Which would be your ideal movie?

[r6d2]

Suppose a famous producer, already tired of Steven Spieberg, James Cameron, Quentin Tarantino, and every single prominent director, decides to give you the chance of your life: unlimited budget to make the greatest film ever.

You get to do the script, the direction, the casting, the music score, everything.

How would you make your dream movie?

Please don't just rush to answer the first thing that came to your mind. Think about it for a while.

Since you are likely to have movies as a hobby, think about the greatest things you most liked about the classics, about the stars, currently living or even dead (I said you had unlimited budget ;)), about the trama, about the mood, about the tint you'd give to it, about the time where it happens, about the beings that will be portraited (not necessarily humans)... everything. Think about the society where the action takes place. Think about what has already been told, and about what has not been yet put on a silver screen.

This is once in a lifetime opportunity, and you get 50% of the profits, so make your movie worthwhile and retire! (or make some more) :)

Any contenders?

[fccHandler]

For me, there's no question about it. I've always wanted to do Alice's Adventures In Wonderland, but truly faithful to the tone and feel of the book. I've never felt that it was done properly in the past.

I want an unknown actress, so I'll stage a big talent search in England for just the right Alice. The role will make her an instant star. I'll throw in some ground-breaking CGI effects too, but nothing in excess. Just enough to suspend your disbelief. I'll write the script myself (with book in hand). There'll be plenty of goofiness to satisfy the children, and plenty of the original pretzel logic to keep the adults scratching their heads too.

I'll be filthy rich if the movie does well, so next year I can make the sequel, Through the Looking Glass. ;)

[r6d2]

Wow, I'm surprised. 50 views and only one contender. Well, it seems that most forum visitors just enjoy the movies, and don't dream of making one.

Or if they do... They keep the secret to their own :)

My ideal movie would happen in a near future. A meteorite is about to crash the Earth, like in Armaggedon & Co., but this time we don't make it. The movie starts with the impact and the death of almost 6 billion people.

Then a raconto is made, from 2 years before, and the fall of mankind is shown. How the system breaks, how law becomes dead paper and how governments, UN and all the world as we know it starts to collapse.

A small group of selected people is embarked on a spaceship and intends to stablish a new civilization somewhere else, like the Moon or Mars.

But Doomsday eventually arrives. Then, the survivor's quest. Those few who managed to escape from the instant death, and what they start to do after that. How they organize, if they do, how they apply the survival of the fittest, how the new natural selection works. What are the actual skills needed in such scenario. I doubt they would be the same that modern society considers useful.

Actors I'd definitely save and send to the outer space colony: Meg Ryan (for the extraordinary fake orgasm in When Harry met Sally), and Tom Hanks (for his experience in Apollo 13).

On Earth, survivors would include Antony Hopkins (sure Hanibbal makes it anyway) and Ingrid Bergman (she would not take the plane this time).

Some millenia after that, Earth has become a inhabitable place again, and part of the outer colonies make efforts to come back. They split. Some are not interested.

Those who come back, find the new (likely evolved) species. Including some hominids which feed on croaches and ants, which would surely make it too.

The tint would be as realistic as possible. The music score, the best of mankind's creations so far (I would not have new music composed).

Well, that's about it. It might very well be a trilogy. ;) (And it would surely not be like Alice in Wonderland) :D.

[ppera2]

r6d2:

For God's sake... What you wrote would be typical, overpacked Hollywood megastar BS - like Mars Attacks and many others big production with lot of big names, but without life, real story etc.

Good movie isn't made on paper, but in head, and later while shotting. It must have some human story, not some childish phantasies. Authors must live for it some time, so goes it.

What is 'biggest movie' is very relative. Just see comments at IMDB.

[r6d2]

Originally posted by ppera2
What you wrote would be typical, overpacked Hollywood megastar BS - [...] big production with lot of big names, but without life, real story etc.
Well, I happen to like Hollywood BS :)

Anyway, of course there would be real story and life, but I have not written the script yet and even if I had, It would be long enough to not be posted in a forum.
Good movie isn't made on paper, but in head, and later while shotting. It must have some human story, not some childish phantasies. Authors must live for it some time, so goes it.

What is 'biggest movie' is very relative.
You first state categorically what a good movie must have, and then you say it is relative. Your statement is an oxymoron.

I am pretty aware about the fact that what makes a good movie is a relative judgement indeed. That's why I asked "which would be your ideal movie". In fact, I did not start this thread interested on anybody's opinions about other peoples's projects (or my own). I just wanted to see if there were some other dreamers in this forum, who have been caressing an idea for some time, and would like to share it.

OTOH, I don't think I'd ever get the budget so don't be concerned, you probably won't have to see it. :)

[LordDethstar]

I would probably redo The Lord of The Rings, but I would stick to the book, include The Hobbit and The Silmarillon (as a prologue), and, most importantly, it would be un-abridged. :D

[Boulder]

I would have two alternatives to choose from:

1) The Lord of the Rings saga - Special Arwen-less Edition :p

2) The greatest film noir movie of all time - with Humphrey Bogart, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre.

Sorry, no details for you yet:D

[KpeX]

I'm far too lazy to do my own movie, considering the budget is unlimited, I'd just hire my favorites to collaborate on the production:

Co-written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan and the Wachowski brothers, produced by Jerry Bruckenheimer, starring Jim Carrey, Jet Li, Adam Sandler, Will Smith, Nicolas Cage, Christopher Walken, Charlize Theron, and Halle Berry.

The soundtrack would be a combination of modern rock, techno, and classical, featuring Linkin Park, The Crystal Method, and Howard Shore.

The plot would be mainly comedic, and the brunt of most of the jokes would be the MPAA, RIAA, liberal left-wings, and PETA. However there would also be frequent and breathtaking kung-fu action scenes. In the end there would be some deep subliminal messages encouraging you to back up your own movies, and probably a happy ending of some kind.

[ppera2]

r6d2:

I know what you expected, but I never think about movies on way like you. 'Greatest film ever' was enough to provocate me.
Nobody can know what kind will be movie until it's finished, and even then, some will say that it's crap, others that it is greatest, best etc. Therefore I say that it's relative what is best. But I'm sure that it's not relative what makes good film. And even more, what doesn't makes good film is very well known. Therefore, no contradictory in what I wrote. Talking about good and biggest is little different story. I saw thousands of good movies, and only one biggest in my life :) OK, more than one biggest, since criteria changes.
Even authors will change it's opinion about what's their best creation.

Topic says 'ideal movie', but you later say: 'greatest film ever'. Then later: 'dream movie'. This latest would be much more apropriate for thread's title.
I could say how would look my 'dream movie' for different genres - action, comedy, SF etc. + combination af genres. But it would take really much space (and time to write).

This tread is far off-topic, you even slightly violated forum rule about 'what is best'. Believe me, I'm only until now, who answered you really seriously.

[fccHandler]

The original question was "How would you make your dream movie?" I didn't think we were necessarily talking about the greatest movie ever made. Maybe people think Alice is silly, but I was 100% serious. That's always been my dream movie.

[r6d2]

Originally posted by ppera2
I know what you expected, but I never think about movies on way like you. 'Greatest film ever' was enough to provocate me.
The topic of the thread is your ideal movie, your dream movie, which are quite the same in this context. You may not be aware of this, but to an author, every piece of work is aimed to be his greatest creation ever, or at least that’s what he thinks when he is in the gestation process.

Of course he can change his mind afterwards, but that’s because it is very difficult to actually construct the dream you had. Things go wrong. Your state of mind lowers at times, we humans are not machines, and the outcome is far from perfect.

You start with an ideal or dream… And end up with a reality.
But I'm sure that it's not relative what makes good film. And even more, what doesn't makes good film is very well known.
Art evolves. Yesterday’s paradigms are not the same as today. If you were constrained to do thing as have always been, then your statement would be correct. But that’s not the way it works. I will not insult your intelligence by giving you examples.
This tread is far off-topic, you even slightly violated forum rule about 'what is best'.
You know, I don’t think so. But if you do, you might report this thread to a mod. I’m a mod too, but as such I’m not above the law. :)
Believe me, I'm only until now, who answered you really seriously.
To answer seriously, you should answer the question asked. So far you have only presented your opinions about others people’s posts and made some semantics comments.

As fccHandler said, what we are talking here is personal descriptions about your own wannabes, and if you respect other people's projects, there cannot be unserious answers, by definition.

[ppera2]

Originally posted by r6d2

To answer seriously, you should answer the question asked. So far you have only presented your opinions about others people’s posts and made some semantics comments.
As fccHandler said, what we are talking here is personal descriptions about your own wannabes, and if you respect other people's projects, there cannot be unserious answers, by definition.

You asked in your first post to not rush, so... :)

I would not call dreams projects. I presented mostly my opinions about movie's quality, just briefly talked about your dream-project.
Anyway, as I see we are not so far each from other in our viewings of all this. Movie quality is painful thing this days. There is really hyperproduction of dumb and dumberer movies. Maybe I'm to strong in my criterias, but it coming with years and thousands of watched movies.

[dvd_master]

I would play Hajime, in a new live-action Case Files of Kindaichi movie remake, which for those who don't know (*cough*everyone) is a huge muder mystery series in Japan.

I'd like to do a remake of the Opera House Murders, where a bunch of people go to an Opera House on an island to rehearse for the Phantom of the Opera, until people start dying one by one in way mimiking the play.

The animated one was a work of art (fantastic soundtrack... I still can't get over it), but the mystery wasn't as deep as I thought it could be, so that would be great fun. Plus I'm already Hajime Kindaichi's age. Woooo!

[nikthebak]

My ideal movie would be something extremely intelligent and profound, with deep understanding of the world, totally based on dialogue. It could be shot with $0.00 budget with home DV cams for all that I care, technical merits are not important.

Something that's so extremely deep, that it will change your world, or at least makes you think about it for months to come. Something that forces your brain to perform a 90 degree tilt inside your cranium.

Something that humiliates Shakespeare for english language and something that totally humiliates the old philosophy masters for profoundness. That shouldn't even be very difficult.

On the other hand, I seriously like fccHandler's suggestion about a decent version of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Especially if it would borrow some ideas from American McGee's Alice. And I'm not totally opposed to the fact that we finally have a decent version of The Lord Of The Rings, although I too would prefer the Arwen-less version :D

These do not fit my description of an ideal movie, but on the other hand, what does?

[Bro]

LordDethstar:
I would probably redo The Lord of The Rings, but I would stick to the book, include The Hobbit and The Silmarillon (as a prologue), and, most importantly, it would be un-abridged.

yeah...you're not the only one....
I just whish there could've been a real fan around watching over Peter Jacksons, that could guide him in making a film Tolkien would have been proud of.
PJ's wild imagination got a little bit out of hand.

[Slogra]

A movie with great humour, adventure, horror, atmosphere and good special effects for it's budget. Oh wait that movie already exists -> Army of Darkness

[fccHandler]

Originally posted by nikthebak
My ideal movie would be something extremely intelligent and profound, with deep understanding of the world, totally based on dialogue. It could be shot with $0.00 budget with home DV cams for all that I care, technical merits are not important.

Something that's so extremely deep, that it will change your world, or at least makes you think about it for months to come. Something that forces your brain to perform a 90 degree tilt inside your cranium.
Sounds like you are describing "My Dinner With Andre" :cool:

[mudda_t]

I have a couple of ideas, but would need plenty of time and about 10 pages just to explain.

I don't play many video games but did play one awhile back on ps2 called PRIMAL. If the game were ever turned into a movie, and the movie kept the characters, theme, and 2/3 of the story line. I think the result would be one awesome movie.

[Boulder]

mudda_t's post reminded me of one game that would be perfect for a movie.

Planescape : Torment

The dialogue is simply excellent and the story really makes you think.

[Abond]

I am dreaming to see "The chronicles of Amber" filmed as a saga, similar to LOTR. Sean Connery should be Oberon :) . I have difficulties to decide who should play Corwin, but (he-he) there are enough characters for all the Holywood population ;)

[midi]

Well I don't really like heavily fictionalized movies and prefer war flicks or stuff with at least a true background setting, ie. Gettysburg, Dances with Wolves - that sort of thing.

So anyway, my ideal "movie" would be created by placing an insane number of camera units throughout the world (perhaps paying people for more private feeds when needed), feeding all the signals into a central processing center (where computers would sort for the topic at hand first and then human selection if needed, want the shortest delay live -> video as possible), and airing it non-stop, forever, 24/7.

We could then pick certain interesting topics and show only that for a year or two each. For example one year we could show someone new dying each minute, next people having sex for year, then maybe getting fired, car crashes, making speeches, playing a certain sport (not full games or speeches and what not - just bits and pieces, 24/7 for a year+ remember ^^), etc. In other words, ultimate reality TV. ^^

I think death tv might be particularly interesting. If you noticed most of the deaths on death tv whenever you tuned in were car accidents would you drive safer? If most of the deaths were painful, pathetic things croaking in hospital beds would we have more laws allowing people in poor medical straits to kill themselves (as I believe we should ever since having to watch my grandfather die painfully for 2 years...)? See, what a great tool for examining the human condition...

Edit: Maybe we could even get topical and have specials too. ^^ Show a year of how people were living in Iraq before the war, show everyone who died in it, show a year of people living afterwards, etc. Although after seeing some of the hideous slants European and American media (in all different directions obviously ;p) can apply to things like that maybe even ultimate reality tv couldn't present an unbiased picture of that. ^^

[mf]

Originally posted by midi
Well I don't really like heavily fictionalized movies and prefer war flicks or stuff with at least a true background setting, ie. Gettysburg, Dances with Wolves - that sort of thing.

So anyway, my ideal "movie" would be created by placing an insane number of camera units throughout the world (perhaps paying people for more private feeds when needed), feeding all the signals into a central processing center (where computers would sort for the topic at hand first and then human selection if needed, want the shortest delay live -> video as possible), and airing it non-stop, forever, 24/7.

We could then pick certain interesting topics and show only that for a year or two each. For example one year we could show someone new dying each minute, next people having sex for year, then maybe getting fired, car crashes, making speeches, playing a certain sport (not full games or speeches and what not - just bits and pieces, 24/7 for a year+ remember ^^), etc. In other words, ultimate reality TV. ^^

I think death tv might be particularly interesting. If you noticed most of the deaths on death tv whenever you tuned in were car accidents would you drive safer? If most of the deaths were painful, pathetic things croaking in hospital beds would we have more laws allowing people in poor medical straits to kill themselves (as I believe we should ever since having to watch my grandfather die painfully for 2 years...)? See, what a great tool for examining the human condition...

Edit: Maybe we could even get topical and have specials too. ^^ Show a year of how people were living in Iraq before the war, show everyone who died in it, show a year of people living afterwards, etc. Although after seeing some of the hideous slants European and American media (in all different directions obviously ;p) can apply to things like that maybe even ultimate reality tv couldn't present an unbiased picture of that. ^^
That's more like "What's your ideal TV show", not your ideal movie.

[r6d2]

I'm quite impressed about the new ideas. Those of you who would like to make movies out of games remind me of the Doom Movie project, never actually done, but it was interesting. Marines in Mars, fighting daemons... Surely more Hollywood BS, (right, ppera2?) :)

But some games have got decent movies. Like Tomb Raider, for instance. Or the inverse: The Phantom Menace.

Some games are actually quite movie oriented, pretty linear, like Max Payne. The script of the game sucks, but the game rocks.

Other games combine a great script with good gaming, like Half-Life.

midi's idea for a reality show, or implemented as cable private stations, is interesting too. It is outstanding the amount of BS mankind would be able to produce.

[dragongodz]

there is a miriad of good books that would be brilliant films with an unlimted budget. necroscope series, riftwar saga etc. where to start ? :)

[midi]

>That's more like "What's your ideal TV show

Hmm, my personal definition of television show is that it has commercials as opposed to movies which you have to pay for. ^^ There are movies produced only for HBO (a pay movie channel) and other television channels for example. I suppose such things are both movie (the general format and way it's watched) and television show (where this instance is aired first) at once. Don't some countries have government run channels without commercials, though? Then maybe we should go by duration, a multiyear show would have to be a movie by that measure. ^^

[mf]

Originally posted by midi
>That's more like "What's your ideal TV show

Hmm, my personal definition of television show is that it has commercials as opposed to movies which you have to pay for. ^^ There are movies produced only for HBO (a pay movie channel) and other television channels for example. I suppose such things are both movie (the general format and way it's watched) and television show (where this instance is aired first) at once. Don't some countries have government run channels without commercials, though? Then maybe we should go by duration, a multiyear show would have to be a movie by that measure. ^^
Movie is recorded on 35mm film and is shown in cinemas. That should be a pretty good definition of a movie.

[Boulder]

Originally posted by dragongodz
there is a miriad of good books that would be brilliant films with an unlimted budget. necroscope series, riftwar saga etc. where to start ? :)

Frederik Pohl's Gateway series? :)

[r6d2]

Originally posted by dragongodz
there is a miriad of good books that would be brilliant films with an unlimted budget.
Every year I wonder if Spielberg or Lucas will finally get a hand on Asimov's Foundation pentalogy.

[Teegedeck]

Hehe, I would do the first decent Star Trek movie ever...

As of yet, it's always been such petty compromises because there were things thrown in to keep it worthwhile and understandable for every T.J.Hooker-fan: a villain, a chase and a fistfight to save the universe.

I'd gather the old DS9-crew and stage the conflict with the Dominion with lots of very sophisticated and well-motivated human-alien interaction; focussing on the portrayal of the workings of other civilizations' governmental systems and cultures and hoping to create some more grown-up SciFi. Give me an alien tailor that really is an ex-head of the secret-service! For Pete's sake, why can't something like LOTR or better happen for SF, too?

[C1PH3R]

i'd like to make the matrix trilogy completely rewritten. especially the last two parts of it.
maybe i wouldn't make too much changes to this first part. only some polishing and a bit more special effects to keep it visually up-to-date.
but the next two parts should be completely rewritten. i mean, i'd give them a story for the first time.
so, that at the end, there would be a real end, and not leaving thousands question open because of the marketing with comics and upcoming tv series etc...
i wouldn't make a game, because it's a movie - nothing more nor less.
for the story i would only take the idea of the Matrix and the One out of the original trilogy.
and well...maybe, someday you will see my Matrix trilogy in the cinemas. lets say in about 20 years or so. ;)

bye

[ppera2]

Originally posted by r6d2
... Surely more Hollywood BS, (right, ppera2?) :)
But some games have got decent movies. Like Tomb Raider, for instance.

Tomb Raider decent movie? - This is one, which had abbrev. BS in every second review at IMDB :) Don't know about second part - not in plan to watch ever...

mf:
"Movie is recorded on 35mm film and is shown in cinemas. That should be a pretty good definition of a movie."

This is not correct. What you said is film. Movie is by my knowledge something like: Motion picture (may have audio too) with story or stories in one part, may have sequels. Media can be video tape too - some TV movies are shot on video.
Some movies, which were played in movie theatres are shot with DV cameras, at least partially - like Full Frontal, 28 Days Later etc...

[mf]

Originally posted by ppera2
mf:
"Movie is recorded on 35mm film and is shown in cinemas. That should be a pretty good definition of a movie."

This is not correct. What you said is film. Movie is by my knowledge something like: Motion picture (may have audio too) with story or stories in one part, may have sequels. Media can be video tape too - some TV movies are shot on video.
Some movies, which were played in movie theatres are shot with DV cameras, at least partially - like Full Frontal, 28 Days Later etc...
They are shot with DV cameras, yet recorded on 35mm film. Anyway, let's make the definition more clear:
A movie is acted and directed, and is meant to be viewed in recorded form (contrary to a play).

That should pretty much cover it.

[ppera2]

Originally posted by mf
They are shot with DV cameras, yet recorded on 35mm film. Anyway, let's make the definition more clear:
A movie is acted and directed, and is meant to be viewed in recorded form (contrary to a play).
That should pretty much cover it.

Still not good :) You forgot documentary movies for example - no acting.
I don't get it: 'meant to be viewed in recorded form...' .
What is form? What is recording? Recording is actually shotting by me... Storing would be what you say.. but word 'record' is too general. There is pretty big confusion in English terminology about all this.

[mf]

Originally posted by ppera2
Still not good :) You forgot documentary movies for example - no acting.
A documentary is a documentary, and a movie is a movie. :) Not a documentary movie.

[r6d2]

Let's not be picky. I prefer the KISS concept.

From Webster's online dictionary:
Main Entry: mov·ie
Pronunciation: 'mü-vE
Function: noun
Etymology: moving picture
Date: 1912
1 : MOTION PICTURE
2 plural : a showing of a motion picture
3 plural : the motion-picture medium or industry

Main Entry: motion picture
Function: noun
Date: 1896
1 : a series of pictures projected on a screen in rapid succession with objects shown in successive positions slightly changed so as to produce the optical effect of a continuous picture in which the objects move
2 : a representation (as of a story) by means of motion pictures
That pretty much covers it. Don't you think?

[mf]

Originally posted by r6d2
That pretty much covers it. Don't you think?
No. :p It's too literal :D.

[r6d2]

Originally posted by mf
Movie is recorded on 35mm film and is shown in cinemas. That should be a pretty good definition of a movie.
And that's too vague. :D
:p

[mf]

Originally posted by r6d2
And that's too vague. :D
:p
And I'm too sleepy to think of anything better (3am here), so after this cold pizza I'm signing out. :p

[dragongodz]

jeez guys why not start a new thread if you 2 want to argue over what people should consider a "film" to be.

ye foundation would be good. also the elija baley books(caves of steel, the naked sun etc) also by asimov would be good. :)

or how about the xanth series by piers anthony, up to 29 books so far. or the incarnations of immortality series would be excellent. :)

[midi]

Ooh, I agree. I think Asimov could even be done well nowadays if someone picked it up. I'd like to see Xanth, but I don't think I could trust the current crop of movie makers to handle so many unique characters. It would be full of scenes like the "Yoda==flying gnat with lightsabre" or the "Gollum insanity solo scene" bit which were both over the top and cheesy IMHO.

[unmei]

i followed this thread a while now, and never thought i could post something. But now i came to the conclusion this "nothing" is a thing in itself that can be explained:

i often have ideas of great scenes or after a movie ideas how certain scenes could be made "better". Also i got ideas how people could dress for certain settings and even ideas about cool mechas or vehicles.

But i never had a idea of a good plot that would make a coherent movie. On top i think, i could not write the plot of my dream movie, even if i could write a good plot. That because i would know all the details in advance and probably other factors that i can't specify clear.
However i know about the direction my dream movie would take. It would most likely be a mixture of some nothern europe production with some aspects of french and italian (fellini? hmm dunno..) style combined with the expensive production processes known from hollywood. It could even have some CG effects, but in a way they would not stand out and people should not know after the film that there were such effects after all (they should just support the mood, not become the main selling point :)). I think 'la haine' would be a good starting point, but it could even have a little fantasy/futuristic aspects ..but moderate as i said. Ah and it should be at least 150-180 mins long (4 hours would be great as it's not boring, being my dream movie;)) and have either no story or a pretty complex one - i love it, when i do _not_ understand the message of a film but still have the impression there is some higher meaning not even the plot writer clearly knows about.

[echooff]

If... and I do mean if Robert Jordan ever finishes the Wheel of Time story I would turn it into a great multi-episode movie. Since he seems to have turned the story into a life long employment project for himself, I suspect he never will. So ....

[dragongodz]

midi - well xanth was more of an "imagine" idea since its 29 books so far and piers anthony has said there will be more yet. imagine if just 1 a year was made, we would be old and grey by the time the movies caught up.
the asimov books are more realistic however and would be possible.

echooff - robert jordan said before crossroads of twilight came out that book 12 would be the last. then he plans on a new series based on a culture similar to the seanchan. so just another 3 years or so to go for the final WOT book i would say. considering i started reading this in the mid 80's (a freind lent me books 1 and 2 just after book 2 came out) i will be glad when it has finally finished but maybe a little sad aswell.

[Gknot4ever]

Originally posted by fccHandler
For me, there's no question about it. I've always wanted to do Alice's Adventures In Wonderland, but truly faithful to the tone and feel of the book. I've never felt that it was done properly in the past.

I want an unknown actress, so I'll stage a big talent search in England for just the right Alice. The role will make her an instant star. I'll throw in some ground-breaking CGI effects too, but nothing in excess. Just enough to suspend your disbelief. I'll write the script myself (with book in hand). There'll be plenty of goofiness to satisfy the children, and plenty of the original pretzel logic to keep the adults scratching their heads too.

I'll be filthy rich if the movie does well, so next year I can make the sequel, Through the Looking Glass. ;)

ill hafta go with FCC ont his one. these books have never been done "right" when brought to film.

[hakko504]

I'd love to see a good version of 'The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy'.

Problem is, that with Douglas Adams untimely death, I seriously doubt that any Hollywood producer can see it's way clear enough to give the scriptwriting job to the only one who could do it properly, i.e. John Lloyd. (who co-wrote parts of the radio show). I'd also like to see Ben Elton and Richard Curtis involved, but John Lloyd must have the final word.

I gave this subject some thought a while ago and came to this approximate scenario for 'The Hitchhiker's guide, a trilogy in four parts' First a movie named 'The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy'. This would follow the first book and the first four parts of radio/TV series, ending with the explosion at Magrathea (from radio/TV but not in book)
Then the rest would be 3 TV-series of 6episodes@30~35 minutes each.
The second installment would be 'The restaurant at the end of the Universe'. The aforementioned explosion would not send the party to 'Milliways' but would in fact be caused by the policemen's equipment exploding. Then most of the things from the second book could be used - except the man in the shack and Zarniwoop.
The third installment, 'Life, the Universe and Everything' would almost only use the title from the book. Instead I'd like to see some of the best stuff from the second radioseries salvaged and compiled into something useful, starting with leaving the prehistoric earth, meeting Lintilla and Zarniwoop and visiting the Man in the Shack, using the ending from the second radioseries where Arthur runs away with the Heart of Gold leaving Zaphod behind.
And lastly 'Mostly Harmless', a series that would follow the book of the same title pretty much from start to finish.
I know there are some things that needs straightening out. I know I had a clear idea about it, but I forgot to write it down so I'm writing this from memory. The main problems is that both the radioseries and the original TV series ended after six episodes at the prehistoric earth. I want the first installment to end after only four episodes of the TV/radio series because that would make a dramatic break in the flow which is a perfect place to end a movie. So the prolem is to expand the last two episodes into a full miniseries of 6x30min. There is enough material in both the second radioseries and the books to make it possible to do one series that moves the party from Magrathea via Milliways to prehistoric Earth, as well as a follow up that goes from the prehistoric earth to the man in the Shack via the Vortex and Zarniwoop. The problem is compiling it into a coherent story, or at least something that flows in the right direction all the time. Not even the books can be said to be 100% coherent all the time, and still it's some of the best books I've read.
Quick note on casting: Today the only sure bet is to use Hugh Laurie as Arthur Dent. Stephen Moore would also be perfect as Marvin. I can imagine Adrian Edmondson as Zaphod Beeblebrox so why not Rik Mayall as Ford Prefect. Leaves Trillian of the main characters: Miranda Richardson could do the job nicely, but Trillian is described as younger than Arthur, who himself is supposed to be about 30 years old at the start. The last book also notes that 17 years have passed since the start, which means that almost all the people I have listed above would be perfect at the end of the series, but would look way too old at the start. And since it's easier to let young people look old than vice versa, maybe some other actors would be more sited for the task.

And before anyone starts asking stupid questions, yes I wouldn't mind doing Discworld either ;)

[dimitrius]

I first started reading Asimov's books when I was 7, I am 20 now and I still love his stories. So I think I would turn them into movies. The reason why I am simply choosing a book instead of making something myself is that I am afraid I couldn't write down my ideas coherently enough. But I do have some clear ideas about some aspects:

firstly the characters will not chew up every bit of information and then give a very simple 20th century analogy to explain it

Janeway: So we are actually looking at ourselves inside this temporal singularity.
Torres: Yes it's like sitting at the bottom of a frozen-over pond, looking up and seeing your own reflection.

:rolleyes: (or something like that)

instead it would be more like Solaris (incidently I quite liked the 2003 remake but original still rocks). The character would explain the situation but if a scientist talks to another scientist firtly they would talk in a way that two scientists would talk to each other and secondly they would talk about something that makes sence.

Pickard: This borg transciever uses somekind of phase modulation technology

:rolleyes:

sorry I can only remeber these things from star trek

another thing is the movie will most definetly be certificate 18. I want people to swear the way they would, if they are killed I want realistic blood and death sequences. If the characters will go to the toilet even though it is the future.

When a love story comes up (and there must some love story or I wouldn't call it a movie - mf don't argue) I want people to talk normally and realistically. Yes, poetic expresions are interesting but does anyone talk like that in real life? I mean the soapopera kind of psycho analisys that alot of movie have.

If I was making these Asimov movies I would write a check list of things like above and hire a diverse but not necesarily big team of writers and make sure they follow the cheklist.

In fact why does it have a to be a film, it could be animation or even animé. There's a whole load more I could write about this but already this is one of my biggest posts.

[ppera2]

This thread is obviously turned to ideas about book adaptations, what is not bad thing... Almost everybody have smaller-bigger disappointments in this sphere.
I still wait for real good movie by '20000 Leagueas Under Sea'. I saw some 4-5 versions, and all were too far from book. To make decent movie sometimes is just enough to follow book almost strictly.

Maybe it's better to start new thread about book adaptations...