OK, I understand that there is major income to be made from selling film rights, but at this point Steve is richer than Venezuela so maybe he doesn't need the dosh any more.
See, I've been thinking about The Shining, and how it is likely that far more people have seen that than have read the book. And, as a result, they think that Kubrick's unpleasant version of the Torrance family is the right one. The book Torrance family's loving relationship is a matter of ignorance to a large number of people when The Shining is mentioned - they think Jack Nicholson chewing scenery - "Heeeere's Johnny!"
Does having a bad film made of a good book permanently reduce the perceived worth of the book? Is there merit in not having your books filmed, so as to preserve their integrity?
I don't have an answer, but I thought it was an interesting question.
See, I've been thinking about The Shining, and how it is likely that far more people have seen that than have read the book. And, as a result, they think that Kubrick's unpleasant version of the Torrance family is the right one. The book Torrance family's loving relationship is a matter of ignorance to a large number of people when The Shining is mentioned - they think Jack Nicholson chewing scenery - "Heeeere's Johnny!"
Does having a bad film made of a good book permanently reduce the perceived worth of the book? Is there merit in not having your books filmed, so as to preserve their integrity?
I don't have an answer, but I thought it was an interesting question.