From: pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu
tsbrueni@gmail.com writes:
> On Friday, October 2, 2015 at 12:10:20 PM UTC-7, Barry Margolin wrote:
>> 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.
>
>
> As political scandals rock NASA!
Revisiting my thoughts -- I don't remember whether I knew when I made my
comments above that the book was originally a series of posts on the
author's web page. The "what, *another* problem?" would probably have
worked a lot better (and not been so noticeable) if I'd been reading the
posts as they appeared, rather than the final book.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
