While most readers would undoubtedly conclude that Dick is by far the more talented writer, when it comes to film adaptations, literary talent seems to have very little to do with the quality of its cinema counter-part; goods book turn into lousy movies and lousy books sometimes make for good films. Both Dick and Crichton have an impressive resume of film adaptations, and both have an almost equal match of stinkers and hits. Comparing them is difficult, for they make undeniably different types of stories, and of course they themselves often have little to nothing to do with their movie adaptations or how good or poor they are, but it is nonetheless interesting to see how their filmic resume’s match up.

ANDROMEDA STRAIN versus SCREAMERS

ANDROMEDA STRAIN may be dated in its thirty-five years of age, but it still remains as a tense and well-crafted thriller; SCREAMERS, while only being a decade old, immediately stands out as a forgettable mid-90’s sci-thriller, along with other duds of the day like THE RELIC and MIMIC. While SCREAMERS has an interesting premise it’s simply too tired and clichéd, and often feels like a TV movie; Andromeda, though rough around the edges, still manages to hold viewers on the edge of their seats.

Winner: Crichton

CONGO versus IMPOSTER

A truly epic battle of B-movies: killer apes versus killer robots! While IMPOSTER may have Tony Shaloub and Gary Sinise, how can any combination of B-actors match Congo’s roster of Bruce Campbell and Tim Curry? Well, in all fairness, CONGO is indeed a much better movie anyway. Cheesy? Yes. Improbable? Yes. Fun? Yes—it takes itself with tongue firmly in cheek, while IMPOSTER is dragged down in its own pomposity. The genre of film where jungle explorers uncover ancient ruins and killer beasts and must defend themselves with crystal-powered lazer guns is truly a rarity, and Congo manages to accomplish this with a respectable budget to boot. A true B-movie that’s equal parts Ray Harryhausen and Ed Wood, they really don’t make ‘em like this anymore.

Winner: Crichton

13TH WARRIOR versus TOTAL RECALL

I’ll admit it: I didn’t mind 13TH WARRIOR. Maybe it’s because I have a huge fascination with Viking lore but I didn’t find it the absolute mess that others seemed to; on the other hand, I often feel like TOTAL RECALL is overrated. Its design and visuals are flat and fake looking, and for all its clever elements it’s mixed amidst the silliness of the 80’s action movie vernacular. But I must admit: TOTAL RECALL is a really fun movie. 13^th Warrior can be quite captivating and interesting at moments—and its first act is quite engrossing. Total Recall too starts out on a terrific note, full of intrigue and first-rate noir-like thrills—but as its clever first act ends the film quickly reveals itself as yet another Arnold Schwarzenneger kill-fest; while that in itself is not bad by any means, its disappointing because the film seemed poised to be more clever than that. But at the same time—it’s a hell of a ride. If you’re going to veer off into action-film stupidity it better be at least done in a fun manner, and with the madman who brought us ROBOCOP at the helm this is easily accomplished. When you see Arnold Schwarzenneger rip a man’s arms off and then throw them at the carcass as it falls down an elevator shaft while spouting a one-liner, you’ll know that you are watching a style of movie that certainly is not made anymore. 13TH WARRIOR, on the other hand, when it veers away from its fleeting intrigue, is simply clunky and messy.

Winner: Dick

SPHERE versus MINORITY REPORT

With stunning cinematography of Januzs Kaminski, the serious star power of Tom Cruise, the imagination of Phillip K Dick and the confident directing of Spielberg this should be an easy victory…yet, some may be shocked when I say Sphere, to me, is far superior. Although it may be a sly rip-off of Stanislaw Lem’s SOLARIS, it nonetheless has enough intriguing and unique elements to make it its own legitimate entity. Barry Levinson crafts a film around the subtle performances and psychology of its characters—and with fine performances from Dustin Hoffman, Sharon Stone, Peter Coyote, Liev Shreiber and Sam Jackson, that’s no minor sentiment. The star however is the story and its twists and turns—the discovery and exploration of an alien, or apparently alien, craft and its mysterious entity within, and the subsequent psychological entanglements that result is utterly fascinating. The film—like the book—of course breaks down in its last act; just as it seems like its really heading somewhere interesting it becomes a tired and predictable psychological thriller that’s too conventional to stand up to the intrigue of its first two thirds. MINORITY REPORT, on the other hand, simply seemed dull all around to me; an interesting story, well made, and with some very good scenes. But it never drew me in. SPHERE did. I know I can’t be alone in this opinion.

Winner: Crichton

THE LOST WORLD versus A SCANNER DARKLY

Though both films drew somewhat mixed reviews, I happen to think they are both absolutely top notch. SLACKERS director Richard Linklater perfectly captures the paranoia and sad depression of the futuristic world seen through the cataract of drug addiction in A SCANNER DARKLY; the script is smart and the dialog and characters are the usual fine Linklater standards—with the story twisting and turning, it accomplishes the rarity of respecting the audience enough to allow them to be confused about aspects of the plot as it weaves around in circles, and the film finishes on a thought-provoking and surprisingly emotional note. THE LOST WORLD on the other hand is pure adventure, a quick-moving thriller that’s much darker than the almost whimsical first entry; not as imaginative as that film, it’s still equally tense, as one sequence where a character lays pressed against a glass bottom teetering over a cliff has an almost Hitchcockian flair to it. The effects are even better than the groundbreaking original, and the characters, while not as memorable as the first film, retain distinction and aren’t sacrificed by the story. Many complain about its GODZILLA-like ending but I loved it—the film is a B-movie after all, but unlike its third installment its construction is still competent. It’s worth noting, however, that Spielberg’s film is quite different from the novel. Perhaps I’m just pre-disposed towards dinosaurs that I’m inclined to say I might enjoy Spielberg’s film a tad more, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the underrated and experimental A SCANNER DARKLY will continue to gain a cult following as the superior picture.

Winner: Dick

JURASSIC PARK versus BLADE RUNNER

Here it is: the true clash of the titans. JURASSIC PARK represents one of the most important adventure films in history, easily giving KING KONG a serious run for its money, while BLADE RUNNER stands as one of the most important science fiction films ever made, ranking alongside 2001. BLADE RUNNER dazzles the eye with its dense composition, its visceral reality, its absolutely authentic design and visualisation, told with total confidence by Sir Ridley and with layers that continue to reveal themselves with each subsequent viewing. JURASSIC PARK on the other hand is pure whimsical fun, cinematic imagination at its best, filled with wonderful characters, a great story, and danger and thrills of the best-crafted sort. Clever and funny, scary and exciting, it’s an all around piece of first-rate Hollywood entertainment. In many ways these two films are total opposites. Comparing them not only presents the same dilemma when deciding if WIZARD OF OZ is better than STAR WARS, it presents the sort of “uncomparability” that would result in trying to decide if AMERICAN GRAFFITI is better than TAXI DRIVER—one is not “better” for they are equal class, they should be most accurately thought of as “different”; in the end it simply comes down to personal preference. Personally, my first instinct is to say I prefer JURASSIC PARK, but I also realise that when I make lists of my favourite films BLADE RUNNER always makes the cut while JURASSIC PARK usually does not; in terms of entertainment, JURASSIC PARK certainly takes the cake, though BLADE RUNNER stays with me in a different but perhaps more intimate manner. In any event, one can honestly say that these two films are absolute top-notch classics in their respective genres and in cinema in general.

Winner: Draw?