3 ms·
It’s weird how Banks can casually create a villain character with such depth and richness almost as a side character and discard the character, whereas other sc
by andrewstuart 3y ago
It’s weird how Banks can casually create a villain character with such depth and richness almost as a side character and discard the character, whereas other sci fi books/movies would build everything around such a character, if they could manage to make one, which they can’t.
- arethuza 3y agoThat makes me think of the Ethnarch Kerian scene from Use of Weapons - which would make a brilliant cold open for a Culture movie.... <sigh>
- andrewstuart 3y agoThere's no need for Culture movies. I don't get why people think great books should be made into movies. Some books just shouldn't. The Culture should never be made into movies, and why would you want to, except for some sort of Hollywood reason.
- arethuza 3y agoI've wanted to see a movie of Consider Phlebas ever since I read the book in one sitting (literally) in May 1988... :-) Edit: I remember it vividly as I took one day off between handing in my final year project on the CS degree I was doing and starting the final round of revision for the exams that were starting soon. Wandered down to Bauermeister Books on the George IV bridge and picked up a copy and spent the rest of the day (until the wee small hours) reading it.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- TeMPOraL 3y ago> I don't get why people think great books should be made into movies. Because some of us suffer from aphantasia and can't just fully experience a book.
- rsynnott 3y agoI'm not sure any [M] Banks books have a villain as a central character. Closest would probably be Veppers in Surface Detail (a wonderful creation, one of the most dislikable villains in any work), but even then he's arguably slightly a side-character.