CHRONS OPTIONED - WRITER HIRED

Post by **Rigel** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:09 pm

I honestly don't get it...

"only the seventh most successful movie of 2008"... What do these people want?

I was under the impression that the majority of movies lost money, so I'd think any successful movie would be a good bet for the studios to follow up with.

In fact, does anyone know what ratio of box office sales to production cost is needed for a movie to break even? For instance, what would a move that cost $50m to make need to sell in tickets for the studio to recoup that investment, and what would it need for them to consider a sequel?

Post by **Zarathustra** » Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:39 pm

I think the problem is the books they are choosing to adapt. But then again, what about Potter?!? Isn't that a wild success?

Another factor may be Jackson himself. You can't underestimate the passion and commitment of that man and the team he assembled.

But in the end, I'll stand by my original point that LOTR inspires more loyalty and awe than any of these other series. I've never even read the Golden Compass, and I was bored by the entire Narnia series.

I think a Covenant movie *could* be successful, if they treated it as an R rated movie, an adult film like it's supposed to be. GC and Narnia are children's movies. While children's movies can make gobs of money, those aren't usually based on epic books. Epic is the stuff of adults. *Fantasy* is the stuff of men (and women). I think the industry has completely misunderstood this genre. You'd think they would have learned after Tolkien. That's definitely not a kids' story.

Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:42 pm

It's not a kid's story, but it's not very deep, and it's only violent, rarely any blood. It's not really an adult fantasy. That, my friend, has never really been done, Pan's Labrynth is probably the closest.

Post by **amanibhavam** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 10:26 am

"not very deep"

That is so far from the truth I don't even know how to express my incredulity at this statement.

Post by **Zarathustra** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 1:26 pm

jacob Raver, sinTempter wrote:It's not a kid's story, but it's not very deep, and it's only violent, rarely any blood. It's not really an adult fantasy. That, my friend, has never really been done, Pan's Labrynth is probably the closest.

Are you talking about the Chronicles? Donaldson said he wrote it for adults, and is disturbed by the idea that children read it. If the author himself wrote it for adults, it's an adult fantasy. (Just one reason, among many . . .)

Sure, I read it at 14. But I didn't fully appreciate its depth until later (plus, I was pretty mature).

How old are you, jacob? Are you an adult? If you are talking about the Chronicles, your "not very deep" comment comes either from ignorance, immaturity, or . . . worse.

The rape alone would get it an R rating. I don't remember Wall-e or Aslan or Harry Potter getting raped. Maybe I missed that. I also don't remember Harry Potter nearly falling in love with his own rape child. Nor do I remember HP dealing with themes also dealt with by existentialism philosophers such as Sartre, Camus, or Heidegger.

I ask in complete seriousness . . . are you a troll?

Post by **Brother Charn** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:10 pm

Malik23 wrote:I don't remember Wall-e or Aslan or Harry Potter getting raped. Maybe I missed that. I also don't remember Harry Potter nearly falling in love with his own rape child. Nor do I remember HP dealing with themes also dealt with by existentialism philosophers such as Sartre, Camus, or Heidegger.

Malik - you made my day with this imagery. Thank you - this was exactly what I needed. I'm now waiting for the director's cuts of the movies you mention, that show those rating-changing scenes.

Post by **Cagliostro** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:44 pm

Malik23 wrote:You'd think they would have learned after Tolkien. That's definitely not a kids' story.

I think he was responding to this, the end of your previous email, by which he means Tolkien.

I'd definitely categorize LOTR as "less deep" than Covenant. But I wouldn't exactly call it "not very deep." I'd have to say that a lot of the depth of LOTR runs a bit more subtle, as I picked up a lot more of how deep it is later in life. I've always found Gollum an especially interesting character, and I have to say that the book version of the ending of LOTR is especially good. I hated it when I was kid, as I wanted the big climax and then out. But reading it as an adult, I found how poignant it is.

Post by **Zarathustra** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 3:54 pm

Woops! If Jacob is talking about LOTR--I take it all back and beg forgiveness! Seriously, sorry (if that's the case).

[Edit: yeah, after rereading my own post, I obviously forgot that I ended it with talking about Tolkien. MY BAD!! I'm tempted to go back and edit my post, but BC has already quoted it (and got a kick out of it), so I'll have to just live with my shame and again beg Jacob's forgiveness.

]

Post by **Cagliostro** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:56 pm

It happens. I only caught it because I was reading through them all for the first time, and it seemed obvious to me, but I'm not in the habit of reading my old posts through either, so these things happen.

Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:43 pm

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Wow. Harry Potter, huh?

"LET'S put a smile on that face!"

You're forgiven. hahahahahhah...man you made my freakin day!

Post by **Zarathustra** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:57 pm

jacob Raver, sinTempter wrote:LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Wow. Harry Potter, huh?

"LET'S put a smile on that face!"

You're forgiven. hahahahahhah...man you made my freakin day!

I'm such an ass sometimes. Thanks for being a good sport.

Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:48 am

Dude, I'm a Raver, you're words mean nothing to me. In the end, young Malik...you, like all other life on and near Kevin's Watch, will despair- for my master's designs are far reaching...beyond your puny little mind's near-sighted grasp. Bow to me now, and mayhap I will spare your life.