Still way more involvement than I would have expected from them having seen it.

According to the Wiki entry (can't seem to access the source quotes), it didn't change that much from the original screenplay, but they ended up changing the ending and giving more screen time to the gang and he let the actors change their lines to make them more natural. It appears Gale and Zemeckis were actually…

It seemed to want to recreate that 48 Hours dynamic, but, as probably goes without saying, Belushi is no Eddie Murphy.

Right. I could see current Pete Holmes doing this, but not still heavily Christian Pete Holmes.

As hilarious as Alien 3?

Yeah, I'm guessing that series keeps him living a more comfortable lifestyle than the average cult filmmaker who hasn't had a real hit as director in 30+ years. He and Giler also wrote the Alien 3 script, or at least are credited with writing that Frankestein monster of a script.

O'Bannon wrote the original screenplay, and Hill and his partner David Giler rewrote it with an eye for Hill to direct. Eventually he opted not to direct and didn't take credit for the rewrite, although I gather that they could have, having done some 8 drafts and creating major plot elements. I believe he's still…

Has anyone ever asked him how he feels about the Alien franchise, considering he wrote the first one?

I'd probably switch SoF and Warriors, but otherwise agree.

I also think he genuinely likes doing crazy shit and being in films that will allow him to do whatever crazy thing (and wear whatever crazy wig) he has in mind.

As much as I have mixed feelings about Southland Tales and The Box, I wish he'd get more opportunities. I imagine it would be very strange to be 42 and being defined almost entirely by a film you made at 24.

Interestingly, the filmmakers had trouble getting financiers involved because of the post-Columbine fear of how a movie about a mentally unstable and possibly violent teen would play with audiences. It's almost like it's bookended by national tragedies.

This is a problem with much of Kelly's work.

There were reports that the Coens were adapting "Black Money" for (I think) Joel Silver around 2015. Kind of a weird book to adapt and wouldn't be my first choice as far as the most cinematic of the Archer books, but if anyone can pull what's special out of it and put it on screen, it's the Coens.

It kind of depends on the book. That's definitely true much of the time; much of his personality comes out in the dialogue and not through any backstory on his part. I'll admit too, what makes Macdonald's books interesting is that it becomes an almost psychological study of the families he works for/against, which…

The movie "Marlowe" with James Garner was an adaptation of The Little Sister. Not sure how faithful it is as I haven't seen it.

I think only Playback doesn't have an adaptation in any form and I'm sure a couple of the short stories haven't been adapted.

How about forget the fake Marlowe novel and someone adapt Ross Macdonald's Lew Archer series already? No one's tried it since the Newman "Harper" movies, which are pretty damn good.

The Long Walk and The Talisman are also great, but they're less horror, but will still give you a great idea of his style.

This. In 100 years I think high school kids will still be reading his short stories in those big American literature anthologies.