| |
<SNIP>
> But TLW was no JP.
Steve made some good points, but even Jurassic Park could have been so much
better than it was. I personally felt the Jurassic Park book was fantastic,
had great character development and flowed very nicely. The movie version,
while enjoyable at times (especially for the kids), paled in comparison to
the book and was a tremendous disappointment for me.
The most annoying issues in JP - the movie, was there was no mystery about
the dinosaurs like there was in the book (more later) and I didn't like the
way Speilberg turned Hammond into a bumbling, nice old man (sort of like
Willy Wonka, except this guy had dinos running around instead of Everlasting
Gobstoppers and Oompa Loompas (sp?) ;-).
Regarding the "mystery" issue, the JP book set the whole premise up rather
well. In the beginning of the novel, natives of the islands surrounding JP
are found with strange bite injuries. Then the book covers a scene where a
huge, mysterious animal carcass is found on the shore of an island. It was
very reminiscent of Jaws where you don't see the shark right away, but
there's building evidence that a creature of large proportions is beginning
to wreak havoc on the residents. The suspense and awe builds over time,
it's not thrust at you right away. That's where JP - the movie, screwed up
the most. Not only that, but the bad guys weren't bad enough. In the book,
Dodson (sp?) and Nedry were truly bad guys and were sophisticated on top of
it -- after all they worked for a bio-engineering company! But, in the
movie, Nedry was reduced to a fat slob who was incompetent at best (computer
wizadry aside).
Back on topic (sort of), all of the above is why I never want Speilberg to
come close to directing a Star Wars movie. I'd rather Lucas be stubborn and
run the risk of screwing up a vision that's his own, rather than having
Speilberg do it for him.
Steve Berry
|
|
| |
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999 17:20:36 GMT, "Steve Berry" <steveb@codenet.net> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>
> > But TLW was no JP.
>
> Steve made some good points, but even Jurassic Park could have been so much
> better than it was. I personally felt the Jurassic Park book was fantastic,
> had great character development and flowed very nicely. The movie version,
> while enjoyable at times (especially for the kids), paled in comparison to
> the book and was a tremendous disappointment for me.
I agree that JPtB was much better than JPtM, but JPtM fulfilled my two
requirements for cinematic versions of novels:
1. It didn't suck (99% of movies-from-books do suck).
2. It didn't go 180-degrees away from the book.
Steve
|
|
| |
Steve Bliss wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 Jun 1999 17:20:36 GMT, "Steve Berry" <steveb@codenet.net> wrote:
>
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > > But TLW was no JP.
> >
> > Steve made some good points, but even Jurassic Park could have been so much
> > better than it was. I personally felt the Jurassic Park book was fantastic,
> > had great character development and flowed very nicely. The movie version,
> > while enjoyable at times (especially for the kids), paled in comparison to
> > the book and was a tremendous disappointment for me.
>
> I agree that JPtB was much better than JPtM, but JPtM fulfilled my two
> requirements for cinematic versions of novels:
>
> 1. It didn't suck (99% of movies-from-books do suck).
> 2. It didn't go 180-degrees away from the book.
I may be the only one here who loved JPtM and hated JPtB. Crichton's (sp?) whole Anti-science rant
really gets on my nerves in all his books, especially because he fancies himself a scientist. His
notions of Chaos Theory as presented in the book were totally skewed, abhorently anti-science &
technology, and when it comes to Chaos Theory itself, downright Wrong. It seems to me that his
research consisted entirely of reading the introduction to James Gleick's (sp?) _Chaos_ (a decidedly
untechnical, though interesting book) unfortunately, he apparently didn't really understand the
point of the book, because he got a lot of it terribly wrong.
I thought Ian Malcom's character in the movie was much better. As a matter of fact, I thought that
ALL the characters in the movie were much better and much more human that in the book... Chrichton
doesn't seem to be able to write "decent" and normal people... all of his characters are insanely
selfish.. even the "good guys".
Don't get me started on TLW t Book! :-)
ObStarwars:
I've got a Really cool, and VERY accurate re-design of the Naboo Fighter that I am going to post
when the 9905 release is out (I tried to inline it, but the file was too big to post.
--Karim
|
|
| |
Karim <knassar@mindspring.com> writes:
> ObStarwars:
>
> I've got a Really cool, and VERY accurate re-design of the Naboo
> Fighter that I am going to post when the 9905 release is out (I
> tried to inline it, but the file was too big to post.
Darn! I was going to redesign the Naboo Fighter and now you're going to
best me before I have a chance to build the entire thing! (I've only
built a moving canopy and the top surface of the wings so far.) I look
forward to seeing your version, though.
How soon is the 9905 release coming out?
--Bram
Bram Lambrecht / o o \ BramL@juno.com
-------------------oooo-----(_)-----oooo-------------------
WWW: http://www.chuh.org/Students/Bram-Lambrecht/
-----------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| |
Bram Lambrecht wrote:
>
> Karim <knassar@mindspring.com> writes:
> > ObStarwars:
> >
> > I've got a Really cool, and VERY accurate re-design of the Naboo
> > Fighter that I am going to post when the 9905 release is out (I
> > tried to inline it, but the file was too big to post.
>
> Darn! I was going to redesign the Naboo Fighter and now you're going to
> best me before I have a chance to build the entire thing! (I've only
> built a moving canopy and the top surface of the wings so far.) I look
> forward to seeing your version, though.
> How soon is the 9905 release coming out?
Well, You've bested me with the moving canopy. I didn't even try to do that. What I did do was try
to remodel the ship from the point of view of, "If Lego made the Naboo Fighter properly, it would
look like this.."
So visually, I think it is very accurate, but it doesn't have too many features (though it does have
a recessed torpedo launcher..)
--Karim
|
|
| |
On Thu, 3 Jun 1999 01:52:49 GMT, Bram Lambrecht <braml@juno.com> wrote:
> Karim <knassar@mindspring.com> writes:
> > ObStarwars:
> >
> > I've got a Really cool, and VERY accurate re-design of the Naboo
> > Fighter that I am going to post when the 9905 release is out (I
> > tried to inline it, but the file was too big to post.
>
> Darn! I was going to redesign the Naboo Fighter and now you're going to
> best me before I have a chance to build the entire thing! (I've only
> built a moving canopy and the top surface of the wings so far.) I look
> forward to seeing your version, though.
> How soon is the 9905 release coming out?
> --Bram
9905 voting will be over this weekend. So right after that. I will try not to
procrastinate too much.
Moving canopy, eh? That I want to see. :-)
-- Terry K --
|
|
| |
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999 21:42:07 GMT, Karim <knassar@mindspring.com> wrote:
> ObStarwars:
>
> I've got a Really cool, and VERY accurate re-design of the Naboo Fighter that I am going to post
> when the 9905 release is out (I tried to inline it, but the file was too big to post.
MPD, MPD, MPD!!!
Heck, send my the files, and I'll empeedy it for you!
Steve
|
|
|
