The Return of Sword & Sorcery Cinema?

[Joshua Randall]

Wait, you mean Rhys-Davies doesn't actually look like Gimli? I feel so disillusioned.

But back on topic, the proposed movie that baffles me the most is Elric. How do you make such a nihilistic, sweeping epic into a crowd-pleasing Hollywood blockbuster?

Edit: not to mention, the main character has a pact with a demon, ferchrissake.

 

[jester47]

?!??

I can only think that either you haven't actually read Leiber, or you dislike his work so much that you can't see it clearly. Cuz, y'know, the main characters in Rush Hour and Shanghai Noon both have more in common with Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser than the characters in Conan the Barbarian.

I disagree. After reading the original howard stories as printed by DEL REY, and then reading the First two books "Ill Met in Lankhmar" and "Lean Times in Lankhmar" the film Conan the Barbarian has more in common with Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser than REH's Conan. Largely the film is a seriously misadapted creature, in that it really does not do a good job of portraying REHs Conan, almost to the point where Conan, Valeria, and Thulsa Doom are basicly just names added on to make claim to the conan property. So it may be this dissassociation with the conan name that makes me see the similarities between Conan and Fafhrd. One thing is- Conan was never really portrayed as being careless from success. Fafhrd was. Conan was not really "nordic" in origin, Fafhrd was.

So I guess my point is this. The Conan from the movie has more in common with Fadhrd than the Conan from the stories. Subotai's connections to the character of Mouser are limited at best: He is shorter and wiser to the world. But I find the character of Conan to be more of a Ghengis-Fafhrd than a Conan.

 

[horacethegrey]

But back on topic, the proposed movie that baffles me the most is Elric. How do you make such a nihilistic, sweeping epic into a crowd-pleasing Hollywood blockbuster?

Simple, you don't. The story itself is meant to be this tragedy laden epic, so why change it something that will please the crowds when it's not designed to be as such? I've not read the books myself, but I'll be in line to watch this if some director has the balls to put it to film.

Besides, Peter Jackson himself said in an interview once that fantasy is the most undeveloped genre in film. So what better way to show that it can tackle different themes and such than by making a film that is the antithesis of The Lord of the Rings?

 

[reanjr]

I bought the DVD to Curse of the Ring/Ring of the Nibelungs, a made-for-TV production that aired on Sci-Fi recently, and it is head-and-shoulders better than both D&D movies, for instance. Not LotR material, but it is as good as Dragonslayer, and would've merited a theatrical release.

Thank you, I have been wondering if that movie was worth the 40 USD import price. I'll probably get it now.

 

[reanjr]

My guess would be that people other than D&D geeks know what Eragon is. I mean, really--Ranger REG; you weren't asking that seriously, were you?

In case you are not aware, the Dragonlance Chronicles is a gateway drug to Tolkien and D&D. I am pretty sure that more people read dragonlance than play D&D. It's hardly a niche in the fantasy genre. Numerous New York Times bestsellers, critics saying its the best fantasy since LotR, etc.

Don't get turned off by the D&D affiliation, Dragonlance was a superbly designed and written series.

 

[Umbran]

As for a younger Bilbo, I'd suggest a younger actor and not Ian Holm as many fans are hoping. My vote goes for Martin Freeman (The Office, Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy).

Having just watched some digital magic done on Ian McKellan in X3, I'm not convinced you need a younger actor. Sure, as a practical matter, it'd certainly be cheaper, but there's in intri9guing possibility of dunking Holm into a digital fountain of youth for the film.

the film Conan the Barbarian has more in common with Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser than REH's Conan.

Your points seem to be that the movie-character of Conan is more akin to Fafhrd than the original book Conan. And that may be. But that's a long way from saying that the Conan-movie has much similarity with the Lankmar stories in theme or structure. A northern barbarian does not a major similarity make.

 

[Storm Raven]

In case you are not aware, the Dragonlance Chronicles is a gateway drug to Tolkien and D&D. I am pretty sure that more people read dragonlance than play D&D. It's hardly a niche in the fantasy genre. Numerous New York Times bestsellers, critics saying its the best fantasy since LotR, etc.

That's because most critics haven't read any fantasy other than LotR and Dragonlance. I can think of a dozen fantasy works that are better than Dragonlance off the top of my head.

Don't get turned off by the D&D affiliation, Dragonlance was a superbly designed and written series.

Replace "superbly" with "competently" and you are about right.

 

[horacethegrey]

Having just watched some digital magic done on Ian McKellan in X3, I'm not convinced you need a younger actor. Sure, as a practical matter, it'd certainly be cheaper, but there's in intri9guing possibility of dunking Holm into a digital fountain of youth for the film.

Ugh. I hated that deaging thing they did on Stewart and Mckellen, made 'em look a bit too plastic for my taste. I don't think I could stand to see Ian Holm like that for an entire film.

Besides, I highly doubt PJ himself would go that route if he decided to make the movie. From what I've watched in the LOTR Extended Editions, he's the type of director who'd rather rely on practical effects rather than digital effects if it came down to it.

 

[jester47]

Your points seem to be that the movie-character of Conan is more akin to Fafhrd than the original book Conan. And that may be. But that's a long way from saying that the Conan-movie has much similarity with the Lankmar stories in theme or structure. A northern barbarian does not a major similarity make.

You have the right of it.

A.

 

[nikolai]

But back on topic, the proposed movie that baffles me the most is Elric. How do you make such a nihilistic, sweeping epic into a crowd-pleasing Hollywood blockbuster?

I thought an interesting comment was this:

"We have loved this series since we were kids and can appreciate it even more as adults. It's a sophisticated, literate, philosophically dense fantasy -- a sort of 'Matrix' of the sword-and-sorcery genre," Chris Weitz [one of the producers] said.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/02/24/film.elric.reut/

Aside from the chance to do another LOTR and the IP that they're buying, I think the chance to do another 'philosophical' picture aimed at an older age group, like the Matrix but with Runeblades, was what grabbed them.