LOL! He has the same problem Scalzi and Stephen King do..Trumpitis (coined by a co-worker) or an inability to ignore the Doofus. I get it...I've had to yank myself away from FB due to falling into the same trap. Twitter is even worse.
Except I think Scalzi and Stephen King have actually created stuff recently. But they're novelists --- it's easier to get a novel published than a television series or movie.
I wonder if Whedon is ghost-writing?
Slaughterhouse-Five is one of my favourite novels. Here's a pitch: Scalzi and Joss get together to adapt Vonnegut's novels (they're in a verse with each other, mostly) into a TV series. Who do I contact to make that happen? :)
Vonnegut is ridiculously difficult to adapt to the big or small screen. I think for the same reasons that William S. Burroughs, Heinlein, and Joyce are...he has this sort of jagged stream of consciousness style...where he jumps around a lot. I like it -- because my mind does that. And I have a mother who will do that in mid-sentence so I'm used to it. But I think it is hard for a lot of people.
If anyone could adapt him Whedon and Scalzi could. Both have similar ways of thinking.
I'm in the midst of Hitchhiker's Guide and appreciating Slaughter-House Five more and more as I go. Adams seems to borrow from it in places. No book did a better job of conveying how human beings dehumanize and objectify one another for their own ends...and how War is the end result of that. That book, Slaughter-House Five, kicked me in the gut, and it really resonated...with what is happening now, in a weird way. (Not sure it was the best pick for travel reading material though...but somehow, I found it comforting. The whole "so it goes" just was really comforting somehow.)
It's a weird book - you can't really describe the experience of reading it. Or why...it is weirdly uplifting...you sort of have to read it on your own to experience it. So, not sure how anyone could convey that to a small screen.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2017-03-21 01:02 am (UTC)LOL! He has the same problem Scalzi and Stephen King do..Trumpitis (coined by a co-worker) or an inability to ignore the Doofus. I get it...I've had to yank myself away from FB due to falling into the same trap. Twitter is even worse.
Except I think Scalzi and Stephen King have actually created stuff recently. But they're novelists --- it's easier to get a novel published than a television series or movie.
I wonder if Whedon is ghost-writing?
Slaughterhouse-Five is one of my favourite novels. Here's a pitch: Scalzi and Joss get together to adapt Vonnegut's novels (they're in a verse with each other, mostly) into a TV series. Who do I contact to make that happen? :)
Vonnegut is ridiculously difficult to adapt to the big or small screen. I think for the same reasons that William S. Burroughs, Heinlein, and Joyce are...he has this sort of jagged stream of consciousness style...where he jumps around a lot.
I like it -- because my mind does that. And I have a mother who will do that in mid-sentence so I'm used to it. But I think it is hard for a lot of people.
If anyone could adapt him Whedon and Scalzi could. Both have similar ways of thinking.
I'm in the midst of Hitchhiker's Guide and appreciating Slaughter-House Five more and more as I go. Adams seems to borrow from it in places. No book did a better job of conveying how human beings dehumanize and objectify one another for their own ends...and how War is the end result of that. That book, Slaughter-House Five, kicked me in the gut, and it really resonated...with what is happening now, in a weird way. (Not sure it was the best pick for travel reading material though...but somehow, I found it comforting. The whole "so it goes" just was really comforting somehow.)
It's a weird book - you can't really describe the experience of reading it. Or why...it is weirdly uplifting...you sort of have to read it on your own to experience it. So, not sure how anyone could convey that to a small screen.