MovieChat Forums > Fantastic Voyage (1966) Discussion > Issac Asimov's great novelization of the...

Issac Asimov's great novelization of the film


The well-known popular science writer Issac Asimov was so impressed by this film that he wrote the novelization of it. This was the only movie that Asimov ever did this for.

I came across my copy the other day, and would highly recommend anyone interested in the movie get a copy of it. Asimov greatly elaborates on concepts in the film. For example, he gives a fascinating discussion on miniaturization and how it might be accomplished. He also elaborates on the function of the human body and how things work in it.

If you liked the movie, definitely try and get your hands on Asimov's novelization. He adds a ton of info that wasn't able to be put into the movie.

reply

I've read it, and it does go into a lot of explanation as to how it might work. The only problem is beating the uncertainty principle. That was a stretch, but if that didn't work, there would be no story.

reply

"so impressed by"

lol

Asimov was approached and asked to write the novelization, he didn't take the initiative on that, and he saw so many plot holes in the film that he agreed to do so only if he could do his best to correct them in the novel.

Then, decades later, he decided to write another version "Destination: Brain" because he was so dissatisfied with the whole thing.

So no, he wasn't particularly impressed with the film, and he even considered it ridiculous. Writing the novelization was just a paying job.

reply

I was massively unimpressed by the way they left the sub inside the guy's body at the end of the film. Naturally, Assimov had them remove it, because even crush to atoms, it would expand and kill the man they were trying to save.

http://thinkingoutloud-descartes.blogspot.com/

reply

Asimov was brilliant. He crafted a very readable and enjoyable novel from this train wreck. When I was an 11 year old nerd I read his book, saw the movie, and it was heaven. Fifty years later I'm marveling at how awful the script was.

reply

Didn't he also beat the movie to market? My understanding was this led to some confusion as people thought the movie was based on the book.

reply

I first read the book when I was 13. From what I read, he basically took the script and translated it into a book with some of his own flourishes. It covered a lot of stuff that you don't hear about in the film, though his way of moving the story along was a bit tedious, such as using conversation only to move some scenes along. I did like that he compensated for some problems the movie had, such as air pressure differentiation when re-fueling the air tanks using an alveolus of the lung, or goading the white blood cell that ate the bad guy and the sub into following them on their way out of Benes. He also was more realistic in what the antibodies looked and behaved like than the film was. If you can handle slightly drier writing, the book is good.

reply