Reply to Comment

said:

kink and scott - as is

kink and scott - as is usually the case in these kinds of conversations, the truth is somewhere in between. scott, get used to being called a hack. it's a common slur thrown at successful authors of popular fiction, including stephen king. wear it as a badge of honor. and kink has a point that maybe you should ease up a little before crying rip-off, at least with bug; given that it's based on a play presented in london in'96, chances are that the original idea was developed separately from infection. what remains to be seen is if the film draws upon your work as well. kink, i totally appreciate english not being your first language, but tactful your comments were not. cut scott some slack; there is nothing that upsets an artist more than discovering that other artists have created something similar to their work. sometimes it's the result of common sources of inspiration, and sometimes it really is plagiarism; only time will tell into which category this falls. you had a valid point that scott isn't the first author to address some of the themes he presents; however, those themes are touchstones of his genre. nobly-intentioned genetic experiments gone wrong, primitive descendants of advanced culture and mind control / paranoia proved to be justified are tropes of speculative fiction. what distinguishes the good author from the bad is where he takes it from there. so why don't you crazy kids just kiss and make up?