PeterDavid.net

I try to read everything I can found writen by you exceot the novelizations. I am just not a big fan of novelizations but maybe I'll give this a try. Lately I been thinking that is important to support the writers you like.

Is filming done, even pick ups? With a year left before the movie hits the screen, I'm wondering if you might have to go back and change a few things before then.

I actually worked on the SM2 game, so I had script access on that one. For me it made it harder to enjoy the movie, because I was so familiar with it so long before it came out.

And don't even bother asking for details:

Can you give us any abstracts? Maybe circumstances? info? memorandums? poop? goods, gospel or info? inside dope, lowdown? Howsabout the nitty-gritty?

PAD wrote: "And don't even bother asking for details..."

Font type? Single spaced? Double? Page count?

I am curious, how much trouble would you get in for disclousre. Curious what was written into the agreement.

PAD:...I have to admit, there's a certain sort of smug satisfaction seeing clips and trailers and knowing where all the scenes fit in to the overall story....

In my best Napoleon Dynamite voice: "Luck-eeeee."

Looking forward to this. I like your novelizations.

Peter Davdi: And don't even bother asking for details: I signed a non disclosure agreement, so that's that.
Luigi Novi: You tease.

"And don't even bother asking for details..."

Will Spider-Man be in it?

I am curious, how much trouble would you get in for disclousre. Curious what was written into the agreement.

Asking to disclose the term of non-disclosure? How very meta ;-)

Peter David: And don't even bother asking for details...
Luigi Novi: What abotu Esquire or GQ? Got any copies of that?

(What? The pun-crazy guy creates an entire race of characters in Apropos of Nothing called the "Harpers Bizarre", but I can't make my own magazine pun? Sheesh.)

"And don't even bother asking for details..."
Everyone is quoting before trying to get info about the book out of you.

What I would like to know is, now that SM3 is done, what is your next book project? You can talk about that one, can't you?

Honestly, your first book ruined the whole first movie for me.

I read the book, loved it, was pumped for the movie, was telling everyone and their mother how good it was going be, even if it was half of what the novelization was.

It wasn't even 5 percent of what the novelization was.

You ruined me.

Either that or the first movie blew chunks.

Probably a little of both.

Your so lucky because the trailer looks so darn cool!

I look forward to reading it and also I as well like to support the writer by buying the novelization AND see the film but lately it seems the person in charge doesnt understand that something like Spider-Man 3 is a very visual film (something the novelization doesnt have at all) and even though a literary person WILL read the book AND know the ENDING we will STILL go out and see the film several times....

But they (the people in charge) STILL insist on releasing the stupid little movie paperback THE DAY OF THE FILM----which leaves little time to READ the book and in fact discourages buying it when your going to just see the darn thing that weekend anyhow so by THEN- why even BOTHER reading the book---which of course shows lows sales figures FOR the novelization which of course backs up the argument AGAINST even printing a movie related book----

so aggravating.

And its even dumber when they get GREEDY----like Paramount did with the last couple Trek films when they obviously were getting great sales on the Trek novelizations and some yahoo decided to soak us even more and release the novelizations in HARDCOVER!!! (oh gee---they added a couple of pages of behind the scenes information at the back---which we all get from a dozen various magazines anyway----duh!!)

Well-- ranting over----

I look forward to reading the book Peter---
as long as it hits the shelf about two weeks before the film of course....

Either way---your continued workaholic habits continue to inspire. THANX!!!

Is Venom in it? ;)

Tuttle, just read or watch whichever one you want in whatever order you want. You don't have to see the movie on the very first day and you don't have to read the book on the very first day. You can experience them in whichever order you think you will enjoy most.

I can remember being 15 and reading Jurrasic park before the movie came out. Maybe 16. Either way as big of a hit as the movie was the book was far better.

I get less from movies then I have ever gotten out of a book.

Seriously though, how strict are they on that disclosure stuff? I've had the script for a new movie about to be released laying around my room for over a year now. One of my friends who works in Hollywood gave it to me (for reasons I won't disclose). He trusted me not to pass it on and I won't- but I imagine family members of people who sign disclosure stuff agreements have seen top secret material before it was released to the public.

"Seriously though, how strict are they on that disclosure stuff?"

I've had to sign a few NDAs and... I never read them very carefully, so I'm not much help. I never thought I needed to, since I knew I'd never give anything away.

The general impression I've gotten is that all kinds of horrible legal action are promised in most NDAs if you break them. From what I've heard, how much of that will actually happen depends on the circumstances. At the very, very least you are jeopardising your work relations. A director often guards his story jealously, so he's not going to want to work with you if you've ever broken an NDA.

I saw a quote from PAD way back in the question thread that he liked Spidey 1 over Spidey 2, and now he's saying he likes the Spidey 3 script more than The Duce script. I dig both Spider-Man movies alot, but I just think Spider-Man 2 is comic book movie perfection. The first movie has its ups and downs -- the Amazing Fantasy 15 Origin at the start is freakin amazing, true, but I think it gets kind of bogged down in the latter half with Spidey vs. Goblin stuff. (don't dig the movie Goblin costume, never did and never will) The second movie just ups the Peter Parker's Life Stinks quotient so much, and has a few more heartfet scenes, and some real laughers (definitely alot more funny than the first movie), a less blatant scenery chewing baddie, and some amazing action sequences... its a just flippin' Empire Strikes Back / Godfather II / Aliens level perfect sequel to me. Anyone else like Spidey 1 more than Spidey 2? How so?

I read screenplays for a living, and I've never had to sign any sort of NDA, despite having read quite a lot of "secret" material. It's always just been conducted more or less on the honor system. Of course, I've never read anything as big as Spider-Man 3, so I guess there's a kind of hierarchy that comes into play when dealing with sensitive material (with Spider-Man 3 being at the top secret, "for your eyes only," "this screenplay will self-destruct in 30 seconds" level).

As for TallestFanEver's question, I like the first Spider-Man more than the second, though I'm really not crazy about either of them. I don't care much for the character to begin with, and the talentless Tobey Maguire certainly didn't help to improve my opinion of him. Still, the first movie was marginally entertaining, while the second one was just inane, in my opinion (incidentally, I also prefer the first Godfather to the second and Alien to Aliens).

Oh, come on, PAD. Give us a little. Even some backstage gossip.

I hear Topher Grace is really, REALLY difficult to write for. Was he a problem for you?

And how about the rumors of cat-fights between Kirsten Dunst and Bryce Dallas Howard over who got more PAD-original lines in the novelization? Rumor has it they got pretty vicious...

J.

Cool. I loved the second film, though the script wasn't the best aspect of it. If this script is better than the second, I'm even more psyched to see it!

Marvel just announced that Civil War and many of its books are being delayed. Civil War #4, due to hit stores today, has been pushed back a full month. Im a little frustrated that they gave us less than 24 hours' notice for it, but oh well. Anyways..... didn't see your Spidey book on the list of delays. Does this mean that you will be putting out a few more issues tied into that series or will you continue with stories a bit more self-contained and based more on consequences from general storypoints, or something else entirely?

Lee-
He has got to catch up with his comic work for various projects and then I think it is the New Frontier for him again in some form.
Kath

Why read novelizations? Because, if it is done by someone such as PAD, there'll be a feel to it and perhaps even whole scenes which aren't in the movie and which add enormously to the story and characters. Just consider the two scenes he added at the church in the last chapter of SM-2. Very nice! Could they have worked in the context of the film itself without unduly affecting the pacing? Can't say. But they sure worked in the book.

Some did prefer the first movie. I brought both SPIDER-MAN films to my mother's and showed them to her a couple of months apart. She liked them both, though she preferred the first. She admitted that might be because of the effect of seeing that sort of film for the first time.

Actually, alot of times, producers are worried that television could zip off a quick knock "TV Movie" off of their idea if it gets 'leaked'.

Big movies like Spider-Man 3 takes months and months (and months)of post production (for the stupendous special effects).
Spidey JUST wrapped but theres STILL 7 months of effects to make.

Meanwhile--If one or two key elements of SM3 get leaked- a TV MOVIE of some superhero could get written, cast, filmed, posted, edited and be on the TV within a few months BEFORE SM3.

Millions of people would see the TV film and then later see SM3 and not be as excited about it because they already saw it on TV. This would greatly affect word of mouth and cost the studio millions.

I recall that a certain James Bond film became delayed because they wrote a scene and found out that the film TRUE LIES had some of the same elements in the ending and they needed to rewrite their ending.

That was a legit co-incidence but there were close enough similiarities where one film had to rework THEIR story for the sake of their audience (which equals a possible loss of hundreds of millions of dollars if the audience feels 'we've seen this already')(Bad word of mouth really puts a dent into the bottom line.)

I think this is why Pirates 2 is about to cross the golden 400 million dollar domestic mark in the top ten.

It has things in there that nobody has ever seen before and it's very fresh.

But this is why even now the actors for SM3 are
being interviewed and they are being very very careful not to say too much. They WANT to work in this town again!

One other example would be when Star Trek had planned the title The Vengeance of Khan.
George Lucas was planning a similar title for his own film coming out that same year. (and at the time it was to be called Revenge of the Jedi)(In fact posters were already printed)
So Lucas asked Paramount to change THEIR title, which they did, to Wrath of Khan.
Lucas change his as well from Revenge to Return.
In the end- years later- Lucas was able to use the word again in Revenge of the Sith.
And thats just a title!!!

This is why JJ Abrahms is so tight lipped about the plot to Star Trek 11

Yes, studios are very very paranoid about their plots.

As for Spider-man 3---I can wait-
at least I got a trailer.
(and they filmed a portion of the film in my hometown Cleveland Ohio so nyahhhhhhhhh)

Anyway- just my 2 cents.

Posted by Antonio Amador
I try to read everything I can found writen by you exceot the novelizations. I am just not a big fan of novelizations but maybe I'll give this a try. Lately I been thinking that is important to support the writers you like.

Antonio, you are seriously missing out and doing a disservice unto yourself. Batman Forever is a sucky movie, but the novelization is an excellent read. Most of the time, the novelization and the movie are different enough that you can enjoy both. Sometimes, as with Hulk, the book enhances the movie by going into more detail and giving you more background.

I cannae wait for the movie! (And then the book I'll read about two months later. I like to keep them separate in my head.)

But did you like this script better than the script to Fantastic Four?

Folks- LISTEN

He SAID he likes SM3 BETTER then he liked SM2
and many many fans think SM2 is the very best of the best of all superhero films---

So- just with that alone- I am confident SM 3
is going to kick serious butt and make billions of dollars which would lead us dorectly into SM 4, 5 and 6!!!!

Can't wait....

Well, I'm taking this as a good sign for the third movie, as I really did not care much for the second.

I always tell people to read the novelization after the movie, for two reasons:

First, it explains stuff that you may have been wondering about in the film. Films are always told in a sort of visual shorthand. For instance, in SM2, Doc Ock shows up at the diner where MJ and Peter are completely out of the blue, with no explanation. The book provides one.

Second, there have been times where people have become enamored of certain scenes in one of my books, go to the movie, and get pissed off because the scene isn't there. Might've been cut for time; might be it was never in the script in the first place and it was entirely my own invention.

So I think books are always better after the fact.

PAD

Well I seem to be differant.

Once I find out about a project and the actors have been cast and a script written....

Then theres the months of following the filming...

Then theres the counting off the year
(for effects heavy films)of post production
or perhaps just 4 or 5 months (for non-effects heavy)

Then theres the all important trailer.

Then opening weekend.

By that time I want to know the actual story from beginning to end.

I go in totally understanding that scenes in a book or even scenes that may have been in the trailer have been cut for timing or other reasons.

It's all part of the fun and experience for me.
But then I am a geek.

And again- it would be nice if all books would be released a couple of weeks BEFORE the film opens so those of us who really want to read the book first have a decent amount of time to do so.

For me, nine times out of ten, unless the book is written by a really good author who I know adds scenes (like Peter David)then once I've seen the film I know the story- which of course is the reason I get the book.

Seen the film? Well, skip the book.

By the way Peter----
Important question which shouldnt interfere with the SM3 Non disclosure----

Is it usually written in your contract that your allowed to ADD scenes?

Or do you write the novelization and sneek the extra scenes in hoping that the machine that needs to get the book to press in a timely manner won't have time to do extensive editing?

Very curious about that aspect.

Some novelizations are just literally a word for word product of the screenplay but authors like you who ADD things to the product really tend to enhance the reading experience for us fans.

So if you can possibly add a word or two about the "added scenes" process that would be very intresting.

Thanx!
months and months of

Tuttle,

While I'm not Peter, I'd be surprised if any author of a novelization were told that they couldn't add scenes. The whole point of a novelization is to provide a prose version of what you'd see on the screen -- as such, they need to provide extra description to make up for the lack of a visual medium. It seems a very small leap from that to added material.

What's more, one of the big advantages of prose over screen is that you can get into characters' heads much more easily and more deeply. It's possible to do that within only the scenes you're given, but it's probably easier and more fulfilling to add a scene or three that'll get your point across better.

So that's my take -- I don't think anyone is assigned to write simply "a word for word product of the screenplay". That's stenography, not authorship.

And as usual ... Peter, or anybody else with experience in actually, oh, DOING this sort of thing, let me know if and where I've screwed up. :-)

TWL

"And again- it would be nice if all books would be released a couple of weeks BEFORE the film opens so those of us who really want to read the book first have a decent amount of time to do so."

Actually, typically, the novelizations are on the stands anywhere from four to six weeks before the movie.

"While I'm not Peter, I'd be surprised if any author of a novelization were told that they couldn't add scenes."

Prepare to be surprised, because it does occasionally happen. The most ludicrous example that I know of was when Max Allan Collins was hired to write the novelization of "Road to Perdition." Now anyone who's paying attention knows that RtP was based upon Al's graphic novel of the same name. So when Al wrote the novelization, he put in all sorts of detail and background about the characters, additional scenes, that sort of thing.

And the movie studio came back and said absolutely not. Al and the publisher were informed that there could be nothing in the book that was not in the script. NOTHING. Not a scene, not a line of dialogue, nothing. Yes, that's right, they told the guy who wrote the source material that he couldn't stray from the script that was based upon his source material. Al had to cut everything from the manuscript that wasn't in the movie. I think his original MS was 90,000 words and the final version was 45,000.

PAD

Understand, I don't mean to be "teasing" anyone about the contents. It's just that typically when I finish a project I tell you guys it's done, and you ask me questions about it and I answer it. So I wanted to give you a heads up that I couldn't do that in this instance.

In the interests of fairness, here are the Top Ten things I *can* tell you about the script and film:

1) The screenplay is credited to Alvin Sargent, with story by Ivan Raimi and Sam Raimi.

2) It is very neatly typed.

3) It is 128 pages long.

4) My draft is dated June 23rd, 2006.

5) Whenever new draft pages are issued, they are always done on different color paper. Colors used, in order, are white, blue, pink, yellow, green, goldenrod, buff, salmon, cherry, and tan.

6) My script has "P. DAVID" imprinted in big block letters running sideways on every single page.

7) It is three hole punched held together with brass clips.

8) It says, "Based on the Marvel Comics Character created by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko."

9) There are several places where the word "it's" is used as the possessive rather than the correct "its."

10) For a brief time, IMDB.Com had the following credit: "Rosemary Harris....Aunt May/Carnage." This was someone's idea of a joke and was changed. Aunt May does not turn into Carnage. I'm not saying Carnage DOESN'T show up. I'm just saying it's not in the form of Aunt May.

PAD

You're right, that's a truly ludicrous example. Wow -- and here I thought living in LA for ten years had inured me to the weirdness that is Hollywood.

In that case, the obvious followup question is whether you've ever been told you couldn't add scenes, which I guess is close to tuttle's initial question. I haven't seen any indication of it in novelizations so far, but I haven't read all of the ones you've done.

TWL

Just one(2) question: Is the Eddy Brock character well developped in it? And except for the physic, is he very different from the comics. A yes or no for these two questions would be enough.

Thanks again

Personally, I would never read a novelization before seeing the movie - but then, I really hate spoilers. If you can't be surprised by a film the first time you see it, what's the point? I can get some added details and insights from reading an adaptation, but I guess that I see the movie as the main experience, and the novelization as a supplement to that. (Not to say that some novelizations can't turn out to be superior to the movie on which they're based; or to say that I don't read novelizations, as I sometimes do, and have several in mind which I mean to catch up on, actually.)

On the other hand, I'd be more inclined to first read a novel before seeing the movie adaptation based on that novel. In that case, I suppose since the book is the original, that's where I'm looking for the surprises, while the film is the supplemental work, where I'm curious to see how they're presenting the story. (Though, I probably would have liked the film of "To Kill a Mockingbird" better if I hadn't read the novel [several times] before seeing it. I know it's acclaimed as a great movie, but much of what I saw when I watched it was its inferiority to the book. Oh well.)

Oh -and thumbs up for the Top Ten list, PAD! Some interesting stuff there, actually, from the "P. David" block letters on the side, to proper credit to Lee & Ditko, to the "its" problem. He's, she's - it's; his, her - its. Even screenwriters still haven't learned...

Peter David: Understand, I don't mean to be "teasing" anyone about the contents.
Luigi Novi: If that was a reference to my comment, Peter, allow me to disclaim that I was just joking.

As for the reading of novelizations, the reason I read the first one before the movie is because I pretty much figured that little would be in the movie that I didn't already know (i.e.: Spidey's origin). I also figured that after all the Spidey and Green Goblin stories I've read, that enjoyment of the film would stem largely from how well the material was executed, rather than any surprise plot twists. Given that the film pretty much was based on the stories (insofar as GG's death, MJ's near-emulation of Gwen Stacey's death, etc.), I turned out to be right. Thus, I really wanted to read what Peter's take on the material would be, especially since I've enjoyed novelizations in the past, and noticed that they often have more material.

Because I figured the second movie would probably more original material in terms of plot, I decided against reading the novelization.

I'm looking forward to reading the novel, but only after I've seen the movie. The reason? I read The Return of Swamp Thing by Peter David, and then watched the movie again for the first time in several years, having completely forgotten what the film was like. That novelization was like the anti-Max Allan Collins story because Peter's book changed nearly everything from the script. After that experience, novelizations became something to read only after watching the movie, to add to the story.

By the way, there's a great But I Digress column in the archives titled "Movie Adaptations" about how Peter handles novelizations and adaptations.

BID: How goes "The Dark Tower" series?

And again- it would be nice if all books would be released a couple of weeks BEFORE the film opens so those of us who really want to read the book first have a decent amount of time to do so.

Well, there's no law saying you HAVE to go see a movie on opening night. If you really feel that strongly about reading the book first, just wait to see the movie.

Batman Forever is a sucky movie, but the novelization is an excellent read. Most of the time, the novelization and the movie are different enough that you can enjoy both. Sometimes, as with Hulk, the book enhances the movie by going into more detail and giving you more background.

Likewise, I've always found the novelization of Star Trek V to be an enjoyable read, given the addition of the visions of the rest of the command crew and the notable lack of Shatner's directing.

-Rex Hondo-

"Even screenwriters still haven't learned..."

Screenwriters tend to have a weak grasp of grammar, spelling, and punctuation (maybe that's why they're screenwriters... they don't have to worry about that stuff). I swear, every single one of them is under the mass delusion that "lightning" is spelled "lightening."

"So I think books are always better after the fact."

You may be generally correct, but in the cases of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and 2010: ODYSSEY TWO, I'd read (and very much enjoyed) the novels before seeing the films, yet this in no way diminished my enjoyment of the movie versions which remain to this day among my top favourites. Exceptions that prove the rule, maybe?

Thank you for not doing the "I know something you don't know" dance.

At least I have no doubt that I'll love Spidey 3. Sam Raimi hasn't let me down yet.

Conversely, I was bummed by the lost potential that was THE FANTASTIC 4 and don't know how to react to the fact that the sequel--FANTASTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER--has even MORE potential...

(Since there is NO mention of Glactus at all in the press release I can only assume that the last shot of the movie will be of the Big G descending from the heavens in front of our heroes. Right? Right? I mean, they wouldn't just leave him out...right?)

"10) For a brief time, IMDB.Com had the following credit: "Rosemary Harris....Aunt May/Carnage." This was someone's idea of a joke and was changed. Aunt May does not turn into Carnage. I'm not saying Carnage DOESN'T show up. I'm just saying it's not in the form of Aunt May."

Oh dear, Now my husband's doing impersonations of Aunt May as Carnage. Not pretty.

Will the book be out in time for Albacon, or is that way too soon?

Peter:
About all those different colored papers you mentioned with your name on them.
1. Who provides them, you or the publisher(s)?
2. If you, where do you obtain them?
3. If you, how much do they cost and do you get repaid for the expense afterwards?
4. Why the different colors and how specifically are they used?
5. Are you still double spacing your lines with a header at the top of each page?
If so, the page count seems awfully low to me and
"three holed punched with brass clips" goes against everything I've ever heard concerning how to submit a manuscript.
Thanks in advance for the answers and keep up the good work.

Lee,

Well, I'm obviously not PAD, but I believe he was referring to the movie script that he was provided to use for the novelization. In fact, I'm sure of it. It has a name prominently on all pages so the movie producers will know who to blame if copies of the script get out. The different colored pages are provided to him when the script is revised and the color coding allows him and everyone else to know what order any changes were made in. Oh, and 128 pages is a light page count for a novel, but it's in the right ballpark for the page count of a movie script.

p.s. Note the correct use of "it's" in the paragraph above.

"Screenwriters tend to have a weak grasp of grammar, spelling, and punctuation (maybe that's why they're screenwriters... they don't have to worry about that stuff). I swear, every single one of them is under the mass delusion that 'lightning' is spelled 'lightening.' "

Well... that's just sad. Or, frightening. My mistake, assuming that professional writers would know how to write properly....

Luke said
My mistake, assuming that professional writers would know how to write properly....

That is why you have us editors. *grin*

i remember reading the novelization of "Star Trek IV" and 2 scenes that i was really impressed with that didn't end up in the film - 1 involved Sulu meeting one of his ancestors as a small child - which apparently they couldn't shoot because the child actor freaked out on the day - and a 2nd where Sulu apparently told kirk off for trying to take all the blame for the mutiny incident - I don't know why this sceene was lost but I think it could have been a great one.

Peter, do you have any favorite scenes in any of the novelazations you've done that you feel should not have been lost in the final film?

Haven't had a chance to read the novelization of SM2 yet - my local library hasn't stocked it, and the bookstore has this silly habit of asking me to pay for things before I take them home...

Anyways, I was wondering - in the novel, was it explained why, when Dr. Octavius' first fusion reactor failed, the unshielded reaction didn't kill half of Manhattan with radiation poisoning?

Not to mention the unpleasant cloud that should have resulted when the second reactor was dumped into the harbor...

"when Dr. Octavius' first fusion reactor failed, the unshielded reaction didn't kill half of Manhattan with radiation poisoning?"

Because it was supposed to be a fusion reaction, not a fission reaction. Fission reactions use radioactive material. Fusion reactions don't.

Anyways, I was wondering - in the novel, was it explained why, when Dr. Octavius' first fusion reactor failed, the unshielded reaction didn't kill half of Manhattan with radiation poisoning?

Answer 1: Because with Spider-Man, Doc Ock, and Harry Osborn all at ground zero, it would have made for a very short movie.

Answer 2: For the same reason half the characters in the Marvel Universe have super powers instead of being glowing or smoldering corpses. ;)

-Rex Hondo-

There's a movie about Spider-man? Cool.

10) For a brief time, IMDB.Com had the following credit: "Rosemary Harris....Aunt May/Carnage." This was someone's idea of a joke and was changed. Aunt May does not turn into Carnage. I'm not saying Carnage DOESN'T show up. I'm just saying it's not in the form of Aunt May.

PAD
*********

You ruined everything!!!!!!!!!!! Now I don't have to see the movie.

Will you stop ignoring me if I don't say Aunt May should turn into Carnage because Hitler did?

With few exceptions, I stopped purchasing (or even reading) novelizations in 1983, the year my family first got a VCR. Up to that point, the novelizations had served as a means of "revisiting" the movies on which they were based. But with the advent of home video, I could rent (and later buy, as prices came down) movies on videotape. And, of course, DVD, in more recent years.

I wonder if there was a decline in novelization sales when home video first got started, or if that was just me.

Another reason I stopped buying novelizations is that I have a long list of books I _already_ own that I need to read. One of the novelizations I _did_ buy in recent years was _Hulk_, and I _still_ haven't gotten around to reading that.

It's very probable that I'll assume reading novelizations again, especially since they are, in many ways, another version of the film. Since I enjoy listening to DVD commentaries, watching deleted scenes, and, occasionally comparing a director's cut to an original release (when time permits), reading a novelization would just add another dimension to my overall enjoyment of the story.

One thing I've noticed about novelizations is that they usually consist of one or more elements: A) they're based on an early draft of the script, and include scene that were either never filmed, or subsequently cut (the Saavik/David Marcus relationship in _Star Trek II_, and the horseback riding scene in _Batman_ both come to mind); B) they contain scenes either added whole cloth by the author, or expanded from the script. For example, in James Kahn's _Return of the Jedi_ novelization, we learn that Han Solo's six Tatoonine months in Carbonite consisted of a "big, wide awake nothing", and that when Leia released him, he was overcome with a rush of images, fragments of memory from childhood to his last view of him. Were those details in the script, or did Kahn invent them? I don't know, but the imagery has remained with me all these years. C), novelizations reflect early product placement arrangements that somehow changed by the time the film aired. For example, in the novelization of _E.T._ , the candies E.T. favors are M & M's. Now I don't remember if that was an assumption on the part of the author, because Reese's Pieces hadn't been around very long, and he may have assumed the small candies _were_ M & M's, or if the studio had originally contracted with M & M's; but either way, it's different than the filmed version. D) (which intersects with A, B and C), novelizations let the reader get into a character's head. In film, unless a character is narrating, we aren't privy to his or her thoughts. And then, that's presuming he or she isn't an unreliable narrator. And finally, E), sometimes the novelization turns out to be the actual _novel_ on which the film was based. Years ago, I bought the novelizations of the five _Planet of the Apes_ films, and was surprised to discover that the first "novelization", despite having a photograph from the film on the cover, was actually Pierre Boule's original story- which is _very_ different. Likewise, _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep_ was re-released as _Blade Runner_ (the title of the film). I suspect more than a few people picked it up thinking it was a novelization of the film, rather than the original novel.

Like I said, I stopped buying novelizations as a matter of course years ago. But the more I think about the subject, the more tempted I am to go back and read novelizations of recent films. Would I get more enjoyment out of the _Star Wars_ prequel trilogy, for example, if I read those novelizations?

Maybe one day I will.

Rick

Some novelizations are very cool. The Star Wars prequel ones are a must read for fans, especially 1 and 3 (also highly recommend Labyrinth of Evil as a prequel to Sith).

Others if they simply regurgitate exactly what is in the movie with no extra depth, less cool.

Remembered enjoyed reading your novelization of Return of the Swamp Thing. Got me pumped up to see the movie. Turned out to be a giant piece or turd.

True Marvelite

Ah...since no one asked for it - my basic feelings about novelizations.

If I really like the movie, I'll buy the novelization and read it later.

If I really like the author, I'll buy the novelization. May or may not wait to read it after the movie.

I've read the two Spider-Man novelizations before seeing the films because Peter David writing Spider-Man is pretty much my idea of comic geek heaven. Yes, there's a few bits that I'm really disappointed weren't in the films, but by and large as I was reading I was saying to myself "that's a PAD bit" so I wasn't really expecting them.

If I'm doing some sort of project (like my Buffy timeline website) I'll get the novelizations.

And...in the case of Star Wars...one of these days I'll get the "Revenge of the Sith" novel to have a complete novelization set even tho I've no desire to read it...or watch it again...or admit to myself that it or the other prequels even exist. So Lucas can look forward to getting one last $7 or so from me unless there's some "Radioland Murders" stuff out there I've missed.

But Jason, while deuterium (or tritium) is not itself radioactive, a nuclear fusion reaction most certainly produces some seriously radioactive byproducts. After all, that "healthy glow" from sitting at the beach for a few hours is nothing more or less than a low-intensity radiation burn, and too much exposure to solar radiation (produced by the solar fusion reaction) can lead to skin cancer...

So now, in the movie universe, half of Manhattan is applying for membership in the Avengers? :-)

Kath wrote: "That is why you have us editors. *grin*"

Ah. Good point :)

My general rule of thumb is if the book is the original medium for the material (ie.Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter) then I don't worry if I have read the book before the movie. If the original medium is the film (ie. Star Trek, Star Wars) then I wont' read the book until after I see the movie. When I have broken this rule I have always been sorry.