I've enjoyed the first two seasons of the TV series, so I decided to try the books, or at least the first one of the series.
It's pretty good -- competent space opera, no breaks to explain the functioning of ray guns -- heck, no ray guns as such! -- and the same general story.
What I didn't expect was that the book would be a little less complex than the TV series. In part, this is because of inherent differences in storytelling; a novel can put you in a character's head or dash off a little exposition on the fly but dramas on screen or stage have to show you. The scriptwriters have done a masterful job of just that, combining a few "background" characters to create a kind of prototypical hardscrabble Belter and the TV series is the better for it. As a specific recurring character rather than a few bit players, he would have been a distraction in the book.
Watching and reading The Expanse makes me want to see TV-series adaptations of hard SF from bigger (or older, anyway) names -- C. J. Cherryh's "Alliance-Union" universe and much of Robert A. Heinlein's output are now well within the capabilities of teleproduction and the (re?)emergence of long-form "serials" provides the right scale for a novel. Maybe a little Larry Niven? Many of his short stories might make fine movies.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
1 year ago