DreamWorks Picks up Neil Gaimans' Interworld

Lisandro writes to tell us Geeks of Doom is reporting that author Neil Gaiman recently announced DreamWorks has optioned the film rights for his upcoming novel, 'Interworld'. "Gaiman said that in 1996 he began working with Michael Reaves on the idea for a story 'about a boy who finds himself in the middle of a war between two equally powerful forces, who joins a super-team consisting of versions of himself from different alternate realities to try and maintain the cosmic balance.' Soon after, the idea was pitched to DreamWorks and other studios, but was turned down."

Comments

Gaaaah!

[EricWright]

Fixit! Fixit! Fixit! "Neil Gainman" indeed...

Re:Gaaaah!

[Lisandro]

Yup, my bad. I had to re-submit the story in a rush and that one slipped by.

Confused

[wiggles]

I am most likely not alone in not knowing the significance of this. It made the front page, but I've never heard of either the author or the novel -- and I'd like to think I'm fairly up on this type of thing. Could someone who knows please enlighten us as to what the big deal is here?

Re:Confused

[LiquidCoooled]

You are right, the only reference to Interworld I know is from the Nivens' Ringworld novels.

Re:Confused

[RingDev]

That the option didn't get turned down again?

-Rick

Re:Confused

[ajs]

The novel has not yet been published.

The author is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Gaiman

and he is on the Web at:

http://www.neilgaiman.com/

Re:Confused

[C0rinthian]

Neil Gaiman is probably best known for the critically acclaimed comic series "The Sandman" and has done a slew of other successful comic series and novels.

Re:Confused

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, I'm likewise situated...

As both conniseur of Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Books and Movies...

My question is: who knows/cares/gives-a-rats-ass?

Re:Confused

[spun]

Neil Gaiman is an immensely popular sci-fi/fantasy author. He also does some great graphic novels like The Sandman. I can't imagine being into sci-fi, fantasy, or comics and not having heard of him. He's not got quite the same level of publicity as, say, Heinlein or Tolkien, but he's got quite a lot of fans.

Re:Confused

[MontyApollo]

The name did not ring a bell for me either. Reading the link it looks like a lot of his working is finding its way into film. That being said, I don't why an annoucement about a book that has not even been written yet makes the front page of Slashdot when he has several movies already about to be released.

Re:Confused

[Pojut]

Ever seen the movie Mirrormask? That was Neil Gainman's child.

Do yourself a favour and read "The Sandman" series of graphic novels. Some of the most beautiful and original storytelling ever told.

Re:Confused

[TheRaven64]

If you've not heard of the author, you might find an interview that he did for a little site called Slash-something useful.

Re:Confused

[Selfbain]

He also writes books that win so many awards that he is starting to turn them down. He won the Hugo for best novel one year, the Hugo for best novella the next year and then turned down the award for best novel the year after that.

Re:Confused

[Selfbain]

Whoops, I screwed up the timing on that a bit. He won best novel in 2002, best novella in 2003, best short story in 2004 then he didn't publish anything in 2005 and then he turned down the award in 2006.

Re:Confused

[Adambomb]

I personally wish American Gods and Good Omens would become something along the lines of highschool curriculum reading. Gaiman has a ton of skill at reducing a complex feeling into a few words, and has an amazing depth of perspective when it comes to seeing things from the other blokes point of view. If you've read nothing else of his, read these two if you have the chance.

Granted Good Omens was a partnership with Terry Pratchett, but that's almost seems more of a selling point than a detraction =).

Re:Confused

[Greyfox]

If you're into the surreal you'd best hop down to the local bookstore and pick up some of his work. He's best known for the Sandman series. I believe the last movie based on his work was Mirrormask. If you like that sort of thing (And I do) you're in for a treat. If you don't, this story won't matter much for you.

Re:Confused

[KrayzieKyd]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Gaiman Up on things, my ass, chump. You don't know jack. Next time you claim something, speak out of your mouth instead of your ass.

Re:Confused

[Scrameustache]

I've never heard of either the author or the novel -- and I'd like to think I'm fairly up on this type of thing. You'd LIKE to think that, but you really, really shouldn't ;-)

Re:Confused

[Achromatic1978]

Although difficult to pull off well, I could see a film of American Gods being pretty fantastic (though it'd piss off the Religious Right no end). Someone needs to option that.

Re:Confused

[Adambomb]

That WOULD be brilliant, and the only reason it would piss off the religious right is the whole reason it exists to begin with. Faith and Belief has moved far beyond the realms of just religion these days, and pointing out the odder things that people exalt would definitely be worthwhile.

The only downside I could see is it'd probably fall into the hands of an extremist left producer who overdoes the whole thing for shock value and ruins the point for everyone.

Re:Confused

[starwed]

Mirrormask was more Dave McKeans child than Gaiman's. (They collaborated on the script, and McKean did all the visuals.)

Re:Confused

[Pojut]

I was simply giving the guy an example of a movie he likely has heard of.

If he hasn't heard of Gaiman, what do you think the chances are of him having heard of McKean? ;-)

Re:Confused

[hickory-smoked]

Even then, I hear neither of them were really entirely satisfied by the end product... so it's not the best example in anycase.
Anyone curious about Gaiman should start with his writing; Sandman: A Doll's House, and/or Good Omens are the best places to start.

Re:Confused

[Skreems]

That, and "Stardust" which is coming out soon and has trailers all over the place...

Re:Confused

[trianglman]

Author: Same guy who wrote Sandman and American Gods (and its sequel), among many others, these being the most popular.

Novel: From the summary, UPCOMING. As in, not yet released.

Re:Confused

[kalirion]

I remember reading Stardust a long time ago. It seemed like a rather generic fantasy title to me. I'd rather they made a movie adaptation of Gaiman's much better works like Good Omens, Neverwhere, American Gods, or Anansi Boys. Or maybe BBC could update the Neverwhere miniseries with similar production values to the new Dr. Who. But I guess with the success of LotR and the first Narnia movie, studios are more interested in epic fantasies than the less standard urban ones.

I'll be looking for Interworld with interest though.

Re:Confused

[westlake]

Neil Gaiman is an immensely popular sci-fi/fantasy author.

But what DreamWorks wants from this deal is what every other studio has been looking for and hasn't found: a winning formula for delivering audiences on the scale of J.K. Rowling and Harry Potter. It's why Warner cut a deal with James Patterson's fiction factory for the rights to When The Wind Blows and Maximum Ride.

Re:Confused

[Anonymous Coward]

Winning a Hugo award isn't really a good measure of literary merit. That's not to say that good novels can't win a Hugo, but choosing winners by a poll of fans lets through some popular but fairly vacuous stuff. A lot of sci-fi fans are smart, but not many of them really understand what literary merit is.

Re:Confused

[garoo]

why an annoucement about a book that has not even been written makes the front page...

Except that the book in question was written ten years ago:

Gaiman said that in 1996 he began working with Michael Reaves on the idea for a story "about a boy who finds himself in the middle of a war between two equally powerful forces, who joins a super-team consisting of versions of himself from different alternate realities to try and maintain the cosmic balance." Soon after, the idea was pitched to DreamWorks and other studios, but was turned down.

Several years later, the duo wrote the novel based on their original idea and once again, pitched it to studios which rejected it. Last year, the authors sent their manuscript to Harper Childrens...

In other words, they wrote an idea, discovered nobody bought it, waited a few years, wrote the novel, discovered nobody bought it, waited, pitched it again and somebody bought it. Therefore it has in fact been written quite some time ago.

FWIW I am looking forward to it, having enjoyed several of Gaiman's novels in the past. Gaiman in the style of a Heinlein juvenile is a nice idea (given that a favourite book of mine as a kid was 'Has Space Suit:Will Travel'). But I'm also not sure why this makes the front page of Slashdot. He announced the news a few days ago on his blog. Maybe this is just Slashdot's way of catching up with the RSS feed.

Re:Confused

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up! (Score:5, Vacuous)

Re:Confused

[njfuzzy]

Not having heard of the book, I can understand. It comes out at the end of this month. Not having heard of the author, though... huh?

Neil Gaiman... You know, graphic novels like The Sandman, The Book of Magic, Black Orchid, and Mr. Punch. Books like Coraline, American Gods, Anansi Boys. Movies like MirrorMask and Stardust. Every major sci-fi, fantasy, and horror award, most of them three years out of four. One of the most popular [children's/graphic novel/fantasy] authors alive. Some of this must be ringing bells.

Re:Confused

[Gryle]

I'm a religious man (probably more Center than Right) and American Gods is one of my favorite books. It is possible to enjoy something without believing it to be true.

Re:Confused

[icarus.burned]

yes indeed I can enlighten you. Neil Gaimen is the author of some finely written, fantastical but incredibly imaginitive books and graphic novels including Neverwhere (produced as a BBC series) and "The Sandman" saga. He also co-wrote a book with Terry Pratchett called "Good Omens", a triumph of comedy and fantasy. It's a shame they Dream Works have bought the rights before the film even comes out for two reasons. One, nobody really knows if it will be a good book - but with his track record it probably will. Secondly, it will probably turn out that Dream Works will ruin the subject matter, when somebody more capable or idependent would have done the book far more justice.

Re:Confused

[medge_42]

Neil once described himself as "the world's most famous author no one has ever heard of".

Re:Confused

[talcottk]

Just Google "neil"

Re:Confused

[xero314]

Winning a Hugo award isn't really a good measure of literary merit. Doesn't that depend on your definition of good literary merit? I mean it is arguable that "writing works that readers actually like" is a measure of "literary merit." How does the saying go? "Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach. Those that can't teach, criticize"

Re:Confused

[Anonymous Coward]

Then the Da Vinci Code is a true masterpiece, up there with the works of Shakespeare, Homer, and Dante.

Re:Confused

[tehcyder]

I'd like to think I'm fairly up on this type of thing.

If you've never heard of Neil Gaiman, I'm not sure what type of thing it is you think you're up on.

Re:Confused

[daemonc]

There is only one director I can think of that could properly convey the surreal creepiness of American Gods:
David Lynch
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think someone should get those two together...

Re:Confused

[gkhan1]

Anansi Boys would also be pretty damn awesome movie. We're at least are getting Stardust this summer.

Re:Confused

[pwainwright]

I agree with you there.

I'm an atheist, and I enjoy Bach's St. Matthew Passion and Verdi's requiem.

(actually, come to think of it, 'tis said Verdi was an atheist and he WROTE Verdi's requiem...)

Re:Confused

[xero314]

I haven't seen/read "The Da Vinci Code" but Being better than Shakespeare and Homer doesn't seem all that difficult. I mean really Shakespeare and Homer are trash writers. Shakespeare wrote sitcoms and Homer's writings are like a D&D campaign gone bad. Neither understand the concepts of character development and the idea of intrigue is totally lost on them. You don't have to like my opinion, but you might now be able to see of quality of writing is a subjective thing, and who is a better judge of that quality than the average reader.

Re:Confused

[Skreems]

You know, I thought the same thing when I read Stardust, but from the trailer it looks like they've fleshed out a lot of little things that I missed. It looks like a very interesting, twisted fairy tale, from the trailers. I know a movie version of Good Omens was in the works, but that was a while ago so it may have been dropped. I would love to see what they could do with Anansi Boys.

Re:Confused

[Tzinger]

I'd say the difficulty is in keeping the humor of the story. Gaiman's work has a couple of layers of subtext where he hides both serious stuff and humor. Humor that is not visible and not physical always has a problem with movie audiences. I mean, there are even people who don't know "Boston Legal" is funny.

Who is Neil GaiNman?

[Anonymous Coward]

pls. fix the topic typo. thx.

Re:Who is Neil GaiNman?

[Minwee]

I see that you are new here on Slanshdot.

Re:Who is Neil GaiNman?

[KDR_11k]

You mean Slaaneshdot.

"Stuff That Matters"

[jessiej]

"Stuff That Matters"... I understand a lot of nerds like scifi, but it doesn't seem like this is very significant news

Re:"Stuff That Matters"

[traveller604]

Well perhaps you haven't read any of his books then. *goes to browse the iHype thread of the day.

Re:"Stuff That Matters"

[Anonymous Coward]

It does matter... To nerds. Therefore, it's newsworthy here. It's right on the label.

Oh, did you mean it doesn't matter in the grander scheme of things? "Real" news is right over that-a-way, pardner!

Remember where you are and all its proud traditions and the company you keep here.

Okay. Just remember the proud traditions.

Re:"Stuff That Matters"

[Khaed]

What's with all these people lately bitching about the stories on /. and citing the "Stuff that matters" part of the tagline?

Slashdot has *always* talked about comic and scifi/fantasy novel movies.

Re:"Stuff That Matters"

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a sign of the great unwashed attempting to assimilate and dilute yet another subculture (ie. slashdot).

Re:"Stuff That Matters"

[lejerdemayn]

Well, you forgot the first part:

News for nerds. :)

Good news

[Selfbain]

but I'm far more excited about the fact he has a new book coming out right away than I am over the fact they're making a movie based on it.

Re:Good news

[slashwritr]

Yeah, I'm cautiously optimistic about Stardust. I know they've added stuff that's not in the book, but the linked review seems to think it worked out quite well. Oh, and Interworld?!? Crappy title--I keep reading it as "teh Interwebs" instead, which is not a good thing. I'm confident though that the story is better than the title.

Re:Good news

[WheelDweller]

Be happy with that feeling; you 'can read'. I can _read_, sure- I'm here typing this. But when long lines are present in dense text-fields, my eyes lose track of the line I'm on, and I have to read a given book, (if I love it enough to try) nearly a dozen times before I "get it". What a pain in the ass. Strangely, reading things on the web usually don't have this problem. (Better margins)

For me, the movie would be good. I'd really like to see Sandman done right, though. I'd love to see something every bit as good as, say, Dante's Inferno done with _good_ CGI. :/

Re:Good news

[TheRaven64]

As someone working on a couple of typography-related projects, I find this interesting. Do you know if it's a well-known condition? The optimal line length for readability has been shown to be 66 letters for most people. Do you know what it is for you? Does line or word spacing make a difference? What about kerning? Is there a difference between serif and sans serif typefaces?

Re:Good news

[WheelDweller]

Yeah, sans works better; being a tiny bit larger helps, too. It seems the biggest thing is the margins; a narrow colum of about 30-40 characters is the easiest- I can kinda speed-read that.

Kerning...the kind i n t h e newspapers t h a t widens things in a surreal way, is merely annoying. :)

I don't know what the condition is called, but it's something I've grown to recognize, like (after 20 years of doing minatures of various kinds) my sight has started to get blurry just like everyone else.

Similarly, at least in metaphor, are other strange things:

1. ADHD or just Adult ADD
2. Pot smoking, even of the 70's varieties OR the 90's, has zero effect.
3. My nerve net won't "shut down". I've had 5 novacaine shots for a single tooth, then dealt with the pain anyway. But general anesthetics work fine.
4. Reflexes; I fought for three hours at an optical shop trying to get my eyelids to relax and install contact lenses- no luck.

So back when that woman told me, "You've got some nerve!" I shoulda said, "Yeah, they're all like that." :)

None of these problems are debilitating; just peculiar things I've noticed over several decades. Isn't that weird?

Re:Good news

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds like you're just some kind of freak. maybe you should give up and go live in a cave. actually, there is no maybe about it.

When do I report for the casting call?

[BendingSpoons]

I'm glad to hear that an author I've never heard of has secured film rights to a book that hasn't been released yet, but I think I liked this movie better when it was called 'The One' and starred Jet Li.

Re:When do I report for the casting call?

[kalirion]

Ah, but this one will be animated. Makes all the difference.

Re:When do I report for the casting call?

[shinma]

If you've never heard of Neil Gaiman, you're missing out. He wrote the DC/Vertigo series Sandman, the BBC miniseries (and novel) Neverwhere, American Gods (and its sequel, Anansi Boys), MirrorMask, with Dave McKean, Good Omens, with Terry Pratchett, Stardust, the film adaptation of which is coming out soon, with Robert DeNiro and Claire Danes, and Coraline, the film version of which is in production, directed by the director of Nightmare Before Christmas.

There's a lot more, but that's what I thought of off the top of my head.

Re:When do I report for the casting call?

[Das Modell]

Neil Gaiman is quite well known, and if he started developing the book in 1996 then he isn't copying The One, which was released much later. Also, Jet Li does not team up with alternate versions of himself in the movie, and there are no "two equally powerful forces" to be seen.

Gain Man

[Mateo_LeFou]

He came out of the Gain to do battle with the amazing Rando!

Re:Gain Man

[MS-06FZ]

The winner, and still photographer, Mateo LeFou!

Hold your horses...

[Incompetnce]

Isn't it only something like 10% of stuff that gets optioned actually ever gets produced? Or possibly even less.

And given the difficulty Gaiman has had with Sandman and movie studios, I don't think this will ever see daylight.

Re:Hold your horses...

[drinkypoo]

I just rewatched Total Recall the other night (GF is on a K.Dick reading kick and it was ontopic) and we watched some of the added content as well. Turns out that movie was optioned for something like a decade before it was made. I think at one time they had patrick swayze or some shit in the lead. As bad as Arnie is, that would have been terrible. I mean, REALLY terrible. And that script was rewritten something like 30 times :P Another similar revelation is that Labyrinth, instead of starring David Bowie, could have starred Sting or Michael Jackson. I'm just not comfortable with the idea of a muppet movie about child abduction by the goblin king starring ol' Michael "Beat It/One Glove" Jackson...

Re:Hold your horses...

[Tony]

And given the difficulty Gaiman has had with Sandman and movie studios, I don't think this will ever see daylight.

Gaiman has a lot of movies in the works: "Coraline," "Stardust," and "Beowulf" are all in post-production or are completed right now. So, as far as this ever making it to the theaters, I think we have a pretty good chance of it.

Re:Hold your horses...

[ZzzzSleep]

Michael Jackson as the goblin king that steals children? That would have been excessively creepy.
*shudders*

Re:Hold your horses...

[Velocir]

Mirrormask has been out for a while now... (A good, out-of-it Neil Gaiman book that got made into a movie...)

Re:Hold your horses...

[Anonymous Coward]

Critically acclaimed literature matters, or are you from the United States?

Ace Rimmer

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if the line "smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast" will be featured in the film

Also... Neil Gaiman is a great fantasy write, check out Neverwhere if you like that sort of thing. He also has some great collections of short stories.

Movie futures

[TheWoozle]

I wonder if we could start a commodities market where movie studios sell tickets/DVDs/downloads for future movie productions. Maybe then "news" like this might be worth something.

Otherwise, wake me up when the movie has actually started *filming*.

Re:Movie futures

[TheRaven64]

I've been saying for a long time this is how TV should be made. Make a pilot, and put it out for the public to view. Set up an escrow fund where people who like the pilot (or, if it's an established writer / producer like their other work) can put up some cash. If it reaches the amount needed to make the series within a given timeframe then the funds are released and the series is made. The final product is then released for download to the people who paid for it, who can then distribute it as they want (you're paying for the item to be created, rather than for the copy, because that's the thing that has the real value).

Copyright would still protect you from derived works, so if the series is successful then people are likely to be willing to pay for a sequel and the original author is the only one who can make it.

Re:Movie futures

[wumingzi]

I don't want to discourage novel ideas in finance, especially ones that would help get new and creative stuff made, but there are a few reasons why such a market doesn't exist.

First, because production companies are generally private enterprises, not traded companies, you may run afoul of SEC rules on "qualified investors".

Second, and more importantly, investing in film is pretty much the ultimate in high-risk investment. Unlike software, you don't really get to do a proof of concept, sell a few copies, then spend real money productizing and rolling out to a larger base.

The proof of concept phase will (at best) produce a script and some storyboards. You can use that to convince investors you have a story, but zero end customers are going to plunk down 10 bucks to see two hours of storyboards voiced over by you and your friends.

At that point, you need money to make a movie. A lot of it. If you're in the live action world, sites cost money, cameras cost money, actors cost money, the army of support people cost money, etc.

If you're doing animation, you need a room of computers and 100+ people bending polygons. Nobody will do that for two years straight on promise of future payment. You can do a 5 minute short with evenings, weekends, and hacked software. A full-length movie? No way.

So a production company winds up with several million dollars in what is essentially venture capital. Investors pony up based on the idea that you and your crew are likely to turn many millions of dollars into two hours of watchable film, and not blow the whole thing on coke and whores. If you don't have film experience, you will not get that sort of money.

Likewise, as someone who is not a seasoned investor in film, just a punter who says "hey! this looks cool and I want to see more of it!", your odds of being able to evaluate a production team are zero. Go to Vegas and put your life savings on 36 red. Your odds are about as good.

But wait, there's more!

So, you've done your homework, put in your money, and a team of seasoned film pros is hard at work on the movie you invested your hard-earned bucks in. What's the payoff?

Statistically speaking, about 2.5%/year.

Yes, every year a few movies come out which just make bank. For every one of those, there are 100 others which don't. When you look at those nice numbers on Box Office Mojo, remember that your distribution chain will eat 50% of that gross (or more) off the top. So a movie which cost 35 million to make and grossed 60 million is "unrecouped".

In short, investing in films is a game for people who know what they're doing, who invest with a great likelihood of their money going sideways or losing, in exchange for the slim promise of a big payoff.

Do not try this yourself at home.

Re:Movie futures

[Bongo Bill]

I think maybe you're missing out on the point of it. The idea is that the people who want to see it donate, and then when there's enough money to make the show, they use that money as the entire budget. There's plenty of ways it can go wrong, but worrying whether you're gonna waste your money isn't one of them. The only initial risk is coming up with the pilot, as I see it.

Re:Movie futures

[westlake]

I've been saying for a long time this is how TV should be made. Make a pilot, and put it out for the public to view.

It isn't that easy.

In 1978 "the Galactica bridge was estimated at $850,000.
Tektronix donated $3 million worth of high tech computer hardware to dress up the set. Television monitors totaling $35,000 were used. The six-foot long model of the Galactica, which weighed 60 pounds, cost $50,000." Battlestar Galactica FAQ

You have to deliver story, talent and production values up-front to stand any chance at all. Think of all the B5 sequels that sank without a trace. Cardboard sets. No-name casts. Your penny jar is a gimmick, it is not a practical way of doing business.

Re:Movie futures

[wumingzi]

The idea is that the people who want to see it donate, and then when there's enough money to make the show, they use that money as the entire budget.

Well, I get it. I am fortunate(?) in that I've worked professionally in software and film. My point is that the money involved to play this game is staggering. In software, a smart programmer working in his basement alone can spend a few months making something cool. The tip jar can then be put out and the programmer can get a buck or two for his hard work. In a few cases, the tips in the jar are enough to hire staff, and get interest in raising enough money to turn a cool idea into a real, live shrink-wrapped product. If not, you still have an interesting piece of software. Shareware and open-source concepts work really well for software.

Movies and TV are only like software in the sense that they exist as 1s and 0s on media somewhere. The underlying dynamics of the business are very, very different.

You need money to begin. Not small money. Not "make an extra payment on the house" money. Not even "buy me a sweet new car" money. More like "buy me a used 747" money, or "Build me a clone of Bill Gates's house" money.

A professionally made art-house film with two actors in a cafe smoking cigarettes is two million dollars. If you want something interesting to happen, then it gets expensive. Really, really really expensive.

If you get only a tenth of that money, you don't get a tenth of a film. You don't get a film that's cool but could be made ten times cooler. You have nothing.

Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[MuChild]

I obviously haven't read the book yet, but it sounds an awful lot like Michael Moorcock's "Eternal Champion"/Elric of Melniboné material.

Everything being done these days was done better in the '70's!

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[semiotec]

maybe you should read a few of Gaiman's books before making comments like that.

I'd recommend American Gods.

I remember reading some Moorcock books, but have zero recollection on what they are about.

Everything being done these days was done better in the '70's!

I sincerely hope that this was not an entirely serious comment. Going by that logic, we'd all still be reading Canterbury Tales.

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[MuChild]

Maybe you should read some Moorcock books before replying to comments like this! I have read a few books by Gaiman, including American Gods and found them, especially American Gods entirely "meh."

His graphic novels are fantastic, however.

To refresh your memory, some of Moorcock's books are about a guy who finds himself in a war and has to fight alongside versions of himself from alternate dimensions. It was a theme he explored in more than one book/series of books.

I just wanna see the guy get a fat check from Gaiman's box office reciepts, that's all I'm sayin'!

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[ao_coder]

While I like both authors, they arent very similar (well ok, they are both English, and prone to fantasy). The Eternals series doesn't share anything in common with the eternal champion series aside from the word "eternal".

Gaiman's been around long enough that I am not sure you can count his entire body of work as having been authored "these days".

If you haven't read Gaiman, you should check out some of his stuff- you're in for a real treat. I wish I could discover him over again...

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Canterbury Tales are from the 70s?

Wow. Language changes much faster than I thought.

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[semiotec]

(Sigh...) no, the argument goes like:

these days (2000's) there are people who think books from the 70's are better, so back in the 70's, there are probably people who think that books in the 50's were better, and in the 50's there are probably people who thought the books were better in the 20's, and so on and so forth. It doesn't necessary have to end at Chaucer, it's just a far back enough to make the point, that's all.

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[semiotec]

The point was, I did read Moorcock years ago, and it never made an lasting impression on me. You probably didn't pick that up because I didn't use expressions like "meh".

To refresh your memory, some of Moorcock's books are about a guy who finds himself in a war and has to fight alongside versions of himself from alternate dimensions. It was a theme he explored in more than one book/series of books.

I just wanna see the guy get a fat check from Gaiman's box office reciepts, that's all I'm sayin'!

You do realise that you cannot patent an idea? and even copyright doesn't extend to just ideas. The idea that a protagonist fights with different version or versions of his/herself is not new, and Moorcock was certainly not the first to explore it. Did Moorcock pay anybody to use the idea of the doomed hero idea? what about Elric's pale features? did he pay someone to use that idea?

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[MuChild]

Whooooa, there Cap'n! While I have been attempting to keep this discussion amiable in tone, if a little spicy for "flavor," you seem to be getting a might worked up.

Bear in mind that what would be tone of voice doesn't come across in email, which, while stylistically weak, emoticons, expressions like "meh" and so forth come in handy while trying to convey the convivial, jocular or otherwise self-deprecatory intent of the writer.

As far as copyright goes, while, true you can't copyrigth an idea....

For example, the copyright which subsists in relation to a Mickey Mouse cartoon prohibits unauthorized parties from distributing copies of the cartoon or creating derivative works which copy or mimic Disney's particular anthropomorphic mouse, but does not prohibit the creation of artistic works about anthropomorphic mice in general, so long as they are sufficiently different to not be deemed imitative of the original.

If Neil Gaiman's idea isn't sufficiently different from Moorcock's, Moorcock should be recognized as the genius he is and well paid, that's all I'm saying. .

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[semiotec]

Whooooa, there Cap'n! While I have been attempting to keep this discussion amiable in tone, if a little spicy for "flavor," you seem to be getting a might worked up.

Bear in mind that what would be tone of voice doesn't come across in email, which, while stylistically weak, emoticons, expressions like "meh" and so forth come in handy while trying to convey the convivial, jocular or otherwise self-deprecatory intent of the writer.

really? I hold to the opinion that using words which concisely convey specific meaning or meanings is a much better form of written communication than using non-descriptive "words" which are weak when spoken and even more useless when written down.

To emphasize my point, I find "meh" to convey nothing of "convivial, jocular or otherwise self-deprecatory intent". In fact, I tend to find the use of it dismissive and bordering on rudeness. Just to show that how useless such expressions are in written language when two people can have such different view of it in the same context.

You think I am getting worked up? Just because I am verbose and disagree with your opinions? or am I reading you wrong again, and you are just being "self-deprecatory"?

Moorcock should be recognized as the genius he is

totally subjective. And the point is that, the idea is not an original one even at the time of Moorcock's writing, so why should he be credited as such? So if you find it to be a better or best execution of such an idea, it still does not justify why Moorcock deserves to gain from other people's rendtions of the idea.

Re:Michael Moorcock Ripoff anyone?

[shinma]

You know they're friends, yes? In fact, Gaiman wrote a short story called "One Life, Furnished in Early Moorcock," for an Elric tribute anthology back in the mid-nineties.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Eternal Champion

[codeheed]

'versions of himself from different alternate realities to try and maintain the cosmic balance'

Sounds very Michael Moorcock to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_Champion/

Re:Eternal Champion

[MuChild]

Thanks for the link, I didn't think of that. I'm sorry I beat you to the punch and so you got modded down.

And they call this superteam

[Anonymous Coward]

The Fantastic One

How about this one?

[MS-06FZ]

"Gaimans'" means there's more than one Gaiman
"Gaiman's" means there's one Gaiman

With Love,
The Grammar Police.

Re:How about this one?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Gaimans'" means there's more than one Gaiman

You ever been to San Francisco?

Re:How about this one?

[MS-06FZ]

"Gaimans'" means there's more than one Gaiman

You ever been to San Francisco? Well, I suppose it would be pretty lonely if there were just one Gay Man... But I'm pretty sure it's pronounced "guy man"

Re:How about this one?

[Fred_A]

"Gaimans'" means there's more than one Gaiman

Shouldn't it be Gaimen then ?

Okay... So let me get this right

[Colin Smith]

The premise of the novel is that it's better to have a permanent, eternal and unwinnable war between two opposing forces than it is to join one side, defeat the other side and have a subsequent eternity of peace?

Re:Okay... So let me get this right

[Rakishi]

Or more likely an eternity of enslavement and oppression under the heel of the winning side.

Re:Okay... So let me get this right

[great throwdini]

The premise of the novel is that it's better to have a permanent, eternal and unwinnable war between two opposing forces than it is to join one side, defeat the other side and have a subsequent eternity of peace?

Interesting. That's the same underlying premise of the Avatars storyline from Charmed seasons six and seven. When did Gaiman turn into a couch potato in love with the WB? Or maybe just Alyssa Milano?

Re:Okay... So let me get this right

[Colin Smith]

The Roman Empire absorbed their conquests and they became romanised citizens of the empire. The British Empire did the same. Then there's the Mongol empire, China etc. The song remains the same.

The bad bit, is the fighting. When that ends, it's business as usual, it doesn't really matter who wins to the average person, it's just a change of leadership.

Re:Okay... So let me get this right

[TheRaven64]

Depends on the weapons the war is fought with. An economic 'war' fought between rival corporations, for example, is better than a monopoly in a lot of ways. The Cold War, with the associated accelerated rate of technological growth, was almost certainly better than a McCarthyite or Soviet super-state.

Re:Okay... So let me get this right

[Anonymous Coward]

I do hope your kidding, and know that the whole notion of dual forces in stalemate until a chosen one pops out is old old old...

Books of Magic...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the premise sounds very similar to the last part of the Books of Magic comic concerning Timothy Hunter which was also created by Gaiman. For those of you who haven't read the comic, it's actually quite an interesting and has already concluded. However, it suffers from a lot of people who think it is a Harry Potter ripoff even though it was created before it.

hopefully...

[semiotec]

if this fleshes out, I hope it will turn out better than MirrorMask and Neverwhere.

Granted, both MirrorMask and Neverwhere were originally written as scripts, but I just thought they lacked that dark atmosphere in his books. The reworked Neverwhere novel did regain that feel though.

Re:hopefully...

[Dachannien]

I really liked MirrorMask, actually. Of course, I haven't read the story, so perhaps I'm missing the point you're getting at, but I thought it was beautifully done. In particular, it had an appropriate level of darkness for kids around age 10-13 who could really learn something from it (and in some cases, desperately need to learn the lesson contained therein), but at the same time avoided being boring for adults.

Re:hopefully...

[Fred_A]

Given its tiny BBC budget, I thought that Neverwhere wasn't too bad actually. I read the book before figuring out it actually was a reworked script, then ordered the BBC DVDs since it was never broadcast here (France) and wasn't too disappointed. Granted the sets were a bit wobbly in places and the actors weren't all that great but for a shoestring budget production they did ok.
It would deserve to be reworked as a proper movie IMO but Hollywood would probably insist on relocating it to Los Angeles or something...

Re:hopefully...

[Ganesh999]

I can't agree with the implied criticism of "MirrorMask". I simply loved it, so did my wife.

Sure it lacked mass appeal; it was very much an "art-house" feel, and the cast of only 7 or so people ensured that the film felt more like a screenplay (not necessarily a bad thing in my opinion - check out "Dogville").

But the plot was inventive and quintessentially Gaiman, and the acting was top notch. Costumes and sets were simple but well thought out, and seeing Dave McKean's usual style of artwork transformed from the static page to cgi was absolutely jaw-dropping; it felt like 3D, somehow.

Weirder, both the wife and I had really powerful, lucid dreams that night. How many blockbusters can you say *that* about?

Original.

Conrad

Re:Hey queer!

[PurifyYourMind]

Hahhaa. Good point. The best part is how silly the moderation system is: I posted this same comment three times. Twice it was "offtopic" and once it was a "troll". Well, which is it? Just goes to show how arbitrary it all is. P.S. I really did poop my pants.

Okay, how about a Beowulf cluster?

[frankie]

Yes, really! Although the bit about Interworld is somewhat interesting, this would have been a much better article if it explained the surrounding context: Neil Gaiman is hitting the silver screen in a BIG way right now. His graphic novel Stardust is coming this August, loaded with an astonishing number of name actors. And for the money shot, Gaiman's adaptation of Beowulf follows up in November, with another big batch of stars.

Re:Okay, how about a Beowulf cluster?

[njfuzzy]

Don't forget Coraline (by the director of Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach) coming in between Stardust and Beowulf.

Re:Okay, how about a Beowulf cluster?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately imdb says that Coraline will come out in 2008.
But still : all this Gaiman movie news gave me goose pimples.

Good Omens.

[ushering05401]

Tastes differ... so I will offer up some slightly contrary advice. American Gods was not nearly as good as Good Omens... the collaboration done with Terry Pratchett. Good Omens is a Douglas Adams like send up about the anti-christ and the end of the world.

Just my $.02 for someone looking into Gaiman for the first time.

Regards.

Spider-clones?

[Midnight Voyager]

It's the Spider-man Clones incident all over again... *headdesk*

Since Gaiman is on-topic

[anethema]

Anyone who enjoys Alice-in-Wonderland type stories, the book Neverwhere by Gaiman is probably one of my favorite books ever.

Does an excellent job of telling a Wonderland type story where the protagonist is thrown into a totally different world, fairly close to this one. It is certainly my favorite work by Gaiman (much more so than American Gods, which seemed to be more 'critically acclaimed')

Amazon page: http://www.amazon.com/Neverwhere-Novel-Neil-Gaiman /dp/0060557818/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/103-3732875-4118235 ?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1182206627&sr=8-2

Re:Since Gaiman is on-topic

[Gryle]

I've always thought Gaiman's Coraline to be his more Alice-in-Wonderland-style work, even though it's a children's book. Neverwhere strikes me as more of an "Odyssey" type of novel.

Re:Since Gaiman is on-topic

[Xeth]

Bah. I never linked Neverwhere. It just felt like some lameass goth (to distinguish from cool goth, which does exist) masturbation fantasy, where the protagonist is whisked away to a world of magic and wonder, while the rest of the normals drudge away at irrelevance, and all because he's just "oh-so-special". It certainly had some good moments, but the overarching themes just left a bad taste in my mouth.

Re:Since Gaiman is on-topic

[NoMaster]

... and all because he's just "oh-so-special"

How so?

I mean, think about it. He's in the company of someone who can open doors in space and time, a mythical hero, and a mysterious being of supreme self-confidence. Occasionally assisted by an odd oracular figure, they're on the run from 2 unstoppable killing machines on a quest to assist a trapped angel so s/he can reveal the answer to a mystery.

What's 'oh-so-special' about Richard?

<spoiler>
Compassion - he stopped to help someone in trouble, at considerable immediate personal cost (much more than he knew at the time). At the end, the favour is returned.
</spoiler>

It's 'The Wizard of Oz', with Richard a considerably less annoying Dorothy...

Re:Since Gaiman is on-topic

[anethema]

I agree with the above post. He isn't special at all, other than that he was a 'good person' and stopped to help Door.

Other than that point, to each their own opinion.

Neverwhere was one of the few books I've read that I reread with only 1 book in between (Usually I wait at least a couple months)

Definitely one of my favourites of all time (Think that honour goes to Dune.)

Re:Since Gaiman is on-topic

[anethema]

Thanks, havent read. I'll have to check it out.

Matrix Story...

[Tteddo]

I thought this addition to The Matrix was awesome: http://whatisthematrix.warnerbros.com/cmp/neil_g.h tml

It's a Long Way to Tipperary

[Nom du Keyboard]

It's a Long Way to Tipperary.

And a much longer way from optioning a property to seeing it on the silver screen. I wouldn't be getting in line for tickets yet.

Swell

[mgabrys_sf]

They'll have a green ogre and a fucking donkey fart and shit all over the place for laughs in a crappy cgi epic.

I'm so fucking excited.

It's not just Hugos

[reason]

From his website, "Neil Gaiman is the winner of 3 Hugos, 2 Nebulas, 1 World Fantasy Award, 4 Bram Stoker Awards, 6 Locus Awards, 2 British SF Awards, 1 British Fantasy Award, 3 Geffens, 1 International Horror Guild Award and 1 Mythopoeic."

Many of these are judged awards, not fan awards.

Zenith

[forgotten_my_nick]

I haven't read interworld but the synopsis in the OP sounds like morrisons Zenith Phase IV.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenith_(comics)

Sounds like Naruto to me...

[bwiles81]

A super-team made up of multiple versions of himself? Kage bunshin no jutsu!

Cold War better than Pax Americana...

[patio11]

... unless you lived in any of the countries America and the USSR ended up using as proxy battlefields. Then the war was a lot less cold and trading in the war for a blowhard senator starts looking pretty darn attractive.

(I never really get the comparisons of McCarthyism and Communist purges. Not saying that parent is engaging in them, but I heart a lot of that sort of talk in college from folks who were, in the main, fortunate that their only exposure to Communism was the Che Guevara shirt they wore in high school. McCarthy's political machinations resulted in some people getting fired and being unable to find work. Thats bad. Communism resulted in millions of people being executed and many more millions being killed by democide (intentional artificial famines and the like). Thats worse.)

Re:Cold War better than Pax Americana...

[Fred_A]

I never really get the comparisons of McCarthyism and Communist purges.

I believe people make the comparison because both were irrational and used the same propaganda tools, not because of their consequences for those subjected to them.

Neverwhere

[d^2b]

I really enjoyed the BBC (mini)-series, maybe even more than the book. The production values are a bit variable, but I thought it good fun. IIRC, the TV series was first in this case.

Neverwhere.

[Organic Brain Damage]

Read it. When you finish, weep because it is all over.

Neil Gaiman is one of the best writers working in the English language today. He has worked in an unusually wide variety of formats, from comics (not my thing really) to children's books (Coraline and I Traded My Dad for Two Goldfish) to novels to short stories to movie scripts. I've probably missed some.

That Gaiman happens to write stuff Nerds tend to like makes it Slash-dot-worthy.

P.S. It is pronounced gay-man.

Ripoff?

[elrous0]

I know I've heard this exact premise before. There was a series of stories (ran in Asimov's, or might have seen it in Dozois's "Years Best Science Fiction" anthology) with almost the exact same premise. A boy starts encountering future and past versions of himself, pulled in from other universes. The versions team up and use their powers and foreknowledge to fight fires, do good, help each other, etc.

Re:Ripoff? Everyone has done it

[Anonymous Coward]

There's nothing new under the sun. The idea of multiple versions of a single person interacting has been around for a long while now. See Joanna Russ' the Female Man, plus everyone else's two cents in these comments. Everyone has read something similar at some point.

Heck, A Christmas Carol would have been the same if Dickens had lived in an era of scifi instead of ghosts.

Get over it.

Alternate versions?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

> 'about a boy who finds himself in the middle of a war between two equally
> powerful forces, who joins a super-team consisting of versions of himself
> from different alternate realities'

I hope he isn't like the average Slashdotter!

Slashdotter from First Reality: I've brought you all here today to help me stop this war. You, there! What's your special ability?

Slashdotter from Another Reality: Uhhh, I can surf for porn?

Slashdotter from First Reality: Yeah, ok. How about you then?

Third Slashdotter: I can surf for porn, too. Really well!

Slashdotter from First Reality: Uhhhh. Great. And you?

Fourth Slashdotter: If you have to ask...!

Slashdotter from First Reality: No, I suppose not. Ok, then. Is there anyone here who can do anything besides surf for porn really well?

Eighty-Third Slashdotter: I know how to hire a prostitute.

Slashdotter from First Reality: Uhhh, well...

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: I can surf for porn really well!

Slashdotter from First Reality: We have enuf of that already!

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: Not this kind of porn...

Slashdotter from First Reality: (In Peter Griffen voice) Uhhh, yeah?

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: It involves a mother and her adult daughter and some four legged animals.

Slashdotter from First Reality: Really! I did not know that! Where is it?

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: What's it worth to you?

Seventy Seventh Slashdotter: I'll trade ya a link to some porn starring Sandra Bullock, who, in your reality, evidently became a big movie star.

Slashdotter from First Reality: No, wait...

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: Done deal! What else's anybody got to offer?

Twelfth Slashdotter: Your Alyssa Milano, a dog, and your Jessica Alba, but with a third mutant arm?

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: You're on!

Nine Hundred Seventeenth Slashdotter: The girl who played Mimi in Drew Carey Show...

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: (In Quagmire voice) Oh god, no!

Nine Hundred Seventeenth Slashdotter: No, wait, in my reality, we have an anti-obesity pill she started taking as a child. She's a 5'10" gorgeous redhead.

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: Bring it on! Bring the pills, too, could ya?

Nine Hundred Seventeenth Slashdotter: You got it!

Fifty Seventh Slashdotter: I don't have any porn or pills of interest, but I do have a force field we can use to keep out the other losers and only let in copies with something to offer.

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: Right this way, sir! (Turns on force field, blocking out most of the copies.)

Slashdotter from First Reality: No, wait! We have this war to stop!

One Hundred Twenty Third Slashdotter: That's your problem. And no, you can't come in. We don't need "Obama Girl" Youtube videos, thxbie.

Re:Hey queer!

[MrCopilot]

how silly the moderation system is: I posted this same comment three times. Twice it was "offtopic" and once it was a "troll". Well, which is it?

It's not arbitrary at all.

Once, it is offtopic,
twice, still offtopic,
thrice is trolling pure and simple.