Author Habits That Annoy You

[Christopher]

Agreed, it very much is a prequel to Asimov's collection. I left the theater and could imagine how this "worked" within Asimov's future history.

Aside from it being hard to believe that Susan Calvin ever looked like Bridget Moynihan. (Although in my youth, I imagined Calvin looking like Sally Kellerman. I guess her coldness reminded me of how Gary Mitchell described Elizabeth Dehner as a "walking freezer unit." Both Calvin and Dehner -- and Number One in "The Cage" -- are exemplars of the pre-feminist idea that a woman could succeed in a traditionally male field, but only if she were cold, aloof, and sexless.)

 

[Greg Cox]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I prefer the original artwork, too.

Okay, here's the thing: movie tie-in covers are NOT aimed at folks who already love the book or author. Heck, those folks have presumably already bought and read the book.

Movie tie-in covers are an opportunity to introduce the original book (and author) to potentially hundreds of thousands of new readers who many have encountered the book before -- and who may never encounter the book otherwise. Which means hundreds of thousands of new readers discover the original book, which is a big win in my book -- for the book and the author.

And, trust me, movie tie-in covers absolutely bring in new readers, sometimes giving older, out-of-print books a whole new lease on life.

Three examples from my own career at Tor Books:

What Dreams May Come by Richard Matheson was literally out-of-print when the Robin Williams movie went into production. I reprinted it with the movie poster on the cover and it hit the New York Times Bestseller List. As far as I know, it's still in print to this day.

Ditto for The Mothman Prophecies by John Keel. Same deal there. The book was out-of-print until Keel's agent alerted me that the Richard Gere movie was in the works. I hastily acquired the publication rights for Tor and arranged to reissue the book with the movie art on the cover. Again, it hit the NYT List, which meant more readers (and royalties) for the then-elderly author.

And then there was I Am Legend. I reissued that book with Will Smith on the cover and, ohmigod, the sales went through the roof. We sold something like 500,000 copies of that edition. I actually had the pleasure of phoning Matheson to tell him that his classic 1954 novel was finallly a New York Times Bestseller. (#2 on the Mass-Market List, actually.)

That was a good day.

So, yeah, in my opinion, any publisher who doesn't put out a movie tie-in edition when the opportunity arises is guilty of professional malpractice. And never mind if it offends the literary purists.

I mean, who doesn't want to a whole new audience to discover a favorite old book?

(And, trust me, neither Keel nor Matheson objected to the huge boost in their royalties.)

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

As a compromise, you could have a new cover as the dust cover, with the old one printed on the book inside, or a cover you can flip around and choose which one you want your copy to display,

 

[Christopher]

So, yeah, in my opinion, any publisher who doesn't put out a movie tie-in edition when the opportunity arises is guilty of professional malpractice. And never mind if it offends the purists.

Not all tie-in editions are created equal, though. My next Patreon rewatch series will be the Minority Report movie and its short-lived TV sequel (which I finally managed to track down), and I wanted to read the original Philip K. Dick novelette as well, so I requested it from the library. I was expecting a collection of multiple PKD stories, but what I got was a 104-page, large-print hardcover chapbook of just "The Minority Report" by itself, $12.95 for just one novelette. It was released the same year as the movie and said "Now a Major Motion Picture" on the cover, so it was clearly meant as a movie tie-in, yet it had no images or logos from the movie, so I guess the publishers (Pantheon Books) didn't get in touch with the filmmakers, but just independently rode on their coattails. Bizarrely, the chapbook was bound on the top of the page instead of the side. I guess the idea was to emulate a detective's notebook, but it made it awkward to read.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I have the "Emily of New Moon" trilogy. Book 1 features an image of Martha MacIsaac, who played her in the TV series. Books 2 and 3 are drawn cover art.

The one on the right is instead this:

 

[Greg Cox]

Not all tie-in editions are created equal, though. My next Patreon rewatch series will be the Minority Report movie and its short-lived TV sequel (which I finally managed to track down), and I wanted to read the original Philip K. Dick novelette as well, so I requested it from the library. I was expecting a collection of multiple PKD stories, but what I got was a 104-page, large-print hardcover chapbook of just "The Minority Report" by itself, $12.95 for just one novelette. It was released the same year as the movie and said "Now a Major Motion Picture" on the cover, so it was clearly meant as a movie tie-in, yet it had no images or logos from the movie, so I guess the publishers (Pantheon Books) didn't get in touch with the filmmakers, but just independently rode on their coattails. Bizarrely, the chapbook was bound on the top of the page instead of the side. I guess the idea was to emulate a detective's notebook, but it made it awkward to read.

One always tries to work with the studios to get the movie art in time, but sometimes it takes a lot of effort and sometimes things fall through. In my experience, the trick was to keep calling and emailing until you got the right person. And it helps, of course, if you develop a good working relationship with Warner Bros. or whomever.

One bizarre situation I've run into multiple times is having to convince somebody in Publicity or Licensing that their big new movie is, in fact, based on a preexisting novel. Believe it or not, not everyone working at the studio is aware of this sometimes, or at least if the movie is not based on some currently hot new bestseller.

"Hang on, Greg. There's a book?"

"I'll Fedex you a copy."

 

[Avro Arrow]

So, yeah, in my opinion, any publisher who doesn't put out a movie tie-in edition when the opportunity arises is guilty of professional malpractice. And never mind if it offends the literary purists.

I don't care so much when we're discussing physical books. If it's something I already own, PRH or S&S or whoever isn't going to break into my place to replace my copy of the book for a newer version. I just don't like it when an ebook is constantly updated to the newest cover version. And yes, I get that you don't really "own" ebooks, and you're just paying for a license, and the rights holders can basically do whatever they want to that ebook. But I still don't appreciate it, and will continue to complain about it online whenever it comes up!

 

[DGCatAniSiri]

One always tries to work with the studios to get the movie art in time, but sometimes it takes a lot of effort and sometimes things fall through. In my experience, the trick was to keep calling and emailing until you got the right person. And it helps, of course, if you develop a good working relationship with Warner Bros. or whomever.

One bizarre situation I've run into multiple times is having to convince somebody in Publicity or Licensing that their big new movie is, in fact, based on a preexisting novel. Believe it or not, not everyone working at the studio is aware of this sometimes, or at least if the movie is not based on some currently hot new bestseller.

"Hang on, Greg. There's a book?"

"I'll Fedex you a copy."

Reminds me of a YouTube reviewer I watch, Dom Noble, who does a series analyzing adaptations, and I believe it was Die Hard that had an addition to his usual graphic of him doing a poll of if people had read the original that those he polled had to be convinced that it was based on a book…

 

[Tosk]

I vaguely remember in high school getting into an argument with another kid over my copy of the Total Recall novelization. "Yes, the movie is based on a book, but not this book. This one was written based on the movie, and the movie was based on an older story..."

 

[Greg Cox]

Actual conversation I had many years ago:

"So, I hear you're remaking Psycho?"

"Oh, it's too early to talk about doing a novelization, Greg."

"Novelization? No, I want to do a tie-in edition of the original novel."

"Novel? Our new movie isn't based on a novel. It's a remake of the Hitchcock film"

"Which was based on the novel by Robert Bloch."

"Really? Are you sure about that?"


And, trust me, I've had this same conversation about various other movies over the years.

 

[Nerys Myk]

As a compromise, you could have a new cover as the dust cover, with the old one printed on the book inside, or a cover you can flip around and choose which one you want your copy to display,

Seems like unnecessary additional production expense.

 

[Greg Cox]

I vaguely remember in high school getting into an argument with another kid over my copy of the Total Recall novelization. "Yes, the movie is based on a book, but not this book. This one was written based on the movie, and the movie was based on an older story..."

Yep, there was a novelization by Piers Anthony, based on the movie based on the story by Philip K. Dick.

Indeed, the whole topic of novelizations of movies based on pre-existing books or stories is a whole other can of worms.

My favorite example is Paul Monette's novelization of Herzog's Nosferatu the Vampyre, which is a novelization of a remake of a silent movie (illegally) based on Dracula by Bram Stoker.

 

[Tosk]

And I'll admit it now, way back when I first got into Blade Runner I was disappointed there was no "real" novelization.

Actually, now that I think about it I might still be.

 

[Dukhat]

I felt the same way about Forrest Gump.

 

[James Swallow]

And I'll admit it now, way back when I first got into Blade Runner I was disappointed there was no "real" novelization.

Actually, now that I think about it I might still be.

Actually, there is a novelization of the movie - Blade Runner: A Story of the Future by Les Martin, published by Random House. But it's long out of print and 2nd-hand copies aren't cheap.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Seems like unnecessary additional production expense.

In regards to the Emily of New Moon trilogy I mentioned upthread, it came as a box set. Both the box and the cover of book 1 had a TV show still as its cover image, IIRC (I've lost the box somewhere). They could have just put the TV image on the box and kept the drawn cover for book 1. But I suppose they were selling them individually, too, with the same book cover.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Indeed, the whole topic of novelizations of movies based on pre-existing books or stories is a whole other can of worms.

My favorite example is Paul Monette's novelization of Herzog's Nosferatu the Vampyre, which is a novelization of a remake of a silent movie (illegally) based on Dracula by Bram Stoker.

Then, of course, there's the case of Moonraker, which (glancing over the Wikipedia article) turned out to be slightly more convoluted than I'd realized: Fleming's 1955 novel (which was itself derived from a screenplay) was about a missile, and had little in common with the 1979 movie other than Bond, Drax, and the title, and so a novelization was commissioned from Christopher Wood.

As to Nosferatu, I've seen the Murnau version (possibly twice), with live organ accompaniment, but not the Herzog version. (And I'm pretty sure I hit upon "Yes, we have Nosferatu! We have Nosferatu today!" before I ever saw Dracula: Dead And Loving It.)

 

[DonIago]

I don't know how blasphemous it is to say so, but I found Starship Troopers the novel to be a significant let-down after having seen the film. Whereas I found the film to be an enjoyable action-packed satire, the novel was far more about the talkiness of it all, and more concerningly seemed to play the politics straight.

I don't think I've ever found any conclusive evidence as to whether Heinlein actually believes the things he seems to espouse in the novel. I've heard his views became more conservative over time, but man, I'd hope not.

What kind of blew my mind was that in the closing credits for 12 Monkeys I believe it indicates that there's a novelization, and I can't imagine any novelization of that film being nearly as compelling.

 

[KRAD]

Okay, here's the thing: movie tie-in covers are NOT aimed at folks who already love the book or author. Heck, those folks have presumably already bought and read the book.

Movie tie-in covers are an opportunity to introduce the original book (and author) to potentially hundreds of thousands of new readers who many have encountered the book before -- and who may never encounter the book otherwise. Which means hundreds of thousands of new readers discover the original book, which is a big win in my book -- for the book and the author.

And, trust me, movie tie-in covers absolutely bring in new readers, sometimes giving older, out-of-print books a whole new lease on life.

Three examples from my own career at Tor Books:

What Dreams May Come by Richard Matheson was literally out-of-print when the Robin Williams movie went into production. I reprinted it with the movie poster on the cover and it hit the New York Times Bestseller List. As far as I know, it's still in print to this day.

Ditto for The Mothman Prophecies by John Keel. Same deal there. The book was out-of-print until Keel's agent alerted me that the Richard Gere movie was in the works. I hastily acquired the publication rights for Tor and arranged to reissue the book with the movie art on the cover. Again, it hit the NYT List, which meant more readers (and royalties) for the then-elderly author.

And then there was I Am Legend. I reissued that book with Will Smith on the cover and, ohmigod, the sales went through the roof. We sold something like 500,000 copies of that edition. I actually had the pleasure of phoning Matheson to tell him that his classic 1954 novel was finallly a New York Times Bestseller. (#2 on the Mass-Market List, actually.)

That was a good day.

So, yeah, in my opinion, any publisher who doesn't put out a movie tie-in edition when the opportunity arises is guilty of professional malpractice. And never mind if it offends the literary purists.

I mean, who doesn't want to a whole new audience to discover a favorite old book?

(And, trust me, neither Keel nor Matheson objected to the huge boost in their royalties.)

I'm quoting @Greg Cox in his entirety because it bears repeating. Putting the movie poster on the book cover is a good for everyone, most especially the author of the book for the reasons Greg outlines here.

 

[Christopher]

I don't know how blasphemous it is to say so, but I found Starship Troopers the novel to be a significant let-down after having seen the film. Whereas I found the film to be an enjoyable action-packed satire, the novel was far more about the talkiness of it all, and more concerningly seemed to play the politics straight.

That's similar to my own reaction, although when I first read the novel, I assumed Heinlein was also being satirical, because the characters' self-satisfied arguments about how well their system worked fell apart when I realized they were predicated on the unexamined, unproven assertion that they did actually work, making them circular arguments. No less a science fiction luminary than Gardner Dozois informed me (when I posted the opinion on the discussion board that Analog used to have) that he had known Heinlein personally and had known him to be sincere.

That said, there are things about the film that haven't aged well, like casting a bunch of non-Hispanic white people as characters named Rico, Ibanez, and Flores. I think Verhoeven said somewhere that he was satirizing whitewashed casting, but it's not really satire if you just do the exact same thing.

I don't think I've ever found any conclusive evidence as to whether Heinlein actually believes the things he seems to espouse in the novel. I've heard his views became more conservative over time, but man, I'd hope not.

My understanding is that he didn't necessarily believe wholeheartedly, but was open to exploring it as a thought experiment. Maybe he believed some of it, the importance of contributing usefully to society, but was more flexible about the rest.