Posted by Dan Gunter on April 19, 1999 at 22:29:14:
In Reply to: Re: Hornblower mention posted by David Pierce on April 18, 1999 at 22:16:27:
"Hornblower" makes much better sense cinematically than does either Vance or O'Brian. (Quite literally parenthetically, I'm glad that I'm not the only person who enjoys both authors.) Forester couldn't match either stylistically, and he didn't have quite the knack for conjuring up what are likely very personal images.
Has anyone seen the rather dreadful illustration of the Pnume in that book about alien biotypes? Illustrations like that make me dread the thought of a Jack Vance film. A picture may be worth a thousand words; but a picture can just as easily ruin ten thousand. For most of his work, Vance chose the printed page. I count myself a Vance fan, not a fanatic, but I'll accept his judgment and stick with his written work rather than someone else's visual version thereof. I'll even eschew projects by other Vance aficionados. Not all labors of love are beautiful; for proof, look at your fellow denizens of Earth.
: : A&E is running 4 2 hour movies of early Hornblower this month and I think will repeat them in May. I have seen 1 and 3 and they are very very good.
: Woh, John, a few nights after my wife and I caught the first Hornblower on A&E I thought, "Good grief! An artful production. Some of that crowd at the JV BBS will now be using it to justify making a Vance film. Just maybe I'll luck-out and there'll be no mention of it...." But mention the movie you did, with, however, an admonition for which, sir, I thank you.
: David Pierce