Fantasy Movies

[pat5150]

This question has been bugging me for a while, and I've spent some time debating this with a friend this evening. So I decided to ask you guys, to see what your thoughts were concerning this.

You all know that a number of fantasy movies will be coming our way in the next few years. With the immense success of LotR and Harry Potter, it was to be expected.

So the rights to Brooks' MAGIC KINGDOM OF LANDOVER, Donaldson's THE CHRONICLES OF THOMAS COVENANT, Farland's THE RUNELORDS, Kay's THE LIONS OF AL-RASSAN, and God knows how many others before we are through, have been sold to production companies.

Now, LotR and Harry Potter were/are great because the films respected the essence of the novels. Jackson is a big fan of Tolkien, for whom he has great respect, and he surrounded himself with Tolkien aficionados in order to produce movies that lived up to the books. As far as Harry Potter is concerned, Rowling is involved in the process, making sure that the ship is steered in the right direction.

But such is a luxury that is afforded to few authors. Even Anne Rice had little to say when they filmed "Interview with the vampire."

Hence, is it reasonable for us to expect that producers and directors will attempt to re-create the essence of those series/novels? Or can we basically expect more than a few stinkers coming our way in the years to come?

As much as it pains me, I think that latter will be true...

Patrick
www.fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com

[Metal-Demon]

I'm of the opinion that it's simply the "bottom-line" of movies such as LotR and the Harry Potter series that is drawing the film industry to take notice of the fantasy genre. Nothing more.

Having said that, I think a majority (but not all) of the fantasy-based films to come out in the next 5 to 10 years will NOT be as creative or respectful of the book(s) in which they are based as were LotR.

I really do hope I'm wrong ... but just look at the number of stinkers that have come out since the wave of comic-book based movies started. The ratio of Good to Awful is (in my view) about 1: 4.

[[Syl]]

"Ninety percent of everything is crap." 1 in 4 is good odds.

[drew]

There were some good older fantasy movies..things like Legend, Labrynth, Neverending Story, Willow, Princess Bride and others.
Hollywood unfortunatly, has run out of ideas.

[Fist and Faith]

I expect many more Earthsea's than LotR's. If the Covenant movie starts as badly as Earthsea did, I'll not watch it, either.

[duchess of malfi]

You can add Lewis's Narnia books and Pullman's His Dark Materials to the list of fantasy movies that have been optioned for films.

I love His Dark Materials, but am very worried about the film being made from the first book, The Golden Compass. I read an interview with the director and he said that (this is a paraphrase) that Pullman's rather scathing attacks about how organized religion can be very corruptive to those who hold the power in the organization and therefore can very damaging to humankind as a whole, as those who hold the power can be willing to do anything to keep it or increase it -- will be cut.

I'm sure that there might still be some cool scenes with polar bears in armor, etc. -- but it sounds to me that one of the biggest points of the story will be eliminated because it might offend the far religious right.

And there is certainly an irony in that, if you are familiar with the books.

[Edge]

I'm familiar with the books - and I loathe them, especially the 2nd and 3rd. Pullman has stated that he wrote them as an 'antidote' to Lewis' Narnia books, because he objected to the 'religious indoctrination' - and he fell headlong into the same trap he accused Lewis of.

His story-telling is ok... but his anti-Christian proselytisation is completely over the top. If someone could produce a movie version in which that disturbing element is removed, they'd have nothing but praise from me.

[Encryptic]

Sadly, I'm sure the Almighty Buck will take precedence over actually producing anything remotely "good" (read: faithful to the original source material).

I just can't imagine a Covenant movie being remotely bankable, unless they chopped about 75% of the books out and focused only on the battles and special effects to make it look like the LOTR movies. If I had no familiarity with the Covenant books, I'd probably be hard-pressed to stick with a movie version after the rape scene or really get into Covenant's character at all. Still, I'll reserve judgment on the Covenant movie until I see a finished product. If they've got someone who actually wants to make the movie faithful to the book, that may turn out better than I thought.

Don't get me wrong, I liked the LOTR movies myself and preferred them to the books personally (the books are good, if not incredible IMHO), but they probably wouldn't have been nearly as successful if they hadn't had so much action.

I think anything with a lot of "depth" would lose a lot in translation to the silver screen. The Landover books or Brooks' older Shannara stuff could certainly be done, although they'd suffer the inevitable comparison to LOTR.

::shrug::

[jacob Raver, sinTempter]

Just finished watching Excalibur. I think Ebert's review is pretty much how I feel 'bout the film, though I didn't find Merlin funny nor entertaining:

Ebert's Review of Excalibur

[Cagliostro]

I just saw a Doctor Who episode yesterday that had the actor who played King Arthur in Excalibur yesterday. I recognized the voice and the look, but I couldn't place him. Hell, the name even rang bells, but I had to imdb him to figure out what I knew him from. Then it all made sense.

[Mr. Broken]

I guess the sad truth is that I would sit through a bad version of Lord Fouls Bane, I would , and even if it was awful I would still be glad that it got made. I have no fear that a bad re-creation of the Chronicles would in anyway diminish the legacy of Thomas Covenant.

[matrixman]

I don't know...the flip side of that is that a bad Covenant movie can (and likely will) turn many people away from the books.

Just finished watching Excalibur. I think Ebert's review is pretty much how I feel 'bout the film, though I didn't find Merlin funny nor entertaining:

Ebert's Review of Excalibur

Ebert sums up Excalibur perfectly for me, too. The movie wowed me initially, but I'm no longer enamored by it.
Honestly, I've lost all patience for it. Tried watching it again when it aired a few months back, but turned it off after a few minutes.
(And please don't let John Boorman come anywhere near the Chronicles.)

[dANdeLION]

I still like Excalibur. I thought the Neverending Story was aptly named. Five minutes into it I knew I hated it; and from that point on, it seemed it would never end.

[Montresor]

I still like Excalibur. I thought the Neverending Story was aptly named. Five minutes into it I knew I hated it; and from that point on, it seemed it would never end.

Much as I like Ebert, he sometimes gets a film very wrong (in my humble opinion). I've read that review before and thought so. Excalibur only grows on me every time I see it. The best film about myth ever made.

[Kalkin]

Having seen heaping buttbags such as Gawain and the Green Knight and Highlander 2: the Quickening (ironically, both with Sean Connery,) I don't think bad fantasy films are anything new, or going away any time soon.

If you're looking for a truly remarkable fantasy film, try The Lord of the G-strings: The Femaleship of the Strings. Throbbits = Brilliant.

[Mr. Broken]

I don't know...the flip side of that is that a bad Covenant movie can (and likely will) turn many people away from the books.

Just finished watching Excalibur. I think Ebert's review is pretty much how I feel 'bout the film, though I didn't find Merlin funny nor entertaining:

Ebert's Review of Excalibur

Ebert sums up Excalibur perfectly for me, too. The movie wowed me initially, but I'm no longer enamored by it.
Honestly, I've lost all patience for it. Tried watching it again when it aired a few months back, but turned it off after a few minutes.
(And please don't let John Boorman come anywhere near the Chronicles.)

Im sorry I dont mean to be elitist here but anyone who would ignore a great book , because of a bad movie is only hurting themselves. I remember back in the 80's the Lynch version of Dune came out, and even though I hated the movie for what I think are obvious reasons, it still intrigued me enough to seek out , and read some Herbert. Today Dune is still one of my favorite reads, and re-reads.

[Tulizar]

I've seen Excalibur a few times and even though it's been a few years since I've last seen it, I think I'd enjoy it as much today as I did the first time. Not the best fantasy movie, but certainly not the worst.

If you're looking for a truly remarkable fantasy film, try The Lord of the G-strings: The Femaleship of the Strings. Throbbits = Brilliant.

Females, g-strings and throbbits?? What more can a man desire?

[jacob Raver, sinTempter]

I've seen Excalibur a few times and even though it's been a few years since I've last seen it, I think I'd enjoy it as much today as I did the first time. Not the best fantasy movie, but certainly not the worst.

Absolutely true. We are however talking about a genre that is probably THE bottom of the barrel.

[Tulizar]

I've seen Excalibur a few times and even though it's been a few years since I've last seen it, I think I'd enjoy it as much today as I did the first time. Not the best fantasy movie, but certainly not the worst.

Absolutely true. We are however talking about a genre that is probably THE bottom of the barrel.

Yeah, years ago I'd rent any fantasy flick that was available. 90% of them were garbage. I learned not to expect much from this genre. If my expectations weren't high, I couldn't be let down. Excalibur is not a great movie, it was just better than most of the junk I watched in the 80s (and 90s). That's probably part of the reason I'll never dislike it.

As I've gotten older, I learned to choose wisely. I wait for fantasy movies that can hold there own with mainstream releases.