Comments on: On Tie-In Fiction http://markcnewton.com/2009/11/11/on-tie-in-fiction/ Mon, 06 Sep 2010 15:11:28 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Mark C Newton http://markcnewton.com/2009/11/11/on-tie-in-fiction/comment-page-1/#comment-1521 Mark C Newton Sun, 15 Nov 2009 08:14:21 +0000 http://blog.markcnewton.com/?p=1563#comment-1521 Jonathan - surely making the prequels ruined your great movie experience? :) The thing is, tie-in fiction isn't merely the novelization of a screenplay, it covers further adventures. So huge amounts of new series and whatnot that couldn't be covered in the original movies. Or not even movies, but RPG universes, which were made for games to be played and stories to be written. Hi Adam - I think Wordpress holds comments with links in to be approved, just in case of spam. I noted that Moorcock didn't claim it was a "tie-in" novel, but I guess that's all down to people's definitions. In my mind, further adventures are still tied-in to the franchise. Jonathan – surely making the prequels ruined your great movie experience? :)

The thing is, tie-in fiction isn’t merely the novelization of a screenplay, it covers further adventures. So huge amounts of new series and whatnot that couldn’t be covered in the original movies. Or not even movies, but RPG universes, which were made for games to be played and stories to be written.

Hi Adam – I think WordPress holds comments with links in to be approved, just in case of spam.

I noted that Moorcock didn’t claim it was a “tie-in” novel, but I guess that’s all down to people’s definitions. In my mind, further adventures are still tied-in to the franchise.

]]> By: Adam Whitehead http://markcnewton.com/2009/11/11/on-tie-in-fiction/comment-page-1/#comment-1519 Adam Whitehead Sat, 14 Nov 2009 20:12:16 +0000 http://blog.markcnewton.com/?p=1563#comment-1519 The main article doesn't seem to be allowing comments any more, but interestingly one of the commentators asked if a tie-in novel could fulfil Michael Moorcock's challenge of being a transformative and subversive work whilst having to be written within realtively narrow creative guidelines. Interestingly, this question was almost immediately followed by the news that Moorcock is writing a DOCTOR WHO novel, so I guess we're going to find out ;-) http://www.sfx.co.uk/page/sfx?entry=michael_moorcock_writes_doctor_who The main article doesn’t seem to be allowing comments any more, but interestingly one of the commentators asked if a tie-in novel could fulfil Michael Moorcock’s challenge of being a transformative and subversive work whilst having to be written within realtively narrow creative guidelines.

Interestingly, this question was almost immediately followed by the news that Moorcock is writing a DOCTOR WHO novel, so I guess we’re going to find out ;-)

http://www.sfx.co.uk/page/sfx?entry=michael_moorcock_writes_doctor_who

]]> By: Jonathan http://markcnewton.com/2009/11/11/on-tie-in-fiction/comment-page-1/#comment-1516 Jonathan Fri, 13 Nov 2009 03:29:54 +0000 http://blog.markcnewton.com/?p=1563#comment-1516 Ever since I saw Star Wars books on the shelves, I've always avoided tie in novels. I guess it's because I don't want to spoil my memory of a great movie experience or I didn't like the movie enough to follow up. That's probably nonsense, but I'm pretty sure that's why. Another thing that I don't care for is when a book is made into a movie and they slap movie covers all over it, such as they did Lord of the Rings. I think that's because I like my imagined look and feel of a book to remain untainted by someone else's visual depiction. Stephen King's Pet Sematary was the only movie I've ever seen that matched how I imagined it. Just a weird observation. Ever since I saw Star Wars books on the shelves, I’ve always avoided tie in novels. I guess it’s because I don’t want to spoil my memory of a great movie experience or I didn’t like the movie enough to follow up. That’s probably nonsense, but I’m pretty sure that’s why.

Another thing that I don’t care for is when a book is made into a movie and they slap movie covers all over it, such as they did Lord of the Rings. I think that’s because I like my imagined look and feel of a book to remain untainted by someone else’s visual depiction. Stephen King’s Pet Sematary was the only movie I’ve ever seen that matched how I imagined it. Just a weird observation.

]]> By: Mark C Newton http://markcnewton.com/2009/11/11/on-tie-in-fiction/comment-page-1/#comment-1514 Mark C Newton Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:49:07 +0000 http://blog.markcnewton.com/?p=1563#comment-1514 The books, for the right franchise, add huge amounts of layers where films simply can't afford to go. A book is cheaper than a film to produce, and the imagination can do more than a production company. Plus you can always cover and expand on issues that would be too minor to film. As for film adaptations, well, it's a ready-made story with a proven fanbase. I guess these things are easier to run with, rather than creating something from scratch. Quicker too. The books, for the right franchise, add huge amounts of layers where films simply can’t afford to go. A book is cheaper than a film to produce, and the imagination can do more than a production company. Plus you can always cover and expand on issues that would be too minor to film.

As for film adaptations, well, it’s a ready-made story with a proven fanbase. I guess these things are easier to run with, rather than creating something from scratch. Quicker too.

]]>