COMPASS & LOTR comparison

[Mister Underhill]

I'm still not buying this theory that it's the US in particular that has somehow become fantasy averse. Caspian was #13 in the yearly domestic box office; its decline in domestic B.O. compared to LtWatW (criminy, that's a clunky acronym) was roughly equivalent to the decline in international B.O. I haven't seen poor domestic box office cited in the stories I read so much as poor overall box office. Caspian didn't even match Compass internationally.

There are still fantasy projects being developed. I can think of two big script sales within the past six months or so -- Galahad and Round Table -- and there are projects like Clash of the Titans and a Dragonheart sequel that are moving down the tracks. They're still trying to reboot Conan, and I've seen a pilot script for a cable series version of George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. I think what's feeling the squeeze are these megabudget tentpole fantasy films.

This is an old Hollywood routine. Any time a genre picture goes mainstream and breaks the bank, all the other studios try to get in on the act. After Star Wars, everybody wanted their own big budget sci-fi franchise. Then when stuff like Dune tanked rather spectacularly, the studios got cold feet. Unforgiven briefly revived the western. The one-two punch of Braveheart and Gladiator made the big-budget historical epic viable for a good while. The comic-book superhero trend that's been dominating the decade has been showing some wear and tear, but The Dark Knight alone will probably keep it going for a while longer yet.

When LotR and Harry Potter blew up the box office, the studios optioned every fantasy series in sight. Now that some of those are turning out to be bum investments, they're backing off, especially in this economy. The moment Harry Potter stops making money, WB will pull the plug, though that doesn't look like it'll happen anytime soon and they're almost done, aren't they?

On the other hand, I do agree that The Hobbit, especially in the planned two-part form, may feel some squeeze. I'd say that the fact that Jackson and Spielberg couldn't secure a green light for Tintin is a bellwether for how risk-averse the studios are right now. It'll be interesting to see how things play out.

[Gwathagor]

Wow! 3 1066 movies! That's great! I'm disappointed that they beat me to it, but William Nicholson is terrific.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

Wow! 3 1066 movies! That's great! I'm disappointed that they beat me to it

I have to agree with you here.

This is quite interesting, I wonder what genre is up next?

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by davem

And Terry Brooks 'Elfstones of Shannara', too

See, to me Brooks is the perfect example of a second-rate series that got developed in the wake of LotR but that will never ever be produced as a series of tentpole films. Some sort of cut-rate miniseries on Sci-Fi Channel, maybe...

Some of that other stuff could happen though. For instance, Dragonheart is almost certain to happen, somewhere in the $30M range. There's an audience that can support fantasy at that price tag.

Originally Posted by Lal

And The Watchmen too.

Yeah, it will be very interesting to see how Watchmen fares. It's fascinating, though. We're starting to get into more and more of these postmodern takes on superheroes. I think the health of the trad superhero movie will be better revealed by the new Wolverine movie and whether or not they're able to get a new Spider-man film into production. From what I can tell there's no plans yet for a follow-up to Superman Returns.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

There are still fantasy projects being developed. I can think of two big script sales within the past six months or so -- Galahad and Round Table -- and there are projects like Clash of the Titans and a Dragonheart sequel that are moving down the tracks. They're still trying to reboot Conan, and I've seen a pilot script for a cable series version of George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. I think what's feeling the squeeze are these megabudget tentpole fantasy films.

And Terry Brooks 'Elfstones of Shannara', too..... Howsumever...it will be interesting to see how many of them hit the screen. Looking at performance, though, it does look like, ATM, fantasy plays better outside the US.

The moment Harry Potter stops making money, WB will pull the plug, though that doesn't look like it'll happen anytime soon and they're almost done, aren't they?

3 more movies - Half-blood Prince due out next summer (pushed back from last November, btw) & a two part adaptation of the final book, Deathly Hallows. And that's the intereesting thing as regards TH - DH is scheduled for release in Dec 2010 & summer 2011. Now, if Warners decide that its better to release DH part 2 at Christmas 2011, then TH will be put back most probably till Christmas 2012 - 'cos they ain't gonna put their two biggest movies up against each other.

On the other hand, I do agree that The Hobbit, especially in the planned two-part form, may feel some squeeze. I'd say that the fact that Jackson and Spielberg couldn't secure a green light for Tintin is a bellwether for how risk-averse the studios are right now. It'll be interesting to see how things play out.

Shooting two movies back to back (TH & sequel) can be cost effective - but only if you know both movies will be hits. But will TH be the hit everybody's assuming? No Aragorn/Arwen love story, no Legolas... No- a Hobbit, an old Wizard & a dozen Dwarves. Yes, there's Rivendell, but we've seen it already, a battle under the Misty Mountains, but we've seen it already.. TH may easily disappoint the movie fans. Caspian has shown that going for a more 'adult' take on a children's story doesn't necessarily work out (though I have to say, while I enjoyed PC, it was difficult to take the idea of children being involved in killing to such a degree - & apparently not even being slightly fazed by it. Mind you, that's in the books, so I'm not blaming the film-makers entirely)

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

The comic-book superhero trend that's been dominating the decade has been showing some wear and tear, but The Dark Knight alone will probably keep it going for a while longer yet.

And The Watchmen too.

Maybe studios will turn to 'feel good' cheese-fests like Mamma Mia as the recession bites? And more and more apocalyptic misery as 2012 approaches and film makers try to milk all that rubbish.

Originally Posted by davem

Shooting two movies back to back (TH & sequel) can be cost effective - but only if you know both movies will be hits. But will TH be the hit everybody's assuming? No Aragorn/Arwen love story, no Legolas... No- a Hobbit, an old Wizard & a dozen Dwarves.

Who's to say they won't shoehorn them in? It means more of these: $$$$.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Who's to say they won't shoehorn them in? It means more of these: $$$$.

They probably will - I've long suspected that most of the movie fans who have been demanding a TH movie know little & care less about Tolkien's book: they want another movie with all their favourite characters in it. I further suspect that that's exactly what Warners will expect to find on their hands come 2011/12.

[davem]

Just come across this http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...s-1213848.html

Definitely interesting that Harry Potter (the most successful franchise in history) could find itself in trouble.

No predictions, but if we hear soon that the Hobbit sequel is to be put on hold, & that instead we're to get a single movie with an entirely new story for a LotR prequel, focussing on Aragorn (& Legolas probably) hunting Gollum & the White Council's assault on Dol Guldur I for one wouldn't be too surprised....