![]() ![]() I don't imagine Clarke spent much time sitting about Paris cafes whilst empathetically trying to put himself in the minds and shoes of others. All his characters read like aspects of one character, which is presumably Clarke. There are very few women and they're psychologically no different than the men, which may explain Clarke's own engineering failure with the fairer sex. Beginning with the bad of the novel, any honest appraisal of Clarke's work needs to recognize that the man was no Dostoevsky: his characterizations tend towards cardboard cutouts, bureaucrats and technocrats running about grand projects, giving us blurbs of Clarke's often pedantic thought dressed up as dialog. Like most who are going to watch this, I've read Childhood's End (CE) several times. ![]() The real problem is however the story and how it's made worse in this TV re-imagining. As other reviewers have pointed out, this TV movie has some serious continuity errors and like most TV sf it's derivative. Because it will be a lot less boring than this movie. If on the other hand you want great literature and serious adult philosophical discussion about the good questions posed by this story then take a philosophy class. ![]() Still, if you like decent sf, then read the book and don't waste your time with this dumbed-down TV version. In summary: the novel is a fun read for sf fans because of its concepts, but like much of sf it lacks any serious understanding of human nature or great philosophical issues. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |