Posted on 04/03/2004 1:23:26 PM PST by Long Cut
Personally, I believe that UQ could live as a movie without the history lesson, for one good reason: The central concept of the latter half of the book, that is, the persecution of law-abiding citizens by corrupt politicians and unelected beureocrats, and the results of such persecution on "the wrong man", is still an excellent and gripping tale without the history.
You do not need to trace the entire history of gun ownership in America to introduce the character of Henry Bowman himself. You just need some time to set him up as what he is...a member fo America's Gun Culture which has existed since this nation's founding. It could be explained what licenses and permits he keeps, what weapons and where, and so forth. He is portrayed as a law-abiding, proper and prosperous citizen.
Then, his life is turned upside down by agenda-driven BATF agents who care nothing for what he may or may not have done, and everything about their budget and careers.
MANY Americans have been through similar trials with gov't agencies to one degree or another. This, if presented correctly, would strike a hell of a chord.
The third act would be Henry's campaign to fight back, presented as was in the book...less a blatant shoot--em-up than a war of wits and tension that he fights primarily with his mind and skills at life.
Three hours, you've got it. And many people outside of Washington, NY, and LA would line up to see it and cheer once they did.
As for a thread, why don't we start one?
Give me a minute....
They might not butcher this one too much. Although I bet they leave out the little pissant left wing Congressional aide (to a character than envokes ,for me anyway, McGovern) that was helping the VC/NVA by passing info to the KGB. "Mr. Clark" took care of that one, and his buddy was "turned" to pass false information to the KGB. (Agent Cassius IIRC). to include them would be even less PC than the nuclear terrorists in "Sum of All Fears" being middle eastern.
I agree, they didn't. But I think the latest one, "The Teeth of the Tiger", which involves young Jack the son born in "Patriot games", does. Maybe he just got a better ghost writer? Either way, it's a vast improvement over "Red Rabbit", which is the only Clancy I've not reread. "Red Storm Rising" is still my far and away favorite though. Although I enjoyed "Red October", which I first read parts of in the Naval Institute Proceedings. SUM and RAINBOW I didn't really care for much, but "The Bear and the Dragon" I liked. So it's not so much a case of degradation over time, but rather of spotty quality. Or at least of spotty appeal to my preferences. :)
Best Fregards.
" Not that Clancy cares. He gave up fighting the Hollywoodheads a long time ago and just sits back and cashes their checks, now."
Maybe he is smart.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.