"Richard Webb -> Ross Sauer"  wrote in
news:29937$POL_INC{at}JamNNTPd:

 RW>> GOulart, yah i seem to remember a couple of his.
 RW>> Edward E. Smith, some of those would have made great movies
 RW>> if you could figure out how to do the special effects.  Lots of
 RW>   blow RW> stuff up and melt it with energy beams, etc.

 RS>> One of Doc Smith's books, "Lensman" was made into an anime
 RW> (Japanese RS> animation) movie.

 RW> WHich one of the lEnsman series?  There was "first
lensman," "Second
 RW> stage LEnsman," and "children of the lens."

The first one. I think.

 RS>> And was pretty much butchered in the process, hardly any of the
 RS>> original book is in the movie.
 RS>> HOWEVER...

 RW> I can see that, but there were perfect teenage boy fare,
 RW> blow lots of stuff up and melt stuff with energy beams, as I
 RW> commented.  THese days with the computerized stuff you could do it
 RW> easier I"d think.

Of course.

 RW> The Skylark series would've been good too as movies.

 RW> I wouldn't see why you'd need to butcher Doc's plots too
 RW> much, plenty of action to keep the folks riveted to the
 RW> screen.

 RW> NOw Asimov, otoh wouldn't make exciting movies without
 RW> totally butchering them.

I don't think any of Asimov's works has been made into a movie.

 RS>> It is a pretty good movie on it's own.

 RW> DOn't think I ever saw it.  But then, I"m disappointed with
 RW> most Science Fiction I see on the screen when compared to
 RW> the books.  And, imho, star wars sucked.

It's on Youtube, if you're interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXa4FE3er8I

Star Wars never was meant to be science fiction.

It was just a fun movie.

--- Xnews/5.04.25