XPost: rec.arts.movies.current-films   
   From: barmar@alum.mit.edu   
      
   In article <1bwpv5z4zr.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net>,   
    Joe Pfeiffer  wrote:   
      
   > Russell Watson  writes:   
   >   
   > > On 10/1/2015 5:12 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >> Well, according to that review the movie leaves out a lot of the book   
   > >> ... as usual in Hollyweird "adaptations".   
   > >   
   > > Yes, a certain amount of streamlining of plots is typical. I like to   
   > > refer to screen treatments as "Based on the 'Reader's Digest Condensed   
   > > Books' version of the novel.   
   >   
   > That could work to this story's advantage.  After a while I felt like   
   > the book's author was afraid it would be too short, so he started   
   > padding it with new problems to stretch it out.  I enjoyed reading it,   
   > but did come away thinking it would have been better as a novella.   
      
   I think he deliberately wanted it to be like a "Perils of Pauline". The   
   point of it seemed to be that even after he solved a problem, and seemed   
   to be doing OK, some new disaster would befall him. If it didn't cascade   
   like that, there wouldn't have been as much point to it.   
      
   Also, the problems were all so different, so it showcased his ingenuity   
   in being able to solve problems in different domains.   
      
   Instead of a movie, this book could realistically have been translated   
   into a TV series, where each week he has to solve another problem, a la   
   MacGyver.   
      
   --   
   Barry Margolin   
   Arlington, MA   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)