Three dollars and some change

Uh. Could be good, could be supremely wretched. It's a tossup.

From:

It's the second option that has me so worried.

From:

Me too. This universe is wonderful on paper [well, with a few acknowledged flaws] but translating that level of dark violence to the screen could either come across as pretentious!goth or cheap!tacky. In real life, men with long flowing hair and lavender eyes don't exist except on romance novel covers. I'd hate to see it turned into a filmed soft core porn disaster with fake blood. Ugh.

From:

You've hit the nail on the head. I know that in the past, LKH has said she didn't want to make a movie of the books unless she had more control or something, but I'm really not sure how this whole thing could possible come across on screen without looking, as you say, tacky if followed too closely to the books. Sure, one could cut the hair on teh guys and such (esp. in the earlier books)... I guess my thing is, I like the books and don't want to see them wrecked by a bad movie.

From:

I think your icon sums it up nicely .. but ..

I also think that the earliest books could be made into movies without too much difficulty. They aren't as complex (in characters) and there is more plot to deal with.

Now, if they tried to make NiC into a movie, they'd have to label it XXX and sell it in skanky little shops but GP should be OK.

:)

From:

You're probably right. I just tend to worry about these things.

I guess this will help us answer the question of who should play Anita...

From:

Just another comment, Charlaine Harris has options for movies on the Sookie Stackhouse books and I have mixed reservations about that. I think that they would work better as movies than AB but I still don't want them to be ruined either.

I keep seeing an Underworld type movie when I think of an AB movie and we know that went over like a lead balloon in the theatres.

From:

cissasghost.livejournal.com

. . I think I sort of don't want to see it. Guilty Pleasures was not my favorite of the books, and . . I sorta can't picture how you're going to translate it to the screen without it coming out really, really corny. What makes the books not so corny - well, most of the time - is Anita's internal dialogue, her dry sense of humor and her continuous angst, the fact that she KNOWS her life is vaguely ridiculous. I'm really not sure how much of that could possibly be conveyed through even very skilled acting, especially considering that in some of the moments where the readers are privy to her thoughts, the character would NOT want to be giving those thoughts away on her face, and in fact, doing so would probably get her killed. So . . yeah. Really not sure on this.

-Sonya

From:

Well, some of us loved Underworld, actually. Though I agree with you- didn't have great commercial success.

From:

I'm with you. THe charm, to me, of the books, is seeing the world through Anita's eyes. That will be very difficult without internal narration and that style of filmaking, while appropriate for Ferris Buller's Day Off may not work so well here.

From:

cissasghost.livejournal.com

I liked 'Underworld' . . but yeah. I think most critics, and apparently a large percentage of the audience, stop looking for psychological subtlety when they see too many flashing fangs. Selene was absolutely fascinatingly fucked-up, really a great character, but I think what the average viewer got out of it was that she was a kick-ass babe in lots of leather. I tend to think the Anita Blake books might go that way too. I cringe at the thought of what they'll do with Jean-Claude.

-Sonya

From:

Oh I loved it too, which is why I own it. But the comment wasn't about my opinion of it, but the general consensus, hence the lead balloon comment. *G* ;)

I really enjoyed the movie and thought it explored a lot of fascinating areas, especially the long life spans of vampires and creation of new lycans. Very very cool.

From:

I think to make the AB books work as movies, they need to keep that air of "this is just a normal world and oh by the way we have vampires" to make it work. One can always hope, right?

From:

PS i loved Underworld too :)

From:

tthjinni.livejournal.com

Heh. Not sure if I'm excited or terribly frightened.

From:

I hope they'll tone down JC. I mean, in the books, you can skim past the frilly shirts, but if they keep true to that in the movie... um, no. (Also, I hope they fix Anita's fashion sense in the movie. True, it was the 90s, but that's no excuse for those clothes)

From:

I'm both. I know I'll see it, even if it's cringe-worthy, but I may have to wear a hoodie pulled up tight so no one sees me go into the theatre.

From:

tthjinni.livejournal.com

LoL.

Personally, I don't know if I want the mental images of some of these characters absolutely destroyed by (possibly) seeing them destroyed in looks, mannerisms, etc.

From:

And I might say that I bet all of us reading your journal and commenting on this thread probably liked Firefly and then Serenity as well. Again, not the general opinion (with the exception of Serenity doing well in box office). :)

From:

child-labor.livejournal.com

From:

There is no excuse for her clothes. None. They were deplorable for the 90s even.

*cries into her fashionista clothing*

Hers are as bad as Stephanie Plums. Gah. Though at least Steph has the excuse of being from Jersey.

From:

Did Serenity do well at the box office? I heard rumor that if the movie made 80 million worldwide they'd do a sequel.

From:

. What makes the books not so corny - well, most of the time - is Anita's internal dialogue, her dry sense of humor and her continuous angst, the fact that she KNOWS her life is vaguely ridiculous

I know... but it's been done before, the making of a 1st person POV book into a good movie. Examples escape me, but I'm sure it can work.

From: