COMPASS & LOTR comparison

[Bêthberry]

What saves Compass from being absolutely dark and terrifying as regards adult treatment of children--or at least the readiness of Lyre's parents to sacrifice other children (to say nothing of adults) to their theories and experiments--is the incredible way that Pullman empowers Lyre. It is her resilience, independence, stubbornness, courage, that is a beacon to children about claiming authority over their own lives. Will too I think, particularly in his ability to care for his mother. Pullman's children are significant for their own agency, something a bit rare in most literature. After all, children once were supposed to "be seen and not heard."

Very much like Aule's creation are given a life of their own when Iluvatar grants them a voice; they are not left to be commanded by Aule's will but flinch from the axe and beg for mercy.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Both Narnia films have had a veddy, veddy British feel- but made huge US money.

(BTW, I think that depicting the Telmarines with a Spanish Conquistador feel was brilliant).

[Gwathagor]

Absolutely! It made me wonder if the original Telmar-guys were pirates of Spanish or Portuguese descent.

[Lalaith]

That's really interesting about the different marketing tactics. It was definitely marketed at children, here in Europe...lots of emphasis on the big polar bear and so on.
As for suitable ages for Pullman...I think seven/eight is a bit young, particularly for independent reading.
Not because it's too scary, but because Pullman is quite dense and literary in style - it's much heavier going than the Hobbit. I'd put it on a par with Lord of the Rings, at least.

[Lush]

I don't know of any serious Tolkien student who even takes the movies seriously

I knew a Duke lecturer who took them very seriously. Yes, she specialized in Tolkien.

As for "Compass" - didn't like it. They took a brilliant opportunity to introduce a really cool female hero and wasted it with horrible editing (especially toward the end). I tend to overlook a lot of flaws in movies like that, but it didn't strike me as a movie with soul, a vibrant core.

Though it was hilarious how in one scene they steered clear of outright insulting the Catholic Church by insulting the Orthodox Church instead (the icons used in one scene were obviously Orthodox). Great PR move! Then again, I've always meant to ask Pullman as to why he had that weird scene in HDM with the (surprise!) vodka-slugging, smelly, terrible, irredeemable Slavs.

[davem]

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/ent...p-ten-gro.html

More evidence that fantasy movies don't play well in the US - Prince Caspian underperformed in America but was in the global top ten. Based on its 'domestic' performance Disney have pulled out of their option of co-producing Voyage of the Dawn Treader. VoDT may get picked up based on its global box office (but maybe not with the same budget).

Can't think of any recent fantasy movies which have shaken up the US B.O. - actually not since The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe. And if a sequel to such a major performer can underperform so badly that Disney jump ship mid franchise it might mean that Warner's will start looking a bit more closely at TH.

Maybe fantasy movies have had their day & the studios will start looking around for the next big thing - & I can't help feeling that these new productions would have excited Tolkien far more than a Hobbit movie http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...n-1206529.html

[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.