Ridley Scott looking to film The Forever War

[Darth Ruinus]

Ridley Scott puts off Brave New World for The Forever War

You wait 25 years for a new Ridley Scott science fiction film then two come along at once. Not content with hatching a plan to bring Brave New World to the big screen, the British director of Alien and Blade Runner is to adapt Joe Haldeman's 1974 novel The Forever War.

Scott confirmed in October that he would be bring Aldous Huxley's dystopian classic to cinemas with Leonardo DiCaprio in the main role. At the time he was quoted as saying: "I waited for a book for 20 years and I have got the book. That will definitely be what I do next after Nottingham, the Robin Hood film (with Russell Crowe)."

It now appears the tome in question may not have been Brave New World, although Scott still seems certain to film Huxley's novel at some stage. Variety reports this morning that The Forever War will be the film-maker's next project after Nottingham.

"I first pursued The Forever War 25 years ago, and the book has only grown more timely and relevant since," Scott told the trade bible. "It's a science-fiction epic, a bit of The Odyssey by way of Blade Runner, built upon a brilliant, disorienting premise."

Haldeman's novel centres on a soldier who returns home from battling aliens for a few months in space to find his home planet has advanced many years into the future, and is unrecognisable. One aspect of the new society which jars with returning military types is the pre-eminence of homosexuality, which has been encouraged by the government to help relax overcrowding.

Scott recently acquired the rights to the book and is now looking for a writer to adapt it for the big screen.

[Grumman]

One aspect of the new society which jars with returning military types is the pre-eminence of homosexuality, which has been encouraged by the government to help relax overcrowding.

Just what we need: a movie about the government telling returning veterans it wants them to become homosexual, crafted with all the skill that brought us Prometheus.

[Imperial Overlord]

It's not really like that. Homosexuality does increasingly become the norm (I don't recall any government encouragement but I haven't read the book in years), but it's part of a society that becomes increasingly alien to the veterans as a thousand years pass back home over the course of the war.

[Murazor]

It's not really like that. Homosexuality does increasingly become the norm (I don't recall any government encouragement but I haven't read the book in years), but it's part of a society that becomes increasingly alien to the veterans as a thousand years pass back home over the course of the war.

Population growth control purposes, if memory serves.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

Probably end up seeing this at some point, but to my mind The Forever War actually suffers from trying to be a war story as well as what it's really about, which is that you can't go home again.

The drive they use basically involves ramming black holes- singularity based- and there is serious time dilation involved, which seems to increase as the war goes on and gets more widespread; out for a few weeks' patrol cruise, back in five years on the first mission turns to going to establish an outpost, back in three centuries on the last.

The problem is that the military doesn't change as much or as fast as the homeworlds do, so even though he claims to be a pacifist, the main character never separates out and settles down- never really has to come to terms with what is changing- because he can always go back home to the war.

The homosexuality is a side effect of the need for maximum possible efficiency; at some point around the 2400s-2500s, the human race went full eugenic, progressively replacing the entire population with vat grown super- humans, who were so inclined partly for population growth control and partly to prevent genetic drift away from the ideal. (It subsequently turns out that the enemy did exactly the same.)

Haldeman lays on the military satire with too heavy a hand, too, with technology progressively defeating itself to the point where in the last battles they are literally back to bows and arrows, spears and shields; defending a starbreaker bomb dump a million light years from home with scutum and gladius.

Contrast and compare with Stanislaw Lem's Return From the Stars, which has civilian explorers with minds full of alien wonders coming back from years in the far beyond and discovering that in the time they have been away, their homeworld has become the strangest place of all; that's basically the story Haldeman was trying to write, and only got it more or less right because he kept too much war in.

It should be interesting to see how Ridley Scott hits the balance on the big screen, if it gets that far.

[Stark]

Or maybe the story is about Vietnam. :v

I'm not sure what is worth making a movie about, though. They'd have to add so much it'd be basically unrecognisable and the central thrust is an extremely common one (however much nerds might argue).

[Tanasinn]

Or maybe the story is about Vietnam. :v

This. Story comes off as a tale about the alienation a soldier faces returning home from a protracted war with a distinctly Vietnam flavor.

The Forever War also does a great job of cutting big fat holes in the "glory of war" and "honor of soldiery" memes.

[Stark]

That's right, and that's why it's strange they talk about the plot elements they do. All the stuff about homosexuality is just like people in the 50's complaining they didn't fight WW2 for a permissive society - they had been left behind by social change, and whether it was good or bad they still felt lost and 'outside'.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Just what we need: a movie... crafted with all the skill that brought us Prometheus.

This is sarcasm I can get behind.

[Grumman]

That's right, and that's why it's strange they talk about the plot elements they do.

It's strange to treat a movie as more than a main theme and two hours of filler? I know the main theme is the alienation experienced by a veteran after returning from war, but I want more from a movie than to be told something I already know. That's where the other elements come in, and where I personally find The Forever War lacking. I do not enjoy the premise of the long, dumb war or the nonsensical use of homosexuality, so I do not like The Forever War despite liking other fiction that explores the same theme.

[Vendetta]

It's strange to treat a movie as more than a main theme and two hours of filler? I know the main theme is the alienation experienced by a veteran after returning from war, but I want more from a movie than to be told something I already know.

It's about Vietnam and the counterculture revolution of the 1960s specifically. All this progressive social change that was happening ostensibly driven by the generation the soldiers fighting in Vietnam were part of happened completely without them, leaving them "fighting for" a country that they no longer recognised.

[PainRack]

It's not really like that. Homosexuality does increasingly become the norm (I don't recall any government encouragement but I haven't read the book in years), but it's part of a society that becomes increasingly alien to the veterans as a thousand years pass back home over the course of the war.

There was, but it occurred much later in the book, after the protagonist returned to Earth as a company leader. And even here, it was more of norming and such, we simply don't know what the government measures at promoting homosexuality was outside of the vats.

There's a couple of major themes in the movie, such as how the war was a mistake and confusion.... settled when the newly hive man was able to communicate with the aliens... or how the war progressed and its technology.... but it would be hard to engage my interest. I predict this easily becoming Battlefield Earth if it tries to stay true to the source material.

Either focus on the "this is war and REAL soldiering" bits or the disorientation and not being able to go home again bits, and how the protagonist get screwed at everything, even though he doesn't even like war/pacifist, he still keeps returning back to it because its where he fit in and such.

[Irbis]

So, judging by reactions, I am apparently one of the few people who would like to see the movie?

Although I must say I am a bit baffled by reactions. Apparently, we read different books as Forever War never had, let me quote 'telling returning veterans it wants them to become homosexual' or 'nonsensical use of homosexuality'; Yes, it dealt with society changing, but if anything changes were too small for 1140 year long period. Homosexuality becomes norm among soldiers cloned for efficiency/disposability? Yeah, that surely can't happen, nor can long, dumb wars start over misunderstanding...

Hell, you can even move all the 'alienation' stuff to the second plane showing it instead of telling, and still make grand spectacle of all the combat scenes the book had to hook common audience. Who said it needs to be boring movie if done well?

[eyl]

So, judging by reactions, I am apparently one of the few people who would like to see the movie?

Although I must say I am a bit baffled by reactions. Apparently, we read different books as Forever War never had, let me quote 'telling returning veterans it wants them to become homosexual' or 'nonsensical use of homosexuality'; Yes, it dealt with society changing, but if anything changes were too small for 1140 year long period. Homosexuality becomes norm among soldiers cloned for efficiency/disposability? Yeah, that surely can't happen, nor can long, dumb wars start over misunderstanding...

Hell, you can even move all the 'alienation' stuff to the second plane showing it instead of telling, and still make grand spectacle of all the combat scenes the book had to hook common audience. Who said it needs to be boring movie if done well?

Didn't encouragement of homosexuality start before cloning? IIRC, when the protoganist returns home the second or third time, his mother is living with another woman and it's already being encouraged.

[Vendetta]

So, judging by reactions, I am apparently one of the few people who would like to see the movie?

I can't see how the movie will effectively convey the things the book does in a way that will add to my appreciation of the theme, so I don't really care about seeing it if and when it comes out. I've got the book, I can just read that again.

[Irbis]

Didn't encouragement of homosexuality start before cloning? IIRC, when the protoganist returns home the second or third time, his mother is living with another woman and it's already being encouraged.

IIRC government started encouraging it due to overpopulation problems, but it was year 2080 and Earth's population crossed sustainability barrier. Also, second return home? There was only one, and his mother died during it. Second return was in 2400s, far past any relatives surviving. In any event, no one forced or encouraged veterans to do anything, Mandella and Marygay remained heterosexual out off their own free will.

I can't see how the movie will effectively convey the things the book does in a way that will add to my appreciation of the theme, so I don't really care about seeing it if and when it comes out. I've got the book, I can just read that again.

Just like people can read Lord of the Rings so it was worthless movie?

I don't know, I am interested in any well done SF movie, anything that can revive genre is a big plus for me.

[Vendetta]

Just like people can read Lord of the Rings so it was worthless movie?

Yep. But, y'know, fatnerds love fanservice. Which is largely all that the LotR movies were. (I have had people seriously argue that the movie of the Hobbit is good because it contains vast quantities of middle earth fanservice, despite these being roundly condemned as the things that make it a bad movie and adaptation).

Given the choice I will always choose to read Lord of the Rings over watching the movies, that means that yes, the movies are worthless. (Hell, given the length of the ultimate fatnerd versions I could probably read the book quicker as well, I could probably read The Hobbit in less than the runtime of the one movie so far released.)


And this is even without considering the themes present (such as they are in the book, they're very much not the point), which the film doesn't address at all. Whereas The Forever War is led by its theme, which it was intentionally written to convey, and which I do not believe would be conveyed easily by a film. (Remember that the things that are important to the theme are what happens between Mandella's tours, which in any likely film adaptation are the bits that are going to get the least attention because Hollywood likes explosions and shouting, meaning that the sense of social alienation which is the point of the book is not going to be given time to develop.)

Film is a bad way of doing this story.

[jollyreaper]

Simple prediction. This was written in partial response to Starship Troopers. Just as ST's themes were lost in the adaptation, FW's will be as well. We will be left with two lobotomized messes humped up into shapes that vaguely resemble movies but bear little relation to their source material. So there will at least be a kind of symmetry in that.

[Stark]

Is there a rationale there or are you just throwing darts at a wall?

[Connor MacLeod]

I never picked up on the Vietnam analogy when I read it (although I can understand it being there), I always just figured it was mainly about the time dilation (or rather the impact it had on the person subjected to it) and the fucked up nature of war in general, especially having read Forever peace after it.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

It makes more sense if you know some of the rest of Haldeman's work, particularly 1968. He was already a science fiction writer when he went, and- this is more or less what he says in the foreword to that, that it really messed with his head and he wrote The Forever War as a means to bring what was keeping him more or less sane, his writing, to bear on what was driving him nuts, the war.

1968 is the book- it's an autobiographical novel, fictional version of himself as the main character, where he peels back another layer of the onion and tries to do it straight. Actually he can't; he's walking around the jungle with a head full of science fiction, spinning plots as he goes- or claims to have been. Bits of the (apparent) first draft of The Forever War occur to him while in a fever from an infected shrapnel wound, for instance.

So, I don't think the book's "about" Vietnam in itself- Because of it, hell yes. The feedback loops between fiction and reality are just too tangled up for one explanation that simple, though. He's trying to make sense of the situation and ignore it at the same time, turning it into science fiction to avoid having to deal with his experiences directly, trying to purge it and trying to explain it both; it's one of the biggest modern examples I can think of of the use of allegory to elude the truth. As art, I think FW suffers from trying to be too many things and serve too many purposes at once.

Let's face it, a lot of writers managed to write about their war experiences without going via Pluto, Beta Geminorum and the Great Magellanic Cloud; some of Baen's lot were there, I think, but the only other really big name I can think of directly bridging the two is David Drake- and nobody, but nobody, is going to film the trail of slaughter and devastation the Slammers leave in their wake; he describes something the same, though, writing as DIY psychotherapy.

The one Vietnam War novel I would like to see filmed, as probably the only one left that matters, is the one by Bao Ninh- the autobiographical novel from a North Vietnamese Army veteran. That could be worth doing.

[StarSword]

Simple prediction. This was written in partial response to Starship Troopers. Just as ST's themes were lost in the adaptation, FW's will be as well. We will be left with two lobotomized messes humped up into shapes that vaguely resemble movies but bear little relation to their source material. So there will at least be a kind of symmetry in that.

As I recall Verhoeven's plan was to satirize the book by showing us what he thought a military-run society, as per the original Heinlein, would actually end up as. 'Course, I also heard that it was originally an unrelated "bug war" script that got the ST name unceremoniously stamped onto it, but either way I don't think it's really a fair comparison since ST never really began as a faithful adaptation in the first place.

Point is, I don't think we've got an absolute guarantee of the same thing happening, though given what Ridley Scott did with what started as the adaptation of The Sheriff of Nottingham by Richard Kluger, it's certainly possible.

[jollyreaper]

As I recall Verhoeven's plan was to satirize the book by showing us what he thought a military-run society, as per the original Heinlein, would actually end up as. 'Course, I also heard that it was originally an unrelated "bug war" script that got the ST name unceremoniously stamped onto it, but either way I don't think it's really a fair comparison since ST never really began as a faithful adaptation in the first place.

I'd heard the satire story as well. I'm all for satire, vigorous debate, and the clash of opinions. I just think it's not cricket to make a movie billed as an adaptation that's really satire. Much as I dislike Ayn Rand, if I want to make a critique, I'd call it Atlas Wanked, not make it the official film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.

I can't find the quote but I remembered reading something from the SFX guy along the lines of "We can't afford the cost of doing good-looking power armor but the bugs are all really scary and cool so fans of the novel will be pleased."

I'll concede that Scott may not have the same satirical agenda, assuming that story is true. But a mess of a movie by any other name, yannow?

[Grumman]

Hell, you can even move all the 'alienation' stuff to the second plane showing it instead of telling, and still make grand spectacle of all the combat scenes the book had to hook common audience. Who said it needs to be boring movie if done well?

I think doing The Forever War as a grand spectacle would go against the nature of the book. The Forever War is two empires grinding impotently against one another for centuries, where the defender is always technologically centuries ahead of the attacker. It is a World War One where the tank cannot exist.

[Tanasinn]

Starship Troopers is definitely satire, but not of the novel it purports to adapt. Verhoven never read the novel.

Works very well as a too-early satire of the war on terror debacle, though.