I know–you think the book is always better than the movie. But I’ve disagreed with that absolutism for a long time. I remember in a Shakespeare class in college a girl making that statement while we were reading Othello, which was a bit funny to me given that Shakespeare’s Othello is a dramatic adaptation of another author’s book! No one remembers that book outside Shakespeare scholars and students, but everyone remembers the play.
A few people, when they read my books have said “This should be a movie.” I’d love nothing better. I bet a screen writer could strip out some of my more esoteric, Theosophic mumbo jumbo and just get down to the heart of the story. Of course, what they would do about Kama’s nudist tendencies I’m not too sure.
All this came to mind because I saw something mention Logan’s Run. Logan’s Run, I would submit, is a much better film than book. Certainly the film is much better remembered than the book. Where the book presents us with a definite anti-hero and an arguably overly complex world system populated by characters of extreme youth, the film gives us slightly more mature characters, a more stalwart hero, and a simple system from which to escape. All while adding new levels of subtext and intrigue in the form of Carousel and a much more authentic Francis.