Thu 11 Feb 2016
Archived Mystery Review: MAX FRANKLIN – Charlie’s Angels.
Posted by Steve under Reviews[17] Comments
MAX FRANKLIN – Charlie’s Angels. Ballantine, paperback original; adapted from the ABC-TV series. 1st printing, January 1977.
I think perhaps this was actually the pilot episode that was adapted here, a made-for-TV movie shown in advance of the series itself. Charlie’s client is an heiress to a valuable estate in California wine country, or she will be if she’s allowed to return safely to prove her claim. The task of Kelly, Jill and Sabrina is to pave the way, solve a murder, and collect a quarter of a million dollars in the process.
I don’t know why anybody would read this. People who watch the show must watch for visual attributes not possibly duplicated in print. People who don’t watch know what the are missing.
Max Franklin is a pen-name of mystery writer Richard Deming, and he obviously read the script and has watched the show. I don’t think he added anything, however, and it all seemed pretty flat to me. Perry Mason never had much background personality either, but he did do his own thinking. What would the Angels do without Charlie?
Rating: D.
[UPDATE] 02-11-16. With IMDb available now, and not back in 1977 when I wrote this, I can now confirm that my assumption in the first paragraph is correct. This novel did indeed adapt the pilot episode, first shown on ABC on 21 March 1976. There were five of these novelizations in all; presumably episodes of the series itself were adapted in later books.
February 11th, 2016 at 6:58 pm
This series was a huge, huge hit at the time. So much so that you may have noticed that in writing up this review I did not feel it was necessary to explain who Charlie was, nor Kelly, Jill, or Sabrina.
February 11th, 2016 at 8:20 pm
And it remains an icon added with the remakes that you still do not need to explain who the characters are.
I am a fan of these TV/Film tie-in books. Before video taping reached the home these books were one of the most popular ways for fans to own and preserve favorite TV series and films.
Best of the group were the Man From U.N.C.L.E, Babylon 5, and the film remake of The Avengers (Steed and Peel – 1998). U.N.C.L.E. and B5 told original stories, and the B5 paperbacks added more depth to the many plots and characters of the series.
The book tie-in to The Avengers did something the film did not – explained what was happening. The movie had a terrible test screening and the producers gutted the film. I had read the paperback before and enjoyed the movie. I also realized without the book the movie was a confusing mess.
Today the tie-in book plays less a role in promoting the film or TV show than it did in the pre-VCR days. But books still remain an important part of TV series such as Doctor Who and Star Trek as well as the movie Star Wars.
February 11th, 2016 at 10:26 pm
I think Michael that after almost 40 years, you have answered my question. Why would anyone want to read this, I asked. Now I know, and it makes sense.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:39 am
You can find the details of these books on TV Tie-Ins, by Kurt Peer, published by (appropriately enough) TV Books. I have the second edition, published in 1999; I strongly suspect that a revised third edition would likely double in size (from 364 pages, including indexes).
I believe there’s a similar volume, also compiled by Mr. Peer, called Movie Tie-Ins, covering the same basic territory; I’ve been looking for it lately (no luck so far).
February 12th, 2016 at 2:25 am
The DOCTOR WHO novelisations were either written by the authors of the TV shows, or by writers who worked very closely on the show. The result was that they very often the books stand as a sort of statement of ‘This is what the TV story would have been like had the budget been high enough’.
The Val Kilmer SAINT movie was awful, but the novelisation by Burl Barer is much better. He is a fan of the original Charteris books, and the tie-in has an almost obsessive level of referencing and in-jokes, meaning that it’s worth reading the book again just to check that you’ve noticed everything.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:22 pm
Burl Barer has written an original novel featuring the Saint (approved by Charteris estate) entitled CAPTURE THE SAINT.
As Bradstreet noted above DOCTOR WHO had tie-in paperbacks published by Target Books. Written by the original teleplay writer adapting the episode, the books were aimed at children. They have been invaluable for filling in for currently lost episodes of the TV series.
But more importantly is how Virgin publishing tie-in books saved Doctor Who and play a major role in the series surviving to this day.
When Virgin took over the books from Target it was limited by the BBC on what it could publish – mostly adaptions. When the TV series was cancelled Virgin got the BBC’s permission to do original stories. The result was some of the most delightful sf fiction of the time. Writers for the series called THE NEW ADVENTURES OF DOCTOR WHO included new writers (at the time) such as Mark Gatiss (SHERLOCK, DOCTOR WHO), Paul Cornell and Gareth Roberts – even Russell T. Davies (who was the showrunner that brought the Doctor back to TV) wrote a novel for the series. Writers from the TV series joined in including Ben Aaronovitch, Terrance Dicks and former producer Barry Letts.
Paul Cornell created a new companion for the Seventh Doctor, Professor Bernice Summerfield that would gain her own book series that I believe is still running.
Bernice is a favorite of mine. She – like the Doctors (all of them)- has her own audio adventures from Big Finish Production that continues to delight fans today.
It was these books that kept people interested in the Doctor and bugging the BBC for its return.
Books for STAR WARS and STAR TREK have done the same.
Another fun part of tie-ins is when the stars write one such as Patrick Macnee’s Avenger fiction book DEADLINE (with Emma Peel of course) and BLAKE’S 7 Paul Darrow.
Today the Doctor Who books are back under the control of BBC. An endless variety of titles exist, some for children others for adults. Some have directly tied into a TV episode. If you are a fan of any of the past Doctors the books continue to tell his adventures and keep him alive.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:48 pm
Following up on my previous comment.
Is it safe to say that in general, the demise of the novelization form of the TV tie-in paperback came at the same time as VCR’s came into general use? By “novelization” I mean taking an actual episode of a TV show and writing it up in print form.
After that, it is my impression that TV tie-in’s came more often than not in the form of original stories. Some of these tie-in’s lasted longer than the various series themselves, such as MONK, MURDER SHE WROTE and others not coming to mind.
With exceptions, of course, including the DOCTOR WHO paperbacks, which as Michael has just pointed out, novelized stories that were lost or otherwise unavailable for viewing.
February 12th, 2016 at 1:55 pm
I have been thinking about the fact that I gave this book by Franklin/Deming a “D” rating. As I recall I did not give many books back then either D’s or F’s.
The reason is simple. If a book was that bad, I never finished it.
In this case, I am sure I was not rating the TV show, and I’m fairly certain that I was not rating Deming’s writing. What I think I was thinking was this. Suppose someone came along and picked up to read this book without knowing anything about the TV series. What would they think about the book?
Using my last paragraph as my only guide, now 40 years later, I don’t think the story itself, in printed form, was all that good. You had to see it, in other words, on the small screen, to appreciate its other values.
February 12th, 2016 at 2:00 pm
Mike Doran, Comment #4
I did not know about the book by Kurt Peer. If I’d known about it a few years ago, I’d have picked up a copy right away. Now that I’m downsizing my collection, it probably wouldn’t be as useful now as it would have been when it came out.
But I am sure I have another book that lists all of the TV tie-in’s known to the author at the time, not this one. I think the author’s name was Moe, and it was probably self-published, since a quick search on Google didn’t find any reference to it.
Anyone have any idea of the book I am thinking of?
February 12th, 2016 at 2:55 pm
My vote for best tie ins of that era would include THE WILD WILD WEST by Richard Wormser, which was a novelization of an episode and not just a tie in.
Among the writers to tackle TV Tie Ins are Lawrence Block (MARKHAM), Stuart Kaminsky (ROCKFORD FILES), Thomas Disch (THE PRISONER), Richard Jessup (as Telfair, DANGER MAN), Harry Whittington (MAN FROM UNCLE), Keith Laumer (THE AVENGERS and THE INVADERS), Walter Wager (I SPY as John Tiger), Martin Caidin (SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN),Henry Kane (PETER GUNN), Frank Kane (JOHNNY STACCATO and LINEUP), Don Tracy (as Roger Fuller THE FUGITIVE and BURKE’s LAW), Nigel Kneale (Quatermass serials, the last one an actual novel and not merely the teleplay), Roy Huggins (77 SUNSET STRIP sort of, a fix up of his novellas),James Blish (STAR TREK), Max Allan Collins (BONES and others), Charles Grant (X-FILES), and in a way Ian Fleming since both DOCTOR NO and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY were based on teleplays for unproduced television series — COMMANDER JAMACIA and JAMES BOND SECRET AGENT.
In later years some tie ins were actually first published in hardcover like MURDER SHE WROTE, MONK, and ROCKFORD FILES.
Deming did much better on the DRAGNET and MOD SQUAD tie ins than here, but then he had more to work with, though you would think CHARLIE’S ANGELS would have been ideal for Mike Avallone.
In all fairness no few tie ins were highly entertaining though at times better than the series.
February 12th, 2016 at 3:35 pm
There is a website for the organization for Tie-In Writers.
http://iamtw.org
Check out their award called the Scribe.
Lee Goldberg has done a great book on the subject entitled TIED IN: THE BUSINESS HISTORY AND CRAFT OF MEDIA TIE-IN WRITING.
It is a collection of essays by such writers as Donald Bain, Burl Barer, Raymond Benson, Max Allan Collins, and others.
As for the reason why adaptations are less common than original stories, the VCR theory is my own. But it sounds likely. Other reasons could be allowing the reader to continued to experience new adventures of favorite characters now cancelled. The Babylon 5 books did both. They adapted the TV Movie episode but also did original series on various part of the B5 Universe that allowed readers to learn more about PSI Corps, the Shadows, Techno-Mages, and characters such as Bester. I suspect but don’t know the sales of the originals were better.
Another reason could be the studios. BBC refused to let Virgin do new adventures of the Doctor until BBC cancelled the series and no longer cared what happened to the character.
Sales of STAR TREK and STAR WARS have no doubt encouraged studios to give the tie-in writers some freedom with original stories. Especially when the books can be considered non-canon if necessary.
February 12th, 2016 at 6:35 pm
I always felt a little cheated when I read a TV tie-in and it was a novelization of an episode. Chances were, I’d already seen the TV version, and I wanted new stories.
When I wrote the WALKER, TEXAS RANGER novels, the first one was a sequel to one of the TV episodes.
February 13th, 2016 at 8:10 am
James Reasoner’s comment just about sums up my opinion of movie and TV tie-in novels. I’ve never liked them and would rather read a stand alone novel, not a rehash of the movie or TV show.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:39 pm
I think everyone prefers the original story versus a rerun in a book.
James Reasoner, how much freedom did you have writing the WALKER, TEXAS RANGER? Was the series still on? Were any of the books original stories?
Tie-in books were used as promotion material to get people aware of a TV series and interested in watching it. Studios and producers wanted to keep control over their characters.
One of the more interesting new developments with tie-in books is its increased importances to fans. When STAR WARS made it recent return to the theaters one of the loudest questions the fans had was about the tie-in books and how much of the tie-in books (and cartoons) were canon. The studio and JJ Abrams had to announce that none was canon. This did not please many fans who had their own personal favorites of the books they wanted included in the official Star Wars Universe.
A tie-in book to me is like watching a TV adaptation of a character from a book. It allows me to enjoy the characters I like and am interested in through another medium and POV.
Fiction is as much about characters as it is story. Find characters you enjoy and it does not matter how you share time with them – book, TV, film, audio stories, cartoons, etc.
February 13th, 2016 at 2:17 pm
A quick scan of the Kurt Peer book, crossed with my own memories, indicates that there’s no clear line between adaptations and originals; both types of novels can be found going back as far as the start of TV tie-ins.
Richard Deming’s Dragnet books are all originals (including the Whitman ‘YA’); so are all the others he wrote for other shows down through the years.
William Johnston, who wrote more TV tie-ins than just about anybody, always wrote originals, from the ’60s through (I think) the ’80s.
Cross-referencing, all the Man From UNCLE books from Ace were originals, running contemporaneously with the series in the mid-’60s. The same holds for Wager’s I Spy andMission: Impossible novels, as well as many one-offs for shorter-running series.
My memory of that time tells me that script adaptations were in the minority – originals held sway until about the mid-’70s, when name writers (such as Avallone, Johnston, Deming, and others I can’t call to mind just now) gave way to “house-name” writers. (Exceptions will be noted by others of you).
Plainly, this whole topic is far more complicated than any of us have thought; a whole shelfload of books could be written on the subject, over and above the ones that have already been cited here.
Our friend Max Allan Collins, who has novelized film scripts, preferred to do originals when he took on TV tie-ins; I believe he has mentioned this divergence on his own blog a time or two.
February 13th, 2016 at 7:03 pm
Max Allan Collins is a co-founder of IAMTW (see comment 11).
He wrote a chapter in Lee Goldberg’s book TIED-IN (also see above comment 11). He focused on two of the many tie-in books he has written, DICK TRACK and ROAD TO PERDITION. Collins was writing the DICK TRACY comic strip at the time of the 1989 film and has much interesting to say about the experience – including why the first five printings of the novel did not include the identity of who-done-it.
His experience with ROAD TO PERDITION was most informative about life as a tie-in writer doing an adaption of a movie. Collins wrote the original graphic novel the film was based on.
Collins wrote, “I wrote a 100,000 word-novel, staying faithful to the screenplay but filling in and around, with the backstory and expansion only the creator could provide.”
Dreamworks Licensing refused to accept the novel, demanding nothing in the book could exist unless it was in the film.
“The bottom line is,” wrote Collins, “even working on a tie-in based on material I had created, I was a hired hand. It’s the saddest reality of our business, but a necessary one to grasp.”
February 13th, 2016 at 8:17 pm
I’ve resisted long enough. I’ve just bought Goldberg’s book. Thanks, Michael!