> Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
> Actually, I believe the basis for those mass drivers
Also voice synthesis and speech recognition. And an astounding AI that "just
growed" similar to a neural network. Also a description of the
permanent degenerative effects of mini (as opposed to micro-)gravity.
Also a UN that's less than completely benign, with a powerful 3rd World voting
block long before the term existed. Also "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free
Lunch." (TANSTAAFL)
An interesting piece of trivia is that the description of "Adam Selene" alias
Mike's CGI character is a dead ringer for Max Headroom.... this is a book that
really deserves to have someone of the calibre of Stanley Kubrick or JMS make
a movie out of it. Finding an outstandingly
talented, Black, One-armed actor who can speak fluent Russian, Cantonese
and Australian English to play a lead role won't be easy though. And the
minigravity SFX would be a right pain, even Kubrick didn't attempt it in the
lunar scenes of 2001.
Dammit, I'll have to discard one of my stable of passwords - MYCROFTXXX
- since you've mentioned the book on the net.
My Dad, a Computer Engineer since the late 40s, just before he died, requested
that I get a copy of the book for him to read one last time. But his heart
gave out completely before I could get him one.
Bugger.
(sorry about the profanity, I reserve it for special occasions. But this is
one of them.)
> Alan E and Carmel J Brain wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Dec 1999, Alan E and Carmel J Brain wrote:
> Nyrath the nearly wise wrote:
a while back, wired magazine came out with a futurological 'scenarios'
supplement full of adverts (hey, this is wired after all); in there were also
a few good articles. one was a set of future newspaper front pages (well, news
site index pages, anyway), and one of the stories that cropped up was news of
the production of 'Harsh', a film of this book. it was
directed and starred in by Macaulay Culkin (remember him?), co-starred
Oprah Winfrey Jr, suffered from amazing budget overruns, scandals and
infights and led to debate over whether the CGI or on-location orbital
scenes are more realistic. oh, and is was a remake of Kevin Costner's 1999
version...
sometimes, just sometimes, wired delivers the goods.
tom
> Tom Anderson wrote:
> > > THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS by Robert Heinlein.
> > the
Hello All:
A few months ago, Aint it Cool News reported that the guy who wrote the
oringinal script for film version of "The Puppet Masters" (that was before the
suits got ahold of it) was working on a screen play for "The Moon is a Harsh
Mistress."
As much as I would love to see a film version of "TMiaHM, I have my
reservations about the project being undertaken in Hollywoods current creative
climate. (or rather lack thereof) Science fiction cinema these days is
controlled by two elements: 1)Action, 2) Special Effects. Although there are
quite a few riot and battle scenes described in "TMiaHM" as well as some great
FX potential, it is the plot and the characters that Heinlein presented that
drove the novel. As I'm sure we
all know, thoughtful sci-fi dosen't sell in Hollywood--especially one
with some very controversial viewpoints. It could very well degenerate
into another "Paul Veerhoven's Starship Troopers:" A watered-down,
ultra-violent, T&A spectacular that has little if anything to do with
the orginal novel.
However, I could be wrong. Hollywood may want to take a chance with a
thought-provoking sci-fi movie with good acting and a decent plot. And
maybe I'll flap my arms and fly to Venus--either that, or find a
girlfriend.
Don't forget about "political correctness"!
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
And
> maybe I'll flap my arms and fly to Venus--either that, or find a
For
> a good time, call 606-4311, ask for Ken. Take heart in the deepening
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> As much as I would love to see a film version of "TMiaHM, I
You mean, as in TNT? But then again, who said anything about Hollywood being
involved?
> Science fiction cinema these
Concur.
> Although there are quite a few riot and battle scenes described in
Absolutely.
Before this degenerates into a "me too" thread, how about doing some casting?
Gospodin Manuel O'Kelly Davis - no idea
Wyoming Knott - again, no idea
Prof Bernado De La Paz - Robyn Williams
Mycroft Holmes/Adam Selene - Max Headrooom
Scriptwriter/Head Honcho with full creative responsibility: JMS
"To Dream the impossible Dream"... hey, this might just possibly be doable.
> Alan E and Carmel J Brain wrote:
> Gospodin Manuel O'Kelly Davis - no idea
Personally I would like to see Mario Van Peebles as Mannie. The trick
would be to find an actor that is appears to be multi-ethnic. However,
that didn't stop Veerhoven from "white-washing" Jaun Rico is SST.
> Wyoming Knott - again, no idea
Hmmmmm... no idea here either.
> Prof Bernado De La Paz - Robyn Williams
I can't see Mork from Ork as Prof. My first choice would have been Raul Julia.
However, he is sadly no longer with us. Anthony Quinn would be pretty good,
but he about 85 now and I don't know if he could be up to it. Charlton
Heston... maybe if we got him to tan a little. Gregory Peck: Good voice, but I
don't think he would go for the project.
> Mycroft Holmes/Adam Selene - Max Headrooom
Heh heh... No.
Actually, I had Malcom McDowell in mind.
> Scriptwriter/Head Honcho with full creative responsibility: JMS
Not a bad idea. The questions are, "would he do it" and "would he do it
right?"
> "To Dream the impossible Dream"... hey, this might just possibly be
Perhaps... but it would take a production staff with integrity, and a film
company with guts to put the whole thing together. I doubt whether or not such
a thing exists in Hollywood.
> David wrote:
I didn't want to be the one who said it, but yes, politics does play a big
part in this. If made correctly, "TMiaHM" would be one of the most
controverisal films ever made with the potential to hack off BOTH sides of the
Western political spectrum, and Hollywood is certainly not free
of political bias. The question before the house is "Would Hollywood,
make a film that would offend the tender sensibilities of the studio
heads/directors/producers/actors?" For some reason I doubt it.
Just saw Robin Williams in Bicentennial Man - good movie - give it a
chance and it can move you. It was enough to wish someone with dedication to
the novelist's work would undertake "Caves of Steel" et al.
But for De La Paz why not Tony Hopkins - given a GOOD script, I think
he'd jump at the part. Williams would be good for Adam Selene. Jimmie Schmit
(NYPD blues) for Manny, Helen Hunt? for Wy Knott?
> On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 11:31:04PM -0500, Popeyesays@aol.com wrote:
Yes! I couldn't think of his name for the life of me,
but he would be perfect. He's the right age -- mature but not
"over the hill" -- and he's sufficiently "multi-ethnic" to
carry the role well.
Of course, if it's a Hollywood movie, the Loonie slang will be replaced with
modern slang, and we'll get a shower scene somewhere along the way.
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> > Prof Bernado De La Paz - Robyn Williams
Neither can I. I _can_ see Mrs Doubtfire though as one of his disguises.
And no-one does "sad, sardonic smile at the stupidities of the world"
like R.W. e.g. his performance in Hook. Or even Good Morning Vietnam.
> > Mycroft Holmes/Adam Selene - Max Headrooom
I was being serious.:) What better to play a cgi character?
> > Scriptwriter/Head Honcho with full creative responsibility: JMS
1. Yes.
2. If allowed to - and has proven he can walk away from even projects
he's invested much time and effort in rather than have it be "Dukes of Hazard
in Space".
> Perhaps... but it would take a production staff with integrity
They exist.
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> However, I could be wrong. Hollywood may want to take a chance
Send us a postcard from Venus, Mark.
"Harsh Mistress" is my favorite RAH book - it stikes a nice balance, I
think, between his earlier 'juvenile' stuff (Tunnel in the Sky, etc) and
the later strange politics/stranger sex books (Time Enough for Love, et
al).
That said, the politics & stuff in Mistress are still pretty outre by
Hollywierd standards - lots of anarchist/libertarian stuff, and some
genuinely original stuff. (See Prof's thoughts on monarchy...:>) The
multi-spoused 'clan marriages' & similar are also unlikely to fly...
There'd be great 'asteroid-smacking-Terra' scenes in HM: The Movie, but
the rest would probably be orgies & political frothing after the film types
got thru with it. The Luna native characters would probably wind up
as astro-hillbillies. Besides, Hollyweird thinks it's already done 'big
rocks form space' w/ "Deep Impact" & that Bruce Willis vehicle.
And just imagine - Paul Verhoven might get his paws in this Heinlein
work as well. <ignorant studio exec mode> After all, he's done one, right? It
was successful, right? </ignorant studio exec mode> :>
Sorry, but I can't see any 'serious' SF movies soon. 2001 was a long time ago,
Kubrick's dead, and Cameron's been messing about in boats. I don't imagine
that I'm the only listee still ticked off about Starship Troopers: The
Movie...(Commitee to Lynch Mr.Verhoven, anyone?)
OT movies rant over...
> Brian Burger wrote:
I would... but the acidic rain keeps eating away at the card and the
atmospheric pressure flattens the mail box like a soda can.
> "Harsh Mistress" is my favorite RAH book - it stikes a nice balance, I
and
> the later strange politics/stranger sex books (Time Enough for Love,
Funny you should mention it... I'm going to start "Time Enough For Love" as
soon as I finish "Sharpe's Eagle."
HM is also my fav RAH novel. It was hard to start at first given the broken
english that was most of the narration. However, once you get past mannie's
truncated grammar, it becomes a fantastic read.
> The multi-spoused 'clan marriages' & similar are also unlikely to
I good old "traditional-family-vaules" America? How can you say
that?
> There'd be great 'asteroid-smacking-Terra' scenes in HM: The Movie,
I'm more afraid that the producers would try to change the political message
of the story to meet their bias. I'm sure that the Lunar Authority will become
some "evil corporation" and the lunies will be the "opressed workers
struggling against capitalist greed" or such. It
would probably be a more palitable message to most modern movie-goers
than Heinlein's anarcho-capitialism.
> And just imagine - Paul Verhoven
I don't want to imagine him... except poor and unemployed.
> Sorry, but I can't see any 'serious' SF movies soon.
Well, first of all, the people who make movies would have to start seeing SF
as a serious genre. They don't. To most average people, SF is for kids and
geeks. Sure they'll tolerate a Star Wars or Star Trek as long as they can drag
their kids to it (or vice versa). But a film that attempts to actually get
these drooling yahoos to "think?" "Where
are the cute aliens? Where are the special effects? Where is the co-ed
shower scene? I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!"
> Kubrick's dead,
Stanley, Stanley, STANLEY. Explains to us again WHY you had to make "Eyes Wide
Shut?"
> I don't imagine that I'm the only listee still ticked off about
I'll bring the rope. The rest of you can bring the torches and pitchforks.
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> > I don't imagine that I'm the only listee still ticked off about
***
> Mark A. Siefert wrote:
> > I don't imagine that I'm the only listee still ticked off about
Bags I the Boiling Oil, and Max Bygraves records.
***
Lynch me instead. I bought a copy as soon as it came out on video, bought a
widescreen version when Megan 'borrowed' my other copy, and watch it
regularly. Brilliant.
I thought we agreed to quit flogging this dead equine...
The_Beast
In a message dated 1/5/00 8:04:13 AM Central Standard Time,
devans@uneb.edu writes:
<< and watch it regularly. Brilliant.
I thought we agreed to quit flogging this dead equine...
The_Beast >>
Who's flogging what? If you like the movie - fine. But you can't call it
an
adaptaion of Heinlein's novel - that's all. Wish he had named it
otherwise so
no one would know what he started from. As for me = lynch him - but on
piano wire and we all get to take lunch while the block of ice he stands on to
take the strain of his neck melts.
> At 7:16 PM +1000 5/1/00, Alan E and Carmel J Brain wrote:
Not the Max Bygraves records!
Surely you have an ounce of compassion!
Nobody expects the...
(aaargh)
;- )
MarkS
All the way from Gallifrey...