07-29-2004, 04:34 PM
Hi,
Because it is SciFi and not SF :)
Time travel is one of the hardest concepts to do well. A single, intelligent, author occasionally pulls it off. And that is about all that is necessary for the written medium, as long as an editor knows good work when he sees it. But films have a multiplicity of "creative" inputs -- everybody from the producer to the key grip feels that it is their responsibility to piss in the pot. The principle of "regression to the mean" takes over, and the final work is no better than mediocre compared to a well told *written* story.
And, of course, in most sequels, the people in charge usually lack the ability to even understand the original. The think that, because people speak of the effects, the effects are what made the original good. So, they reproduce the effects without reproducing the underlying story.
Analyzing an action film is like looking for nourishment in cotton candy. Simply enjoy each for what it is.
--Pete
Because it is SciFi and not SF :)
Time travel is one of the hardest concepts to do well. A single, intelligent, author occasionally pulls it off. And that is about all that is necessary for the written medium, as long as an editor knows good work when he sees it. But films have a multiplicity of "creative" inputs -- everybody from the producer to the key grip feels that it is their responsibility to piss in the pot. The principle of "regression to the mean" takes over, and the final work is no better than mediocre compared to a well told *written* story.
And, of course, in most sequels, the people in charge usually lack the ability to even understand the original. The think that, because people speak of the effects, the effects are what made the original good. So, they reproduce the effects without reproducing the underlying story.
Analyzing an action film is like looking for nourishment in cotton candy. Simply enjoy each for what it is.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?