A LoTR Inspired Fantasy Movie Renaissance - What Happened?

[Michael Morris]

They're doing a live action version of The Last Unicorn aswell which should be amazingly awesome...

That will be awesome if they don't kiddify it.

 

[Shadowdancer]

I read that Jackson received something like $20 million himself to write and direct it.

Actually, the deal is a package for Peter, Fran and Philippa to produce and write, and Peter to direct. And it's $20 million versus 20 percent of the gross, whichever is greater.

Basically, the studio is buying the whole movie, minus actors' salaries, for that price, since Peter's companies such as WETA will provide all of the technical support and FX, costumes, etc. That's included in the deal.

 

[barsoomcore]

It's a deal looked on with some dismay by the other studios, but New Line seems confident -- and frankly, I don't blame them. After what PJ accomplished with LotR -- the logistics alone, let alone the final product -- it's clear he can manage the big productions and stay on top of things. He and Fran and Philippa and WETA are a proven team now, and I think the griping of the other studios is just sour grapes.

They wish THEY had a Peter Jackson on their distribution sched.

It's interesting, though PJ is turning into sort of an old-style studio -- an one-stop shop for film-making. I wonder how viable a business model that's going to be. Once you've set up all the workshops and trained all the people and acquired all the tools -- how do you keep them all busy and paid? It'll be interesting to watch.

 

[Ranger REG]

Considering that they are based in New Zealand, whose landscape can vary from tropical to arctic, it shouldn't be that difficult. The catch is trying to get Hollywood producers to do their films there. It is something that even Hawaii is also on the market for location shooting and have invested in building soundstage and editing studios so that the film crew don't have to commute over the Pacific.

 

[Rackhir]

Originally Posted by nikolai
Can I ask what the Last Unicorn is? It seems common knowledge among you lot, but I haven't a clue!

It was an animated fantasy film done in the mid 1980's, I think around 1984. I think it was based on a novel. I heard good things about the movie but never seen it. You can probibly find it on VHS for rent. Don't know if its on DVD.

The original book was written by Peter S. Beagle and is one of my all time favorite books. You should be able to find a copy at your local Borders/B&N.

The movie has not been re-released on DVD in the US, but the video tape is still available. Here's a link.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_1/103-6667069-8935824?v=glance&s=video

On E-bay you can find a region-0 DVD, but I doubt if this is actually a "legitimate" release. There are a number of "The Last Unicorn" items available on there. I HIGHLY recommend the soundtrack CD.

The animated movie version was a terrific adaptation of the book. It has that classic Ranken-Bass look, which seemed to suit the story very well. Understandably it left out some of the minor plot events, but was extremely faithful to the book and as mentioned the songs by America were fantastic and really helped set the mood of the various scenes in the movie. There are few songs more melancholy than "Man's Road" and it perfectly suited the Unicorn as she searched for others of her kind and was finding nothing. The movie pretty much covers all the bases. It's funny as hell, extremely touching, very romantic, a supurb soundtrack and has some truly spine-tingling moments.

The only real flaw in the movie are the one or two songs that are actually sung by the actors. Unfortunately, neither Jeff Bridges nor Mia Farrow are trained singers, but they do a tolerable job.

Note: If you are sensitive, have plenty of tissues on hand. The end of the movie is heartbreaking.

Warning mild Spoiler

[COLOR=Black]My favorite little tidbit from book, that didn't make it into the movie is Shmendrick's origin. He's actually immortal, which is why he said in the movie "Whatever can die is beautiful -- more beautiful than a unicorn, who lives forever, and who is the most beautiful creature in the world. " Also it's why he was so excited at being able to summon "Robin Hood". He was gifted/cursed with immortality by his master. Who had come to the conclusion that Schmendrick was so monumentally incompetent at magic that Shmendrick had to possess the greatest powers of any wizard ever. So he made him immortal until he could finally unlock his powers. The end of the book has a great line about how he was finally able to unlock his powers that involves Prince Lyr.[/COLOR]

The thought of a live action version makes me uneasy. Few Directors/Producers/Script Writers/Studio Execs/stagehands, can resist the urge to meddle and make changes in an attempt to justify their existance. Also the animated version so beautifully captured the feel and heart of the book, that I'm hard pressed to see how a live action version is going to improve things. I'd LOVE to be wrong like I was with LotR, but I'm afraid that the odds are heavily stacked against it.

So to sum up. Watch the movie then read the book. You won't be disapointed.

 

[John Crichton]

Couple of observations -- fantasy movies are EXPENSIVE. They're FAR more expensive than, say, sci-fi movies, because in a sci-fi movie you can put everybody in polyester jumpsuits, film the whole thing in a warehouse, add some cheap effects shots of spaceships that don't have to match anything else, and you're done.

A fantasy movie you'll need period costumes of SOME sort, weapons of some sort, maybe horses, rustic-looking sets, exteriors without modern building in the background, animals and if you use any effects shots they're going to have to integrate into SOMETHING -- even just plain old matte paintings have to look a million times better than a starfield if you're going to avoid howls of laughter from your audience.

I disagree.

Doing all those things can make a good fantasy movie, and that doesn't guarantee it will be entertaining (take Dragonheart, for example). Just as a few jumpsuits and a starfield does not make a good sci-fi movie. It takes exotic locales, complex starship battles and cool looking aliens to make a good (typical Star Wars-esque fare) movie. I contend that, on average, sci-fi is more expensive or at the very least equal in cost - especially these days in order to get people to suspend a little disbelief.

Fantasy films, even good ones don't need a huge budget. It helps but you don't absolutely need it to make a good film. Take Excalibur and The Princess Bride for example. Made on a fairly modest budget and still looked great for the time.

:: edited formatting ::

 

[Red Baron]

That being said, I agree that a DL trilogy (or double-trilogy, to include Legends) would rock. The history is as extensive, if not moreso, than that of Middle Earth. And now we've got the FX technology to do it right.

I'd certainly pay to see a half-decent DL film. But where on earth do people get this notion that Krynn has a history even remotely as deep and rich as Middle-Earth? (I'm really not trying to be a jerk; I simply find the very notion mind-boggling. I mean, have you read The Silmarillion or any of the Unfinished Tales books, etc.?)

 

[Alzrius]

I remember when the Fellowship of the Ring came out, to pretty wide popular and critical acclaim, there was talk about how Fantasy was the next big thing in movies and it was going to trigger the production other films. Now, what happened? Have there been any of them? are any of them in the pipeline? It seems to me that sadly there hasn't been an effect at all.

It's not just you - there really hasn't been an effect. The reason is simple: The Academy (that is to say, Hollywood) hates fantasy films. Whether or not the fact that fantasy films are usually unprofitable compared to other types of movies is related to the previous reason or not depends on who you ask.

Fantasy movies just don't draw the respect of other kinds of films - usually contemporary and period pieces. I don't know why, but that's how the "professionals" of Hollywood view them. Personally, I think that's idiotic, but that's just my opinion.

On the second reason, fantasy just doesn't do well, not as much as other types of film. For every big fantasy success, there have been a dozen that failed miserably. Anyone remember a little movie called Dungeons & Dragons? What about Kull? Or Warriors of Virtue? If you do, then you probably wish you didn't. Imagine how the accountants at Hollywood felt.

The Lord of the Rings movies are exceptional, but make no mistake, they are an exception, and not the beginning of a new trend.

 

[barsoomcore]

I disagree.

Doing all those things can make a good fantasy movie, and that doesn't guarantee it will be entertaining (take Dragonheart, for example). Just as a few jumpsuits and a starfield does not make a good sci-fi movie. It takes exotic locales, complex starship battles and cool looking aliens to make a good (typical Star Wars-esque fare) movie. I contend that, on average, sci-fi is more expensive or at the very least equal in cost - especially these days in order to get people to suspend a little disbelief.

Fantasy films, even good ones don't need a huge budget. It helps but you don't absolutely need it to make a good film. Take Excalibur and The Princess Bride for example. Made on a fairly modest budget and still looked great for the time.

I'm not saying that fantasy movie has to be hundreds of millions of dollars. But there's no getting around the fact that the barrier to entry, purely on cost alone, is higher with fantasy than with SF. Sure, there ARE fantasy TV series -- but there's far more SF TV series. Cost, my friend. Spaceship shots are FAR, FAR cheaper to produce than shots with castles, monsters and swordfights. I have friends who can produce convincing spaceships in their spare time. But a dragon? Having people ride up to a castle gate? No, sir.

The notion that Excalibur and The Princess Bride are low budget films only proves the point. Sure, compared to big mainstream films they are, but they're a far cry from, say, Abraxas: Guardian of the Universe. And keep in mind they possess marketability beyond their own merits -- King Arthur, who's nicely famous, and William Goldman, who was probably at the peak of his influence when The Princess Bride got made. And even then both films were strapped for cash.

It's harder to make fantasy films than it is to make SF films. It's not impossible, but it's harder. And that means there will be less of them, and they will be more likely to suck.

 

[Shadowdancer]

It's a deal looked on with some dismay by the other studios, but New Line seems confident -- and frankly, I don't blame them. After what PJ accomplished with LotR -- the logistics alone, let alone the final product -- it's clear he can manage the big productions and stay on top of things. He and Fran and Philippa and WETA are a proven team now, and I think the griping of the other studios is just sour grapes.

He's not doing "King Kong" for New Line. I believe it's for Warner Bros.