![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Fantasy Reports
Dec. 18th, 2002 09:35 amWell, it's the big day. The monst anticipated movie of the year - well, for poeple who loved Fellowship, anyway - is here, to pretty much the same reviews as last year. Oddly, as stoked as I am, I can easily wait till Seanan is in town to get the gang together, hopefully on the night of Dec. 30. I am most assuredly a fan of LotR and of the first film, but what does it say about when I stand on the geek scale that I wanted to see Nemesis the first weekend? Of course, if and when they make a good Superman or Batman film, then you're really see some geekiness in action on my part.
The TTT review of most mote to me? Roger Ebert, who enjoys the film as an action epic of great skill but feels that a lot of the true essence of the books is gone.
(Read it here: http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/cst-ftr-lord18f.html)
It's an argument that I don't usually expect from Ebert - he tends to watch films with an eye towards what makes them great or good or lousy films - but it's the kind of argument I can respect. On this matter, Ebert is a purist, and his criticisms come not from a curmudgeon's sense of critical duty but from a deep love of a set of books he read in his formative years. As a Batman fan, I know how it feels to see something you love become something not quite itself.
But I throw it to the floor as to whether he is right. I would argue that Peter Jackson, at least in FotR, took the stuff that works best as an epic film and left a lot of intersting but not-too-essential information in the book. The result was a stunning and memorable film that didn't require the kind of investment in time and thought the books do, but that also is likely to make new fans read the books afterwards.
Meanwhile, another fantasy classic advances to the screen, The LAst Unicorn. Here's the film's early but official website: http://www.the-last-unicorn.net/index.htm
As you can see on the site, the cast already includes two legendary talents, Angela Lansbury as Mommy Fortuna and Christopher Lee as King Haggard. Remarkable that Lee, who labored for years in all those grade-B Dracula films, is now a grade-A villain all over the place. He's earned it. The cast also features Mia Farrow (who I like but not as much as Diane Keaton) as Molly Grue and Rene Auberjonois as Cully. I can't wait to see who gets the crucial parts of Schmendrick and Amalthea/voice of the unicorn.
And the unicorn will be CGI, a feat that seems cheesy only five years ago but now sounds perfectly doable after Yoda and Gollum.
Lastly, I've just read a book that belongs on the same shelf as The Last Unicorn, Barry Hughart's award-winning Bridge of Birds. This charming fairy tale takes place in an ancient China not quite that of the real world, and is it a delight to read. Merav loaned it to us, said that we must read it, and she is quite right. This tale is thrilling, unpredictable, and full of amazing characters. I cannot recommend it too highly. Because of the setting, this also stands out from works that take place either in idealized European settings or in fantasy realms. Ancient China, or some form of it, comes to life, and the reader doesn't want to leave it.
That's it for now. Now, go and get in line, get your tickets, and have fun storming Mordor.
The TTT review of most mote to me? Roger Ebert, who enjoys the film as an action epic of great skill but feels that a lot of the true essence of the books is gone.
(Read it here: http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/cst-ftr-lord18f.html)
It's an argument that I don't usually expect from Ebert - he tends to watch films with an eye towards what makes them great or good or lousy films - but it's the kind of argument I can respect. On this matter, Ebert is a purist, and his criticisms come not from a curmudgeon's sense of critical duty but from a deep love of a set of books he read in his formative years. As a Batman fan, I know how it feels to see something you love become something not quite itself.
But I throw it to the floor as to whether he is right. I would argue that Peter Jackson, at least in FotR, took the stuff that works best as an epic film and left a lot of intersting but not-too-essential information in the book. The result was a stunning and memorable film that didn't require the kind of investment in time and thought the books do, but that also is likely to make new fans read the books afterwards.
Meanwhile, another fantasy classic advances to the screen, The LAst Unicorn. Here's the film's early but official website: http://www.the-last-unicorn.net/index.htm
As you can see on the site, the cast already includes two legendary talents, Angela Lansbury as Mommy Fortuna and Christopher Lee as King Haggard. Remarkable that Lee, who labored for years in all those grade-B Dracula films, is now a grade-A villain all over the place. He's earned it. The cast also features Mia Farrow (who I like but not as much as Diane Keaton) as Molly Grue and Rene Auberjonois as Cully. I can't wait to see who gets the crucial parts of Schmendrick and Amalthea/voice of the unicorn.
And the unicorn will be CGI, a feat that seems cheesy only five years ago but now sounds perfectly doable after Yoda and Gollum.
Lastly, I've just read a book that belongs on the same shelf as The Last Unicorn, Barry Hughart's award-winning Bridge of Birds. This charming fairy tale takes place in an ancient China not quite that of the real world, and is it a delight to read. Merav loaned it to us, said that we must read it, and she is quite right. This tale is thrilling, unpredictable, and full of amazing characters. I cannot recommend it too highly. Because of the setting, this also stands out from works that take place either in idealized European settings or in fantasy realms. Ancient China, or some form of it, comes to life, and the reader doesn't want to leave it.
That's it for now. Now, go and get in line, get your tickets, and have fun storming Mordor.
