Newsbuzz: JONATHAN STRANGE & MR NORELL adaptation, Isaac Asimov's FOUNDATION and Tom Hardy's TABOO

The BBC are adapting Susanna Clarke's 2004 novel JONATHAN STRANGE & MR NORRELL into a seven-part series for next year. Peter Harness (Wallander) has written the scripts, which will star Eddie Marsan (as Mr Norrell) and Bertie Carvel (as Mr Strange), two Englishmen living in an alternate 19th-century, who help the British government in the war against Napoleon using magic. It will also star Alice Englert (Beautiful Creatures), Marc Warren (Mad Dogs), Samuel West (Mr Selfridge) and Charlotte Riley (Wuthering Heights).

J.J Abrams adapting Stephen King's time-travel novel 11/22/63 for Hulu

I like Stephen King and J.J Abrams, so anything combining their talents is cause for celebration. However, both men are far from infallible. Abrams has been struggling to find another Lost-sized hit for awhile now (bruised by the flops that were Undercovers, Alcatraz, and Almost Human), and I've lost track of how many King novels I've read with bad endings. I sometimes don't bother starting them now, because there's something particularly irritating about a weak ending when you've spent days or weeks reading something.

Anyway, Hulu have announced they're getting into the original programming game in a serious way, playing catchup with Netflix and Amazon Prime. J.J Abrams is developing an adaptation of King's 2011 novel 11/22/63 for the online streaming service, because King's work is suddenly hot property after the inexplicable success of Under the Dome for CBS.

Keanu Reeves accepts lead role in planned TV action drama RAIN

It seems Keanu Reeves has sensed a change in the air, regarding his box-office standing. He hasn't had a major critical and commercial success since The Matrix trilogy ended in 2003, and last year's dismal 47 Ronin marked a particular low in his career. So what do you do to perk things up? Easy: head for the bosom of television, in search of edgier material that will make audience falls back in love with you again!

DMD contributed to 'The Take2 Guide to Steven Spielberg' – so readers get 20% off this excellent e-book!

Independent e-publisher Take2 are releasing an assortment of e-book guides to various filmmakers, movies, and TV shows over the coming months. I'm one of the many collaborators on this project, so recommend you download their inaugural release—an exhaustive guide to the filmography of Steven Spielberg.

In this publication, my old review of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was included amongst many others from established critics and bloggers—such as Matt Zoller Seitz, Joseph McBride, Jonathan Rosenbaum and James Berardinelli.

Like most e-books, the price is very reasonable ($9.99/£6.16), but DMD readers can get 20% off by inputting the discount code "dmd2020" at Step 2 of the purchasing process. The e-book is also available through most online retailers.

TV News: 24 – LIVE ANOTHER DAY, AMERICAN GODS, HOUSE OF CARDS, SCROTAL RECALL

• 24: LIVE ANOTHER DAY has been assembling an interesting cast, but one of its biggest "gets" has decided to quit. Australian actress Judy Davis (due to play the British widow of an infamous terrorist) has decided to leave the show, citing "personal reasons". Naturally, this vagueness was greeted with theories the actress had second thoughts about what might be a controversial role, or suchlike. Regardless, the producers of 24 are looking to recast. [via The Mirror]

CBS developing adaptation of Anne Rice time-travel novel ANGEL TIME

It's been reported that CBS are developing a pilot for Angel Time; an adaptation of the Anne Rice novel of the same name—the first in her The Songs of the Seraphim series.

The pilot is being written by Josh Harto and Liz Garcia (Memphis Beat), with Joe Carnahan (Narc, The Grey) slated to direct.

I'm unaware of these books, but they apparently involve a modern-day New Orleans hitman called Toby O'Dare (aka 'Lucky the Fox'), who accepts an offer from a mysterious stranger (a 'seraph') to atone for his sins. O'Dare duly finds himself transported back through time to 13th-century England; beginning a quest for salvation in this primitive, frightening setting.

That sounds very interesting. I'm a sucker for a good time-travel yarn, and this sounds like an extreme version of Life on Mars—if Sam Tyler were a villain trying to repent, and found himself going back to the 1270's.

Has anyone here read the books? I don't want any spoilers, but would it bet set entirely in the 13th-century from thereon in? Is is a medieval story that just happens to feature a man from the future? Mind you, I'd be more excited if it wasn't on CBS and written by the duo behind TNT's short-lived Memphis Beat...

Fox commission 'LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN' TV pilot

Alan Moore and Kevin O'Neill's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is one of my favourite graphic novels, but it's best-known as a 2003 Sean Connery film that underwent a critical mauling. However, despite being remembered as a box office dud, the $78m-budgeted movie actually made a profitable $179m at the worldwide box office.

Despite that fact, audience response wasn't favourable and an intended sequel wasn't greenlit. The film's infamously difficult production is also thought to have led to Connery's retirement at the age of 73. The career of director Stephen Norrington also suffered, having publicly clashed with Connery on the League's set, he went into a self-imposed directing exile for 10 years and is only now showing signs of a possible return.

TRAILER PARK: The Time Traveler's Wife

I recently finished reading Audrey Niffenegger's best-selling sci-fi romance The Time Traveler's Wife, having been aware of the book and its imminent movie adaptation for awhile. Consequently, this will be one of those movies that I can't help comparing to the book, which I'm pleased to say was a fantastic piece of work, and not at all the "girly" trash ignorant men assume it is (purely, because it has "Wife" in the title, I guess.) If you like your time travel with emotion, characters and a logical attention to temporal dynamics (and have just cum in your pants at that sentence), then read on...

The story concerns a librarian called Henry who has a genetic disorder that causes him to randomly jump around in his own timeline, and the ensuing relationship with his true love Claire. It's an idea that's not unique in the genre, but it's presented in a very engaging manner and certainly influenced the popular Lost episode "The Constant" and Doctor Who's "The Girl In The Fireplace". The pitfalls and dilemmas of a romance where the man is unstuck in time is handled incredibly well by the book, with non-spoilery situations like Henry first meeting Claire when she's just a little girl and there being occasions where two Henry's exist in the same timeframe. A love-story told from both linear and non-linear viewpoints, basically.

But enough about the book; what about the movie's trailer? Y'know, I have my concerns about this, exascerbated by the fact this film's been delayed for over a year (which is rarely a good sign...) The great news is that Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams appear perfectly cast in these roles, and it's difficult to see how the screenplay could ruin the basic momentum of the book and its various surprises. So, it should at least be engaging. My concern is that the trailer goes overboard with its rom-com style editing and choice of backing tracks, and slightly gives away a few of the book's surprises in the second-half. If I hadn't read the book, I'd probably dislike this trailer and be expecting something of similar quality to The Lakehouse (another time-travel rom-com starring Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock.)

It's only my knowledge and adoration for the book that has me intrigued to see this, and I hope it's a faithful and entertaining translation. The horrible thing about all film adaptations that go badly is that 95% of people will forever associate the film with that story and those characters, and the remaining 5% that first read the book will spend their days defending it to non-bookworms. It's directed by German director Robert Schwentke, whose only notable credit has been the Jodie Foster thriller Flightplan. I'm already envious of The Lovely Bones' fanbase, as their high-concept best-seller is being worked on by Peter "Lord Of The Rings" Jackson, but... we'll see. Still, to be safe, I urge everyone to read the book first! Click the Amazon link on the left, pleeease. You get your best experience of being told a story the first time, so go straight to the source.


Release Dates: 14 August 2009 (UK/US), 5 November 2009 (AUS)
HD Downloads: 480P (48MB) | 720P (116MB) | 1080P (170MB)

To play: right-click link, "Save As...", rename
file "whatever.mov" and double-click.

RIP Michael Crichton (1942-2008)

A belated mention from me about Michael Crichton, the best-selling author most famous for writing Jurassic Park, who died a few days ago after battling privately with cancer. Sad news, especially because I devoured a lot of Crichton's work in the early-90s and he was definitely a writer that eased my progression from child to teenage reader.

I read Jurassic Park before the Spielberg movie's release (and it's always amused me how the sequels borrowed scenes from that source novel), then went on to read Rising Sun, Disclosure, Sphere (which was much better than the film), The Terminal Man, The Lost World, Congo and The Andromeda Strain.

Like a lot of authors I admire, the science in his stories always sounded very plausible and you felt like you were learning while being entertained. After reading his books, I still believe dinosaurs might someday be resurrected, await the discovery of an ancient spaceship lying dormant in the ocean, and fear us having to deal with an alien contagion.

Beyond his books, I've always liked the sci-fi movie Westworld (which he wrote and directed) and appreciated his scientific input on Twister. While never a massive fan of ER (which he co-created), I do remember seeing it in the mid-90s and being amazed by the realism Crichton's real-life training as a doctor brought to proceedings, too. It undoubtedly made every other medical drama raise their game.

For no discernible reason, I moved onto other writers in the late-90s, so I've not read any of his later work (Airframe, Timeline, Prey, State Of Fear, Next), but I'm certainly glad there are a fair few Crichton stories left for me to soak up and enjoy.

TRAILER PARK: Choke

I happen to have read Chuck Palahniuk's novel Choke, which has now been adapted into a movie by Clark Gregg, starring Sam Rockwell as Victor Mancini – a sex addict who pays for his sick mother's expenses by playing on the sympathies of people who save him from faked choking fits in restaurants. While I realize Choke's a very popular Palahniuk novel, I didn't find it anywhere near as intoxicating as Fight Club or Survivor, but it's certainly full of interesting thoughts and gets progressively more intriguing and controversial as it goes along.

I actually think a movie could improve on the novel (as David Fincher proved with the already excellent Fight Club novel), and the casting of Sam Rockwell is inspired. Anjelica Huston plays his sick mother, Kelly Macdonald is a doctor, and Brad William Henke plays Victor's best-friend Denny – who works with him as an historical interpreter.

The trailer was mildly amusing, but I wasn't blown away. The good news is that many of the book's best moments and dialogue aren't spat out in the trailer (indeed, the whole choking thing just gets one brief shot), but there's also not much to inspire people to seek this out. If you've never read Choke, or just don't know or care for Chuck Palahniuk's work, I can't see who would get excited about seeing this. Sam Rockwell's a great actor, but he can't open a movie.

That's probably why the trailer is packed with quotes from early reviewers, proclaiming how brilliant it is, and that it won a prize at the "Sundance Film Festival". That's all very well, and I'll certainly watch Choke at some point -- because it's always interesting to see film adaptations of books you've read... but what about everyone else? Hopefully there's a funnier trailer on the way; one that bathes you in Palahniuk's quotable dialogue and throws in some compelling visuals. The only thing that stuck in my mind here was the glorious poster – a silhouette of Victor scoffing a woman in profile, her slim legs kicking wildly.

HD Download: Hi-Res (18MB), 480P (31MB), 720P (90MB), 1080P (135MB)

Chuck Palahniuk: adaptations and snuff

Slash Film's interview with Fight Club author Chuck Palahniuk, whose novel Choke has just been adapted into a film starring Sam Rockwell. He also talks about the status of other adaptations, the death of Heath Ledger, and his upcoming novel Snuff.

"... because language is what books do very well and movement is what movies does very well..."

ON RADAR: I Love You, Beth Cooper

Hayden Panettiere, who once played a cheerleader in Bring It On: All Or Nothing (2006), before going on to play a cheerleader in TV smash-hit Heroes, has been cast in new movie I Love You, Beth Cooper as... a cheerleader!

Ignoring the typecasting issues for Ms Panettiere, this film from director Christopher Columbus (Home Alone, Harry Potter 1), adapted from a debut novel by Larry Doyle, sounds quite interesting...

Hayden will star as the eponymous Beth Cooper, a gorgeous cheerleader who regularly dates high school hunks, but becomes the target for geek Denis Cooverman's obsession -- after he professes his love for her during his graduation speech.

I haven't read the book, but apparently it's perfect rom-com material. Author Larry Doyle used to work on The Simpsons and most of the book's reviews I've read say it's hilarious. It should make a good movie, I think -- even with the workmanlike direction from Columbus.

But, as much as I enjoy Hayden Panettiere's work on Heroes, she really needs to start moving away from cute, blonde cheerleader roles. Don't you think?

I Love You, Beth Cooper is expected to start filming this spring.

The Golden Compass (2007)

Writer & Director: Chris Weitz (based on the novel by Philip Pullman)

Cast: Dakota Blue Richards (Lyra Belacqua), Nicole Kidman (Marisa Coulter), Daniel Craig (Lord Asriel), Ian McKellen (Iorek Byrnison, voice), Ian McShane (Ragnar Sturlusson, voice), Sam Elliot (Lee Scoresby), Eva Green (Serafina Pekkala), Freddie Highmore (Pantalaimon, voice), Ben Walker (Roger Parslow), Claire Higgins (Ma Costa), Jim Carter (John Faa), Tom Courtenay (Farder Coram), Kathy Bates (Hester, voice), Kristin Scott Thomas (Stelmaria, voice), Jack Shepherd (Master Of Jordan College), Simon McBurney (Fra Pavel), Magda Szubanski (Mrs Lonsdale), Christopher Lee (High Councilor) & Derek Jacobi (Magisterial Emissary)

In a parallel universe dominated by the Magistereum, a young girl attempts to rescue her kidnapped friend in the arctic north...

In a blatant attempt to build itself another Lord Of The Rings-style blockbuster trilogy (a teaser trailer even had the One Ring morph into this flicks' golden compass), the first of Philip Pullman's intelligent, sophisticated and unique fantasy adventures gets a Hollywood adaptation. From the guy who made American Pie.

Okay, that's a cheap-shot. I actually have some respect for Chris Weitz, who showed considerable commitment to the project, and at least seemed to be an anglophile (after he successfully adapted and directed Nick Hornby novel About A Boy.) But, his screenplay for The Golden Compass may contain all the ingredients of Pullman's novel, but it snips away all hint of religious controversy and dumbs down the source material to spoon-feed the literary-aloof.

I expected as much. It's not that The Golden Compass is particularly anti-religion (anti-establishment, really), and it's easily the simplest of the His Dark Materials trilogy to translate into a kid's film. But seeing Pullman's multi-faceted plot and ideas condensed into weak-sauce excuse for a plodding adventure is just inexcusable.

For readers of the novels, you know you're in trouble when the film's opening narration explains parallel universes and daemons (animal "spirit guides" that accompany every character.) The book isn't forthcoming about what a daemon is, or that multiple dimensions are involved in the storyline, for ages... but Weitz's film just dumps all that information on your lap in the first 5 minutes.

Consequently, the sense of discovery is totally missing from The Golden Compass. There are developments in the remaining books (The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass) that are now clearly signposted by The Golden Compass film.

So, armed with full knowledge of parallel worlds and daemons, the film basically becomes a not-very-thrilling adventure for Lyra (newcomer Dakota Blue Richards), a girl on the cusp of adolescence whose best friend Roger (Ben Walker) is kidnapped by "The Gobblers". Lyra takes it upon herself to find him, helped by a truth-telling alethiometer (the titular "golden compass", which it actually doesn't refer to – ask Pullman.)

Lyra's soon off to the frozen north to find her explorer uncle Lord Asriel (Daniel Craig, wasted and miscast), whilst being pursued by icy villainess Ms Coulter (Nicole Kidman, perfect). Along the way she secures the help of a talking bear Iorek Byrnison (Ian McKellen, a distracting Lord Of The Rings reminder), chats with a sexy witch (Eva Green) and inexplicably becomes best friends with Texan aeronaut Lee Scoresby (Sam Elliott, out-acted by his moustache).

Throw in some unfocused musing on "Dust", a tyrannical Magistereum, a hazy witch prophecy, some helpful gyptians, and a horrifying project to split children from their daemons -- and you have quite a perplexing mix of ideas for anyone who hasn't read the books!

I can see the problems Weisz had in making The Golden Compass a standalone movie (as sequels were not guaranteed like Rings and Potter), but in over-explaining some elements and under-explaining others... you just never get a proper handle on anything. And this is coming from someone who has read the books!

But there are some positives. Dakota Blue Richards is shaky to begin with, but settles into the role quickly, turning Lyra into a plausible young heroine by the time the arctic-set sequences arrive. It really would have been disastrous if they'd miscast Lyra, so thank heavens for small mercies that Richards doesn't disappoint.

Nicole Kidman is a great choice for Ms Coulter – personally asked to star by author Pullman, who really should have insisted on the quality control J.K Rowling secured for her Harry Potter books. Kidman's beautiful and suitably chilling, particularly when her daemon (a mute, golden monkey) is on hand to help creep out audiences.

Yes, the daemons are one aspect of Pullman's novel that are done full justice. These animal spirits provide Golden Compass with its one unique idea (everything else has a faint Narnia/LOTR smell about it), and are nicely realized by CGI. Talking animals will never fully work on-screen (their mouths aren't designed for speech, see), but it's great fun to see the kid's daemons shape-shifting, and the idea that pain is shared between a human and their daemon is quite unsettling.

The polar bears are similarly strong, with the standout action moment being a bear fight between Iorek and bear king Ragnar Sturlusson (an unrecognizable Ian McShane.) Actually, it's pretty much the only action moment worth caring about, and will likely wake a few people up from their slumber.

You see, The Golden Compass is a book at heart, and while it contains a number of visual ideas that beg for a screen adaptation, it doesn't really have as much cinematic splendour. The second book is even less cinematic, as it largely takes place in "our world", so you'll have to wait for the third book's showdown to get your whizz-bang thrills...

But is it likely we'll see The Amber Spyglass in cinemas one day? The Golden Compass flopped in the US and, despite the fact it did well overseas and will turn a profit, will its poor domestic box-office cause New Line to cut and run? I hope so; for the sake of completion, but also because the next books get down to the nitty-gritty and will be near-impossible to castrate. The idea does boil down to kids trying to kill God, after all!

So, will the studio have the balls to plough ahead with the trickier sequels, but get in a director with better credentials to handle the material? Weitz gave it his best shot, but he's clearly the Christopher Columbus of His Dark Materials... and we need an Alfonso Cuaron. Quickly too, before Dakota Blue Richards grows up!

Above all, studio execs need to realize that these children's books were successful not in spite of their "controversial" subject matter, but because of it. They were an interesting and provocative mirror to C.S Lewis' pro-Christian Narnia saga, and didn't speak down to their young readers. We should have got a film that stayed true to Philip Pullman's principles, not danced around them with talking bears and flying witches.

A disappointing (but watchable) adaptation for the book's fans, but diverting entertainment for newcomers. Just don't expect to be riveted to your seat, totally understand what's going on, or be rewarded with a decent climax -- the film oddly glides to a premature end, even though the book has a proper cliffhanger it could have reached with better pacing...


New Line Cinema
Budget: $180 million
113 minutes

READY TO CHOKE?

Sam Rockwell has signed on to play Victor Mancini in the movie adaptation of Chuck Palahniuk's Choke, co-starring Anjelica Huston as his mother. Interesting casting, but neither actor fitted my own mental image for their characters, particularly Huston.

If you're unaware, Choke concerns a sex-addict (Victor) who fakes choking in swanky restaurants to form connections with his dining "saviours". Of course, being a Palahniuk novel, there are more layers of strangeness and amusing facts scattered throughout, although it isn't my favourite Palahniuk novel. It dragged quite a bit in the middle.

No, the best Chuck Palahniuk* novel is still Survivor. Of course, Fight Club is his best idea (and he reuses elements of its style/structure constantly), but David Fincher's 1999 film is better than Palahniuk's source material.

I actually just finished reading his latest book, Rant, a few weeks ago. I found it pleasantly diverting, once you settle into the "oral biography" style. I particularly enjoyed the crazy curveball it throws towards the end.

Anyway, any film based on a Palahniuk book is something to keep an eye on. I'm amazed more of the author's work hasn't made the leap to the big-screen, actually. I know Fight Club bombed at the box-office, but it did incredible business on DVD and regularly tops film polls now. Best film of the 90s? Well, it's one of them certainly.

Survivor should get the big-screen treatment next, I think. It's about the last surviving member of a suicide cult, narrating his life's story into the blackbox recording of a doomed passenger jet. It's great stuff, packed with incident and clever asides, but it was sadly pulled from development in the wake of 9/11. Can plane crashes be used as entertainment again, in 2007? It's hardly the basis of the film anyway -- just a framing device.

I recommend you take a look at Palahniuk's work. I haven't read everything of his yet, but of the stuff I have read, I'd recommend Survivor, Rant and Haunted to get you started.

* It's pronounced Par-la-nik.

ROALD DAHL ON FILM

News arrived today that directors Alfonso Cuaron (Harry Potter & The Prisoner Of Azkaban) and Guillermo Del Toro (Hellboy) are going to join forced in bringing Roald Dahl's The Witches to the big screen. Now, I'm not against this in the slightest, because the prospect of these two directors working together on a story as potent as The Witches can only be good for audiences, but... The Witches was already made into a movie by Nicolas Roeg. In 1990. Just 16 years ago!

So technically this is another remake of a Dahl story, and we've already had one of those last year with Tim Burton's Charlie & The Chocolate Factory. But, the previous version to Burton's movie was 1971's Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory. I think a 33 year gap between remakes it a decent space of time to ensure you're not just regurgitating stuff to the same generation. I'm guessing that the kids who saw The Witches (1990) will now be in their late-twenties, so perhaps a 2007 version is justified...

Anyway, the real reason behind this post (oh yes, there is meaning in the madness) is to take a quick look at Roald Dahl movie adaptations. The highs, the lows and the books that remain unfilmed...

For me, Roald Dahl is still my favourite children's author. Like anyone, once you move into adulthood you rarely read children's books, so your favourite children's author usually stays the same for life. These days that line is being blurred more and more, thanks to J.K Rowling and her Harry Potter money-spinner (and Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials, too) but by and large your childhood choice is for life...

Roald Dahl will always be my favourite. Such a shame he died. I remember being genuinely sad for the death of a celebrity -- for probably the very first time. Just knowing that there would never be a brand new Roald Dahl book in the school library was heart-breaking! Every one of his books was a delight to read, although I admit I never read all of them (and still haven't, truth be told). But all the "core books" he's most famous for... consider them read!

Quite a few of Dahl's books have made it to the silver screen. Most notably are the two Charlie & The Chocolate Factory adaptations (1971 with Gene Wilder - iconic and great fun, to 2005 with Johnny Depp -- visually superb, satisfyingly sinister). Dahl's written sequel, The Great Glass Elevator, has never been adapted into a film, though. Perhaps deservedly, as I remember finding the book quite far-fetched and disappointing, but still great fun at times.

Matilda was a recent adaptation in 1996 by director/actor Danny DeVito. It relocated the events to America, which actually worked quite well, and had a perfect cast -- most notably DeVito himself as the slimeball father, Mara Wilson as gifted Matilda and an excellent Pam Ferris as the frightening Miss Trunchbull. Matilda was a more standardized Dahl book in many ways, perhaps more nuanced and less inclined to veer into surrealism. Great book, good movie.

Danny The Champion Of The World is often overlooked by Dahl readers. The film version in 1989 with Jeremy Irons wasn't much of a success, but it did a pretty good job of translating the book's tone and story. I particularly remember reading Dahl's book in the mid-80's and found it to be a "proper" read. There were no ridiculous names and bizarre events -- just a down-to-earth family adventure. A great bridge between childhood and teenaged reading. Excellent book, okay movie.

The Witches. A favourite of mine. I remember being particularly pleased to actually read a book with over 200 pages! It was also superbly detailed with all its ways to spot witches -- great stuff for kids to read. Nicolas Roeg's 1990 film was an excellent translation (it even kept the British setting, unlike other movies). The only fault with the movie was the happy ending. The book was beautifully downbeat. But I can forgive that decision thanks to some excellent casting -- Angelica Huston owned the role as The Grand High Witch.

The BFG. Another favourite, although as the years pass by it somehow loses its mystique because adult logic comes into play. How can a giant give everyone dreams in one single night? Where is this land of giants exactly? How do giants go undetected at night? Blah, blah, blah. But when you're ten, none of that mattered. The best thing I remember is the sense of mystery and the brilliant central character of the BFG. And, yes, there was a film -- albeit animated by Cosgrove & Hall (Danger Mouse). I actually enjoyed the film when it came out, but time hasn't been kind. There are rumours of a live-action version from Python's Terry Jones, though...

James & The Giant Peach. I never really understood the book, to be honest. It was a bit too weird for my taste at the time, although memorable in parts. The movie was interesting with its stop-animation by Henry Selick, but it didn't hold my interest.

So what about the other Dahl books that haven't made it to cinemas? Well, an animated version of Fantastic Mr Fox is nearing completion (I remember enjoying an audio version of the book, having never read it), plus a new version of The Witches as mentioned above. I'm certain George's Marvellous Medicine will probably never happen (it is about poisoning your grandmother, after all!), but I'd love to see The BFG on the big screen sometime soon...

What's your favourite Dahl book and movie?

STEPHEN KING - Cell

Finally got my copy of Stephen King's latest book - Cell. Like many people I've been a fan of Stephen King for years now, but haven't actually read much of his work! Of his forty-odd published works, I can only remember reading Misery, 'Salem's Lot, Pet Semetary, Night Shift and Desperation!

It's a sad state of affairs, I know...

The reason for my King deficit is quite simple. I've never felt the need to read the books, because of all the movie and TV adaptations! Stanley Kubrick's The Shining (disliked by King) remains one of my favourite movies of all time, The Green Mile was a decent film, The Shawshank Redemption is a classic, I remembering being freaked out by moments in the It mini-series with Tim Curry, caught most of The Stand mini-series on TV, Carrie was very unsettling during its Prom sequence, Misery with James Caan was also very enjoyable, and The Shining mini-series was interesting, yet inferior to Kubrick's reworking...

Adaptations of King's novels come in for criticism from his fans, but the movie/TV examples above are all worthy of praise. I'm sure King's original material is just as brilliant (if not better) but I can't read a book of a movie I've seen -- unless it particularly struck a chord with me. As it is, though, I don't care if I never read The Shining or Carrie. I know what happens in those stories, so they hold no surprises for me.

Conversely, I don't care if I never see the movie versions of 'Salem's Lot or Pet Semetary... because I've read the books. Just one of those things. Perhaps I should read the stories that became bad movies -- The Tommyknockers, Dreamcatcher, Thinner, etc? Hmmm.

Cell concerns a "pulse" signal sent to every mobile (er, cell) phone on the planet, turning every mobile phone user into a homocidal maniac. The book has already been picked up for movie adaptation by Eli Roth (Hostel), and its plot has a vague similarity to Spiral - the TV spec script I'm working on myself. So reading Cell can also be considered research for me -- to see how King dealt with his "end of the world" scenario...

A review of Cell will be posted on DMDB in due course. I'm only a few chapters in, but... so far, so bloody...