boyajian@akov68.DEC (Jerry Boyajian) (07/24/84)
> Whether Blade Runner was a good movie or not, it's a > typically bad adaptation of a book, Do Androids Dream > of Electric Sheep. It's as if someone reduced the plot > to 3 sentences, then handed it to someone else to expand > back into a full length script. Not only did they leave > out some of the nice things in the book, but the elements > they left in had no relevance to the movie plot. Example: > the empathy test that involves showing photos to the > suspected android. The whole point in the book was that > all the pictures showed death or mistreatment of animals, > and with nearly all animals on the verge of extinction, > any human would have great empathy for the animals. In the > movie, the picture of the nude woman is emphasized, but > not because she's lying on a bearskin rug, as in the book. > If you didn't read the book, the whole scene doesn't make > any sense. > > Bill Kelly It certainly *does* make sense if you haven't read the book, because *I* haven't read it (I tried, but I found the first three pages unreadable, so I gave up), but I understood perfectly what was going on in the movie. Some of the details may have changed, but the point of the test was to judge *the emotional reaction of the subject*. The fact that some of the scenarios given had nothing to do with mistreatment of animals doesn't change that fact. Is this a really major point? Does is change the outcome or the focus of the whole movie? No. There are some who think that what an author puts into a book is sacred, and that it is sacrilege for a filmmaker to change anything. I don't. As long as the central point is preserved, and major details, I have no objections. And BTW, it so happens that Dick was generally pleased with what mater- ial he saw from the film before he died. He felt that the feel of the book re- mained intact. --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Maynard, MA) UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
paul@ism780b.UUCP (07/27/84)
#R:decwrl:-281000:ism780b:27800002:000:1890 ism780b!paul Jul 26 01:52:00 1984 ***** ism780b:net.sf-lovers / decwrl!boyajian / 12:09 pm Jul 25, 1984 Re: "Blade Runner" and "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" > It certainly *does* make sense if you haven't read the book, > because *I* haven't read it (I tried, but I found the first three > pages unreadable, so I gave up), but I understood perfectly what > was going on in the movie. Sure, how could you *not* understand "what was going on" when they tacked on that stupid voice-over telling you exactly that (I've seen conflicting stories on whether the voice-over was really a last-minute addition, but it sure *felt* like one). It's actually a pretty good movie, but it is a very different story than the one in the book. If you found the book "unreadable" after 3 pages, that just means that it's different from what you're accustomed to reading (Phil Dick was a very *unusual* writer). > There are some who think that what an author puts into a > book is sacred, and that it is sacrilege for a filmmaker to > change anything. I don't. As long as the central point is > preserved, and major details, I have no objections. I'll go along with that. But in "Blade Runner", they changed *everything* except the basic idea of what an android was, and the character's names. Examples? In the book, Deckard guns down the last android, it doesn't save his life and then expire. Also, Deckard is married, and his affair with Rachael ends with her killing his pet goat (she got his goat, ha ha). In the movie, of course they live happily ever after together. Paul Perkins -- INTERACTIVE Systems USENET: ...{uscvax|ucla-vax|vortex}!ism780!paul ...decvax!cca!ima!ism780!paul MILNET(?): decvax!cca!ima!ism780!paul@ucb-vax Disclaimer: This message is provided AS IS. The reader assumes all risk as to the accuracy of the content and its usefulness for any particular purpose.
howes@unc.UUCP (Byron Howes ) (08/04/84)
I have always viewed films based on books as separate treatements of the same
theme. "Blade Runner" took the basic premise of "Do Androids Dream of
Electric Sheep" and chose to emphasize certain of its themes. That is the
directors right and should be expected. To do that, the screenwriter moved
away from the specifics of the original plot. No matter. The film is really
a separate work and should be judged on its own merits.
This is certainly in the grand tradition of good filmmaking. I have seldom,
if ever, seen a film treatment of a book where major alterations in specifics
haven't been made for cinematic reasons. In the case of some books, (M*A*S*H
comes to mind) the alterations resulted in a significantly superior work. For
others it doesn't work out so well. Still, judge the film on its own merits
and not by attempting to compare it to the book, which is an entirely
different medium.
--
Byron Howes
UNC - Chapel Hill
({decvax,akgua}!mcnc!unc!howes)