtains with the final page, but it does do a good job of dimming
 >the lights until the next one appears on the shelves.

I disagree; I closed the first book with a deep sense that nothing had
ended.  Instead, he went ahead and introduced the next beginning (wozname
and her dragon egg).

 >It's far from perfect, but no where close to the cookie cutter story
 >you're attempting to make it out to be...

I'll agree that its degree of craft is quite high, as I'd expect Martin's
work to be.  There are even some Martin stylistic touches--in particular,
the true father of the king's heirs was an element that I would not have
expected from a cookie cutter writer.  And, of course, Martin is appalled
by a happy ending, so there was a full-on tragic feel as the characters
headed to their inevitable and eventual doom.

But, ultimately, my feel is that the book brought nothing new to the
dynastic struggle story and introduced no innovations nor stretched the
bounds of the fantasy genre.  Possibly my expectations were too high.
- --
"Ahem...Okay, here's what we've got.  The Rand Corporation, in conjunction
with the saucer people, under the supervision of the reverse vampires, are
forcing our parents to go to bed early, in a fiendish plot to eliminate the
meal of dinner.  We're through the looking glass here, people!!"--Milhouse

[e-mail]                       http://www.whiterose.org/dr.elmo/
Stratagem Ideaware        http://monstereditor.sourceforge.net/Stratagem.html


=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 19:39:36 -0800
From: "Brooke A. Wheeler" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: (glencook-fans) Re: glencook-fans-digest V1 #159

Dr. Elmo wrote:

> Martin is capable of innovation, insight, and real human drama.  I can't
> fault him intellectually for setting that aside to make a pile of money
> by writing books that might as well be stamped "David Drake" or "David
> Farland" or "Terry Brooks" or "L.E. Modisette Jr.", but I can still
> fault him creatively.  The world did not need another Wonder Bread
> fantasy series, and it definitely needs more George R. R. Martin stories.

And this would be a bad thing why exactly? I've never read anything by David
Farland, but the other three (especially Drake) have written a lot of really
excellent stuff. In fact, those three authors make up a good chunk of my library.


=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.

------------------------------

End of glencook-fans-digest V1 #161
***********************************

=======================================================================
 To unsubscribe, subscribe, or access the archives of this list,
 visit <http://www.xmission.com/~shpshftr/GC/GC-Mail.html>.