Kevin's Watch

As reported elsewhere, here is the news through cinescape.

www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_i ... j_id=43187#

an ill writer

some actions that have long-term effects on his psyche

Really tiptoeing around this, aren't they? Do you think it's just that the people writing the articles aren't being told (to avoid negative publicity and all), or are they leaving it out themselves for some reason?

You know folks, I really feel that this is just a large bucket of non-news. Producers option everything - it doesn't mean much. Mostly it means that they want to get it while it is cheap on a 'just in case' basis. LOTR was optioned for 25 years before we saw a movie, and then 25 more before we saw an unanimated movie. There're hundreds of books that were optioned and never became anything. Organizations turn this into so-called news in order to scare up readership. Book publishers are only happy to comply when they want a new book to sell well. Producers are poking around for the next LOTR and so it looks like they're coming close, but when Narnia is lackluster and the one after that is a flop, and meanwhile something else becomes the next hotness, this will dry up again like the nasal effluvium that this is.

And yes, I laugh at people lining up for Jackson's The Hobbit.

You just gotta set your expectations at the right level ...

But the difference this time is LOTR did extremely well. That is enough to get hollywood interested.

Wayfriend does have a point. If, Covenant is acted upon quickly, yes it will ride on the wings of LOTR. But if something else (or a couple something else's) ride those wings and fail, the iron won't be hot any longer, and it's likely to wait until at least the next cycle turns and it becomes the "In thing" again.

Personally, I'd rather have this be a well-done cult classic than a viewer-friendly blockbuster. I'll see it miss the LOTR boat, fall in the water and drown before I approve of butchering it to get more people to watch it.

I'm getting bitter. Can you tell?

Alynna Lis Eachann wrote:Personally, I'd rather have this be a well-done cult classic than a viewer-friendly blockbuster. I'll see it miss the LOTR boat, fall in the water and drown before I approve of butchering it to get more people to watch it.

I'm getting bitter. Can you tell?

If the Director optioned the movie due to his "love" of the series then perhaps he will "be true"!

Heh. We've only had a few bits of movie info, along with SRD and the writers telling us to shut up, and there are already ten topics around the Watch talking about it.-jay

Heaven help us when the film is being made: we'll have ten topics about the lead casting!

Wayfriend wrote:You know folks, I really feel that this is just a large bucket of non-news. Producers option everything - it doesn't mean much. Mostly it means that they want to get it while it is cheap on a 'just in case' basis...There're hundreds of books that were optioned and never became anything. Organizations turn this into so-called news in order to scare up readership. Book publishers are only happy to comply when they want a new book to sell well ...

Everything you say here is basically true, Wayfriend, but it's an awfully cynical perspective. Thousands of books get optioned and never go farther--that's true. When the author is a fairly big name, news of a movie option on his or her book will boost sales for a little while. I don't see why that's a bad thing. Book publishers publish and sell books. That's what they're for. When books sell well, the publishers make more money, the author makes more money, the agent makes more money, and everyone's happy.

For the most part, book publishers don't even own the movie rights to the books they publish--the author does. (SRD has said that this is not the case with TCTC, because he didn't have an agent when he sold LFB, and didn't know better than not to sell movie rights.) So the publisher usually doesn't make any money off the option except by any nudge in sales the news might give them. Saying that "book publishers are only happy to comply when they want a new book to sell well" is a moot point because A) most of the time, their compliance isn't necessary; and B) book publishers want all their books to sell well, so they can stay in business and keep paying their employees $28K a year.

I'm sorry if this seems at all like a slam. But it doesn't make sense to me to blame book publishers for trying to make an extra buck here and there, when in the process they heighten their author's visibility. Literature is art; art is culture; but someone has to pay for it somewhere along the line or the artists will all starve and die, and there won't be any literature at all.

This all could be a go no where sales gimmick but I was struck by the fact that, according to Cinescape's article "Revelstone Entertainment has bought the film rights to the first six books in the CHRONICLES series and has hired screenwriter John Orloff (BAND OF BROTHERS) to adapt the first novel. As well, Mark Gordon is onboard as a producer for the film." Hiring a known screenwriter and boasting a real flesh and blood producer seems to give this news a touch more cred than just another book being optioned. Naturally I could be all wet.

JohnOrloff joined the Watch, TOM--have you seen the post he wrote us? It's in the "Important post regarding the movie" thread. Read it!

Myste wrote:JohnOrloff joined the Watch, TOM--have you seen the post he wrote us? It's in the "Important post regarding the movie" thread. Read it!

I have not seen it. Thanks for the heads up.

empiremovies has the same bit the TOM quoted above, as well as the following snippet:

The books revolve around a shunned author (Covenant) who is magically transported to the Land, a mystical world where he discovers he is the incarnation of a great hero. Covenant thinks it's all a dream. But he's the bearer of a magical talisman, and is enlisted to help save the Land from Saturn and his representatives.

Who the hell is Saturn? Is that a typo? Do they mean the actual planet?

I can see it now:
Leprous writer Thomas Covenant, accompanied by his crack haruchai bodyguards and whiny love interest, must save the Land from a devastating collision with the runaway gas giant. Armed with the One Bomb, Tom and his intrepid crew board the giant granite rocket Starwars' Gem and put their lives on the line to save the world, the American way.

Myste wrote:Everything you say here is basically true, Wayfriend, but it's an awfully cynical perspective.

I am not a cynic. I believe in setting expectations at the right level. It's a fine distinction, but one nonetheless. You'll find that there's no one following the movie news with as much hope and enthusiasm as me.

Myste wrote:But it doesn't make sense to me to blame book publishers for trying to make an extra buck here and there, when in the process they heighten their author's visibility.

I'm not blaming book publishers for anything. Heck, I'd do the same. I just think it's important to point out that there's lots of incentive for book publishers to do this without there being an imminent movie behind it.

Wayfriend wrote:

Myste wrote:But it doesn't make sense to me to blame book publishers for trying to make an extra buck here and there, when in the process they heighten their author's visibility.

I'm not blaming book publishers for anything. Heck, I'd do the same. I just think it's important to point out that there's lots of incentive for book publishers to do this without there being an imminent movie behind it.

I didn't mean to say you are a cynic, just that your perspective was cynical.

It's true that a movie deal definitely ramps up advertising and publicity budgets for the book, and those budgets are bigger than the non-movie-deal books get. But unfortunately, a publisher can't spend $1million to promote every single book it publishes--no matter how much they love the books themselves, no matter how much they'd like to. Generally speaking, an the editor who acquires the book will say "I love this! I want an advertising budget of $100,000.00!" And some guy in the business office will say, "I love it too! You can have $10K!" And the editor smiles and takes it, because deep down she knows that the book is only going to sell 5,000 copies no matter how much they spend on advertising.

Nav, you need to take the word Leprous, out of your snippet, they said "Shunned", not "Leprous", so if we're going to assume Saturn the Planet, and talk about the One-Bomb and StarWars' Gem, you can't assume they'll make him a leper, LOL.

wayfriend, 4 years ago wrote:Producers are poking around for the next LOTR and so it looks like they're coming close, but when Narnia is lackluster and the one after that is a flop, and meanwhile something else becomes the next hotness, this will dry up again like the nasal effluvium that this is.

It seems that this outcome is what has come to pass. Here's what the Independent wrote today:

Sadly for filmgoers, the rush to grab hold of the Rings coattail has led to underwhelming adaptations of hugely successful fantasy novels Eragon (2006) and The Golden Compass (2007). Neither did enough business to warrant planned sequels. Disney has even pulled support from future films in the decent CS Lewis Chronicles of Narnia franchise, with Prince Caspian only the seventh most successful movie of 2008. [link]

So it appears that the Fantasy Movie Renaissance has fizzled out.

I'll be interested to see how Inkheart does this month. I know my daughter is dying to see it. Maybe there's some life in the genre left.

wayfriend, 4 years ago wrote:And yes, I laugh at people lining up for Jackson's The Hobbit.

You win some; you lose some.

It's a shame. But...I think doing fantasy as good film is very difficult, lending to Jackson's team's greatness.

I think what lead LOTR to being especially good was that it didn't just concentrate on the wonder of the world. It got to the nitty gritty, and the really dark places that can be a little uncomfortable.
Narnia...I never saw much darkness there, and I never really got into those books, but it seemed like the fan base was pretty huge for it. Too bad the movies were so boring.
The Golden Compass? It came off a bit boring as well, concentrating on a lot of the wonder of what they were showing; so much so that the story didn't stick to the forefront. A bit of a bland retelling, if you ask me.
Eragon? Can't comment. Haven't read the book or seen the movie, and I doubt I ever will.
The problem with so many fantasy movies is that they either have too much budget, which has happened lately, or too little. Very few strike it right, as most the directors are interested in the decorations rather than the story. LOTR was good because the story was not just retold; it was enhanced to make more sense of some things and to make other bits more exciting. While I am a strong critic of the films, and think that there are several things that they didn't get right at all, I admire them for much of what they accomplished. And the funny thing is, the decorations worked well too.
I feel like an adaptation of Covenant would probably work, as the story is pretty solid. Having read both Narnia and the Golden Compass, I had hoped they would be more interesting than the books, but I don't think they have as solid of story. As I felt when I was a kid, Covenant was a more grown up version of LOTR. Which is why I always enjoyed it more.