Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Genndy Tartakovsky to Direct Dark Crystal Sequel

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the ya-look-like-gelfling dept.

Movies 186

An anonymous reader writes "The folks at Jim Henson productions announced almost without fanfare that a sequel to the impressive The Dark Crystal is in the works and will be directed by the award-winning Genndy Tartakovsky, who created the hit series Star Wars: The Clone Wars, Samurai Jack and Dexter's Laboratory, will direct 'Power of the Dark Crystal,' the sequel to the 1982 classic fantasy film."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This sounds good. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799252)

Gay niggers for life. Bring a friend.

Re:This sounds good. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799335)

How is this offtopic? It's a wholehearted recommendation of the movie. And endorsement of Gay Niggerism. Here's another good film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QXUXQ8miHs [youtube.com] .

Wrote some great music, too. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799254)

Take the Buttcracker for instance.

Wow! (-1, Redundant)

dswensen (252552) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799255)

This was really exciting news, three weeks ago or so.

Also, without the presence of Brian Froud, the heart of the original, I am skeptical.

Re:Wow! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799265)

Along with being skeptical, are also a gay nigger? Not that there's anything wrong with it. This was a free country. I have gay nigger friends. Really. I hear they are making a sequel to Brokeback Mountain. Escape from Gaynigger Mountain. Starring Kurt Russel. And your mom. You can get free access with a credit card. Always use protection. If I could offer you one tip for future success it would be to always wear sunscreen. Unless of course, you're a gay nigger.

Re:Wow! (2, Insightful)

Witchblade (9771) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799317)

Also, without the presence of Brian Froud, the heart of the original, I am skeptical.

From TFA (er, press release):

Legendary fantasy artist Brian Froud, designer of the original film, will return to design the new characters.

The only person missing is Jim... and he could be anywhere.

Froud is in... but Tartakovsky is too. (2, Insightful)

Cappy Red (576737) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799410)

Genndy Tartakovasky, the master of style over substance. His presence, combined with a quote like the following from Lisa Henson, does not fill me with confidence:

"I am sure that his visualization of Brian Froud's designs will thrill fans of the original film as well as audiences who are meeting these beloved characters for the first time."

The quote is also disheartening for that "audiences who are meeting these beloved characters for the first time," bit. I can understand about slashdotters missing out on items like the movie being "set hundreds of years after the events of the first movie," but to neglect a fact like that while being quoted for a press release is rather disturbing.

Re:Froud is in... but Tartakovsky is too. (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799683)

This movie isn't aimed at you and me.

The original Dark Crystal was excellent but it was a kid's movie. We liked because we were kids when we saw it. When we look at the original through adult's eyes, it won't be anywhere near as impressive, because the new Dark Crystal will also be a kids movie.

Studios know where the best target market for these sorts of films is, and it isn't us.

E.g. compare the box office of Harry Potter movies with Serenity. First one was unashamedly aimed at kids, second one aimed at 30 something sci fi geeks. Harry Potter makes hundreds of millions of dollars, Serenity just about broke even. If you look at the whole HP franchise - all the HP films, it will make literally billions of dollars, hundreds or thousands of times more than the Serenity franchise, because Serenity was only one film, and it's much harder to make the first film of a series than the subsequent ones. Just imagine trying to raise money for Serenity vs the next HP movie. The people that lend you money for HPn+1 know that it will make x% of the last movie - the numbers are big enough that you can probably plot a graph of profit vs series member and know best and worst case estimates. Since the worst case is still a sh*tload of money, it's an easy case to make.

The people that lend you money for Serenity will moan about how it is based on a 'failed' series and have no idea if the rabid fans will get enough of their friends into a cinema to make the whole thing work.

Simple economics predicts that this movie will disappoint fans of the original. It's a sad fact, but it's the truth.

And before all the browncoats start pointing out that I'm ignoring DVD and foreign sales, you have to remember that it applies to HP too. If you add up all the possible sources of money, Serenity probably did ok. HP on the other hand did far better than ok. I'd like it not to be true, since I'd much rather watch Firefly than HP, but wanting something to be true doesn't automatically make it true.

Here are the numbers for Serenity
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2005/FRFLY.php [the-numbers.com]

And here are the numbers for the HP franchise
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/series/HarryPott er.php [the-numbers.com]

You could reasonably predict that you can spend $150,000,000 on "HP: Order of the Phoenix" and get back between $800-$900M.

For a movie aimed at the same demographic as Serenity, i.e. us, you're unlikely to make any real profit.

So which demographic will the Dark Crystal target?

Re:Froud is in... but Tartakovsky is too. (1)

kirkjobsluder (520465) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800136)

The original Dark Crystal was excellent but it was a kid's movie. We liked because we were kids when we saw it. When we look at the original through adult's eyes, it won't be anywhere near as impressive, because the new Dark Crystal will also be a kids movie.

Speak for yourself. I find Dark Crystal an impressive work as an adult. I don't buy the claim that "kid's movies" or for that matter fiction written for "kids" should be automatically bad or less impressive in scope than works created for adults. Some of the best fantasy of the 20th century fits neatly on young adult bookshelves, The Hobbit, Earthsea and to a lesser extent, Narnia.

Dark Crystal is strongly impressive to me for a couple of reasons. First, it's one of the few fantasies that attempt to create an entire world in which human characters are non-existent. Second, it amazed me that Henson and Froud had the balls to produce a fantasy based on new-age conceptions of duality and schism rather than "slay the monster."

E.g. compare the box office of Harry Potter movies with Serenity. First one was unashamedly aimed at kids, second one aimed at 30 something sci fi geeks. Harry Potter makes hundreds of millions of dollars, Serenity just about broke even. If you look at the whole HP franchise - all the HP films, it will make literally billions of dollars, hundreds or thousands of times more than the Serenity franchise, because Serenity was only one film, and it's much harder to make the first film of a series than the subsequent ones.

And the sticky problem that Sorcerer's Stone was better-written, had a better cast, and ended up a considerably more entertaining afternoon than Serenity probably didn't have much to do with it. I suspect Rowling gets more adult than children's readers. And on the other side, the Disney empire distributes almost a dozen "family" movies a year, about half of which go direct to DVD/cable, and they get only one or two "hits" a year. As a few other datapoints, Hollywood gets a sci-fi blockbuster about once a year.

There is a phrase there which highlights the basic problem, "aimed at 30 something sci fi geeks." I suspect that such demographic targeting is one of the best ways to make a bad film. Pixar's success has largely been because they manage to produce G-Rated scripts that can be enjoyed by all ages.

Re:Froud is in... but Tartakovsky is too. (1)

bckspc (172870) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799876)

Sadly, it seems style over substance is what Henson's all about these days. Did you see Mirrormask [imdb.com] ? I read somewhere that Henson Co. is desperate for another Labyrinth. The movie flopped at the box office, but has been a consistent seller on DVD. It was supposed to be their Labyrinth "for the 21st century." But it was gawdawful. And I write that as a huge fan of Dave McKean's artwork. It was hard to sit through 2 hours of CGI romp with random magical plot and not much character development -- not to mention a soundtrack of smooth jazz. Ugh. Now it's time for the Dark Crystal.

Re:Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799674)

The only person missing is Jim...

And I don't think anyone should underestimate the devastating effect that will have on this production.

It won't be the same (4, Funny)

metricmusic (766303) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799266)

Aughra: Where is Brian Froud?
Jen: He's dead.
Aughra: Could be anywhere, then.

In case people don't know (2, Informative)

sgant (178166) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799563)

The above poster was joking. Brian Froud is on board "The Power of the Dark Crystal" as it's conceptual designer.

The Power of the Dark Crystal at IMDB [imdb.com]

Brian Froud at IMDB [imdb.com]

Stuff that matters? (-1, Flamebait)

TheKingAdrock (834418) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799270)

"News for Nerds", perhaps..."Stuff that matters." I don't think so.

Re:Stuff that matters? (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799293)

Maybe it doesn't matter to you - but it does to some people.

Me for example.

Dunno if it will match the original film - but still, cool news.

OMG! (0, Offtopic)

wintered (75625) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799284)

One of my all time favourite 80's movies!!! (Closely followed by the Goonies and the Princess Bride).

Re:OMG! (1)

DDLKermit007 (911046) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799294)

You forgot Labyrinth buddy!

Re:OMG! (1)

WuphonsReach (684551) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799308)

Yeah, I'd be curious whether they can catch the magical quality of the slightly-clunky and campy animation of the original. Or whether they bury it in modern-day CGI effects.

(I also read the book at some point while growing up. Not sure if it was a screeplay-to-book or if it was more of the original story prior to being made into a screenplay.)

Re:OMG! (1)

0WaitState (231806) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799402)

Ranking "Dark Crystal" above "Princess Bride" marks you a fooking maroon. Or are you merely a GOUS (Geek Of Unusual Stupidity)?

Dark Crystal? Better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799662)

Dark Crystal = best movie of all time. Princess Bride? A lame-oh CHICK FLICK only redeemed by Andre the Giant.

As the saying goes (1)

Arcturax (454188) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800376)

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has them and they all stink.

But seriously, the guy just posted his opinion. Disagree if you want but you don't have to be so nasty about it.

OMG WTF AOL LOL! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799289)

I've heard lots of good reviews about the originalmovie, but let me tell you, it's a clunker.

Poor animation, dull story.

PS Legend sucks too except the Tangerine Dream soundtrack.

PPS Labyrinth was actually pretty good.

The normal person has spoken. All you geeky freaks of nature continue your weirdness.

Re:OMG WTF AOL LOL! (1)

ROBOKATZ (211768) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799299)

I don't think anyone is arguing that Legend didn't suck.

Re:OMG WTF AOL LOL! (0)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799371)

I know I'm not.

Er, or maybe I am? Stupid double negatives!

Not so sure (1)

burntsigil (898978) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799301)

Yeah....I'm not so sure this is a good idea. I have fond memories of that movie and I don't want to see them going up in flames.

Re:Not so sure (1)

Secret Rabbit (914973) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799340)

I agree 100%. This movie is part of many peoples childhoods. Maybe the sequal will be part of the next generations. But, if there is anything that I've learned, it's you can't go back.

I fear that for us, this movie will be a mockery.

Re:Not so sure (1)

Pad-Lok (831143) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799442)

Yeah....I'm not so sure this is a good idea. I have fond memories of that movie and I don't want to see them going up in flames.

I fear that for us, this movie will be a mockery.

How would a sequel affect your perception of the first movie? Thats something I cant grasp when everyone is bitching about the new Star Wars, Matrix sequels or what ever. I've seen the SW sequels which didnt live to the expectations, still the originals are the same kick-ass as ever. Nothing changed. Same with Matrix, first one still the same even when the sequels are lame.

Dark Crystal is one of the best childhood memories I have and I doubt watching this sequel will ruin it in any way, even if it sucks big time.

But thats just me.

Re:Not so sure (1)

Jubetas (917500) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799603)

Two words as to why the new Star Wars movies, at the very least, damaged my perceptions of the originals: Midi-chlorians. Ok, well one hyphenated word, then.

I know there are a lot of people who like them for whatever god-awful reason, but these things take the Force from being a mystical energy that surrounds and guides life and reduces it to something horribly similar to an abysmal anime. "Well my midi-chlorian count is over... TWO million! I have the power to go... SUPER-Jedi!"

Having said my peace as far as Star Wars goes, I'm also hoping that this movie won't be terrible, as I love the original. The plot so far doesn't sound promising: (FTFA) "Power of the Dark Crystal follows the adventures of a mysterious girl made of fire who, together with a Gelfling outcast, steals a shard of the legendary Crystal in an attempt to reignite the dying sun that exists at the center of the planet."

Honestly, this sounds more like a job for Superman.

Re:Not so sure (1)

bohemian72 (898284) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800210)

Now I know there may be books and whatnot that negate what I'm going to say, but I don't know that for sure. Taking directly from the movies, I did not lose any sense that the Force was any less of a mystical energy field created by and yet surrounding and guiding all life simply because people interfaced with it through the midi-chlorians.
The force is what it is. The midi-chlorian count simply explains part of the interface. It was clear that some people were stronger in the force than others and I think we all knew something more or less genetic controlled how "strong" one was in the force.
They might have well said, "Whoa! He's got a recessive yet powerful gene in the Force chromosone." (Clearly I'm not a geneticist).
Just because we were explained the mechanism behind why some are more talented in their use of the force than others it doesn't discount the Force itself.

Just my opinion.

Re:Not so sure (2, Insightful)

Sky Cry (872584) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799593)

I've got a perfect solution for you... don't watch the sequel!

Then dont watch the sequel? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799646)

Geez, not exactly rocket science (which doesn't seem all that hard to begin with anyway)

Re:Not so sure (1)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800415)

It's a sequel, not a remake. If you are really really worried, just don't see it.

Re:Not so sure (1)

The Snowman (116231) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800442)

I think a sequel to Dark Crystal makes about as much sense as a sequel to Bambi: none. In both cases, it is the result of a movie studio unable to come up with original material.

The Crystal Method (2, Informative)

SinGunner (911891) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799305)

another world
another time
in the age of wonder

another world
another time
this land was green and good
until the crystal cracked

once more
they will replenish themselves
cheat death again
the power of their source
the crystal

can't you can't you trip like i do
can't you can't you trip like i do

Re:The Crystal Method (2, Interesting)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799405)

Just for the record this man is responsible for Samurai Jack and The PowerPuff Girls arguably the most influential and creative American cartoon works of the post-anime era.

Re:The Crystal Method (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799875)

You've got to be fucking kidding me. If you're citing Powerpuff Girls as an example of progressive American culture, then to be quite honest I don't think there's any hope left for you people.

Re:The Crystal Method (1)

JadeAuto (935739) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800505)

oh my god this is the best.... 3

don't forget the shocking twist (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799307)

the girl ones have wings and can fly

my head asploded when i saw that film at a tiny age. i still remember that little creature those grizzled vulture dudes pinned down and fried with some sort of ray to extract some life extending goop. and how when one of the evil vulture dudes would die, their "good" counterpart would die as well

serious lsd trip-like stuff for a little kid, it left an impression

Re:don't forget the shocking twist (1)

Omaze (952134) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799355)

The vulture dudes were "Skeksis". I forget what the monkish guys were called. And yes, my head asploded as well when the wings showed up.

Re:don't forget the shocking twist (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799647)

Mystics. And third vote for the asploding head at that scene

Re:don't forget the shocking twist (1)

Vanye1 (448817) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799826)

Actually, the mystics were uknown as the UrRu.

It has to be said (1)

jftitan (736933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799314)

I for one welcome our... You get the point.

I don't really know what to say about this article. Whether or not this is a good or bad thing, this is left to be seen when something is available to be seen. However, if my memory serves me right, the Dark Crystal wasn't all that good. BUT!!!! I did like it. I enjoyed the fantasy of the story, but due to the fact I didn't get to see it until 4 years ago, thanks to modern unimaginative CG movies we have these days, I personally didn't get all to into the movie.

  I can say in my defense is that I am more of a SciFi person above all else. Should this have a sequel? NO! Because this movie ended well. Should the Hensen productions allow this to happen, sure why not.

  I just hope that quality and the story line doesn't get all screwed up due to the massive change is direction of the director.

Re:It has to be said (1)

tezbobobo (879983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800317)

It is not because you are a sci fi fan or because of CG that you didn't REALLY like it. The reason is that, for this movie to really appeal, you had to see it in your youth.

As a child you can forgive the crude mechatronics, or puppetry, or whatever the hell it was. As a younger person with their limitless imagination, there is a completely new world for total immersion. There is also life concepts of good and evil and there co-dependence. Maybe that's just crap though.

The Dark Crystal was for me though probably one of the prime movers for my introduction to the fantasy genre. The escapism it alloed was amazing.

"almost without fanfare?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799327)

Is that like being almost not rich?

Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

revscat (35618) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799337)

Man, I dunno about this guy. Dexter's Lab was ok, but the Clone Wars sucked ASS. Holy crap. There were sooo many times in that thing I would just cringe in embarrassment.

I hope I'm wrong. Dark Crystal was awesome. It's just a big strike against the chances of the sequel being respectful of the originality and imagination of the original.

Re: Samurai Jack (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799399)

Watch them all. Watch them many times. In order, out of order... your perception will be changed. This man is incredible.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799520)

I hope I'm wrong.

Not to offend, but you are wrong. The Clone Wars shorts were absolutely amazing, and in my opinion stand head and shoulders above the actual films (perhaps not so hard to do). Maybe you were expecting something from them that they weren't intended to provide, or maybe it was the unusual animation style, but I would strongly recommend watching them again.

I don't know if making a Dark Crystal sequel is a good idea, but since they're doing it I'm thrilled to know that Tartakovsky is in charge.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799540)

If by "amazing" you mean "sucked," then yes!

Maybe he was given an awful story to work with, but after Dexter and Samurai Jack, I expected a lot more. A lot more.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799549)

I'm with rev

My boy and I really tried to enjoy them.

Funnily enough I didn't know until now they were by the same guy that brought us Mandark and Mojo Jojo.

Maybe I didn't have enough faith, it wouldn't be the first time one needs to watch a few, leave it and then watch them again to get over the culture shock.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799590)

It wasn't quite like shooting heroine into the tip of my penis, but the Clone Wars micro series he did was beyond just TV. I was making damn sure what ever I had to do there was time set aside to watch those live. I have the DVDs and still I'm blown away. That man single handedly rescued the Star Wars of my childhood after what Lucas did it. Before he came along, I'd even pared down the series to just Empire Strikes back.

The ephemeral sense of wonder, and childhood impression of daring is something he recaptures with startling regularity. To say nothing of the cultural pool he draw from and weaves into his stories for another generation. If someone is going to make a followup to Dark Crystal, I'm glad its him.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

rabel (531545) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800259)

Thanks Mom! -- Genndy

Spelling Nazi time (4, Informative)

Eevee (535658) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800272)

To quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroine [wikipedia.org] Wikipedia: "Heroine", the feminine form of "hero", should not be confused with heroin, the drug.

It's important to keep the distinction straight: You shoot heroin into the tip of your penis; but shoot the tip of your penis into a heroine.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800452)

Genndy didnt create Mojo Jojo. I believe it was craig bartlet. Im sure genndy directed some of them though. Cartoon Network's studio works much like termite terrace in the old days. They pool the work from episode.

Sorry in a hurry so I didn't have time to proof.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

superiority (892798) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799538)

Really? I find that odd, because everybody I know, from those who like The Waterboy to those who like The Royal Tenenbaums think it absolutely rocks. What don't you like about it? Also, I must agree with my sibling post in that you have to watch Samurai Jack.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799690)

Also, I must agree with my sibling post in that you have to watch Samurai Jack.

Oddly enough, I've liked everything he's done except Samurai Jack.

Somehow, Professor Utonium in a bathrobe with a sword, acting all serious and silent just never did it for me.

But aside from that, I'll agree with what others have said - I don't know if screwing with a sequel to something Henson made seems like such a good idea, but I'll give it a shot just because they have Tartakovsky directing it.

Agree and disagree (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799695)

They were okay, on their own. Their style was something you can either accept or not.

The biggest problem arrises when you already have an idea what the style should be like. Dexter labs and the other originals stand on their own and so their very stylised art can be allowed to work.

Clone wars however clashed for me with my perception of what star wars should be like. Not that much since I grew up with far worse art massacres in the form of the early star wars comics but still it clashed.

But the Dark Crystal art is totally different. I only seen the movie and the art book and that created in my mind a very detailed dreamlike world with beautifull sets with lots and lots of detail and realism.

EXACTLY opposite of all the cartoons this guy has done. Oh of course he is the director, not the artist but it strikes me as significant that all his cartoons share the same art style, hard simple lines giving the characters an almost deformed look. Clone wars is the most realistic and , well just google for the images. Now compare them to the artwork for the dark crystal. Not exactly a match now is it?

Yeah the guy is a great creator of cartoons. That is nothing to sneer at considering how much crap others make, he does very well. BUT we have seen with game movies that just because a director is good at one type of entertainment they don't have to be any good at another. Especially if it calls for a style change.

Can he recapture the magic that was the Dark Crystal? I doubt it. The fact they are going to use CGI has me worried. Sure a puppet made of fire would probably be hard to do but still. CGI. In a muppet movie. Ewh.

Oh well at least it is not a prequel. Dark Crystal, the phantom menace anyone?

OT (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799705)

you're right vi [bell-labs.com] is the best,

and emacs [bell-labs.com] aint all that.

=)

Re:Agree and disagree (1)

dadioflex (854298) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799973)

Doesn't matter whether he's working with puppets, cartoons or people because if his past work is anything to go on there will be a strong visual style and a bucketload of sly humour. Only thing better than this would be a Samurai Jack live action flick.

Without muppetry ... (1)

willtsmith (466546) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800244)


Without muppetry, I don't think the world would be the same. It is absoluetly amazing what the Henson Creature shop accomplishes.

I hope if they DO do the CGI that they figure out how to make their actors LOOK like the original muppet actors with the generally soft edges.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (3, Interesting)

Stinky Fartface (852045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799968)

Sorry mate, got to disagree (mostly) with you on this one. Dexter was pretty damn good- an honestly funny show which is rare in children's animation these days. The voices were partcularly sharp and the art direction was very good. Samurai Jack was fantastic in almost every aspect- great plots, beautiful artwork and superb direction. The Star Wars stuff was ok- but his hands were tied by the Lucas people in many respects. The second series was better than the first, and had a lot more of his style reflected in them. I am pretty jazzed about him directing the Dark Crystal sequel, although I am a bit leery of the distance between films. My main worry is that they will replace the excellent puppets and costumes with some over animated and underwhelming CG crap.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

sconeu (64226) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800418)

Ahhh... Today is a fine day for movies.

Re:Genndy Tartakovsky? (1)

JohnnyLocust (855742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800527)

but the Clone Wars sucked ASS

What, are you insane? Both volumes won a friggin Emmy for Outstanding Animated Program. 'Twas the movies that sucked ass.

Eerie parallel with the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide" (4, Informative)

Badmovies (182275) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799369)

I see that the voice talents seem to be the same people. This immediately looks good, but I have found that this is not always the case. Anyone else who has listened to the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" show probably knows what I mean. The first two series were done within a short time of each other. They also had Douglas Adams' input. The third (and others) were made about twenty-five years later. They are nothing like the first two; I never listen to the CD of the third series that I purchased. Most of the major voice talents are the same. Including Zaphod, who sounds like a roaring drunk in rehab, in the new series. And, possibly most of all, the performances do not have any of the charm and energy that the first two exhibit.

The choice of director is heartening and seems like a good choice, but I did not watch the clone wars series so I have not seen Tartakovsky do anything that did not have a strange sense of humor. That could work for Aughra, but Jen and Kira were pretty straight forward. The reason I am concerned is that Jean-Pierre Jeunet does good on movies like "Delicatessen" and "Amelie," but totally missed the mark with "Alien: Resurrection." There are other examples of directors who seem to have a certain type of movie pegged (and do great making those movies) and cannot adjust to something different.

Let us just hope that the script is good and everything comes together.

Re:Eerie parallel with the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide (3, Insightful)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799426)

Anyone else who has listened to the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" show probably knows what I mean. The first two series were done within a short time of each other. They also had Douglas Adams' input. The third (and others) were made about twenty-five years later. They are nothing like the first two; I never listen to the CD of the third series that I purchased. Most of the major voice talents are the same. Including Zaphod, who sounds like a roaring drunk in rehab, in the new series. And, possibly most of all, the performances do not have any of the charm and energy that the first two exhibit.

We're going to have to agree to differ on this one, as I thought the quandary and quintessential radio series to be superb. Remember that the books themselves are darker by now, and that the performances are coloured accordingly. Remember too that the characters are supposed to be older and more experienced.

As for having Douglas Adam's input, whilst I have the utmost respect for his work I thought the two recent series showed how much better things were when he had an editor or someone else to bounce off. I thought the last book was quite poor, and not just because of the ending. I also thought the fourth book was only so-so. But the radio series...both were superb, because they had editorial input from others. Douglas Adam's did not create HHGttG on his own first time round - that's why certain characters are missing from the books, because he didn't have the rights to them.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Eerie parallel with the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide (1)

bani (467531) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799478)

but totally missed the mark with "Alien: Resurrection."

even the best director in the universe can only do so much with a shit script.

Re:Eerie parallel with the BBC "Hitchhiker's Guide (1)

paedobear (808689) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799508)

The script that leaked - which is the one being used when he came onboard - was so much better than the script we ended up with.

Forgot The Powerpuff Girls (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799373)

C'mon, you know you liked watching them ;)

And I'm being quite truthfull. That's good "X" viewing.

Re:Forgot The Powerpuff Girls (1)

DrMrLordX (559371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799455)

That was originally Craig McCracken's production. Tartakovsky did some work on it as well, but you know that by now.

If you go back and watch the old Space Ghost Coast to Coast ep/special where they rolled out three debuts on their What A Cartoon show, they do a mock-up of a pageant where the producers of each short vies for a regular spot in the Cartoon Network lineup.

They aired the original pilot with Fuzzy Lumpkin, his meat gravy, and his meat ray. Funny how that show was never aimed at young girls early on.

Genndy Tartakovsky: FTW!!! (1)

Narcocide (102829) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799418)

*seriously*

WATCH Samurai Jack.
WATCH the PowerPuff Girls.

I mean *really* *really* WATCH them. This man is the man for the job. If you really see his previous work you will KNOW its true.

S S and E N (3, Funny)

KuRa_Scvls (932317) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799464)

Sugar
Spice
and everything Nice

These are the ingredients to the perfect little movie.

But Director Genndy Tartakovsky accidentally added one ingredient to the concoction: Sequel!

EXPLOSION

Thus, the Power of the Dark Crystals were born. Using their ultra realistic puppeteering, the movie studios have dedicated their lives(er... few months?) to creating the ultimate sequel to a wonderful movie!

Re: Genndy Tartakovsky: FTW!!! (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799874)

You know what's sad? Nothing anyone had said until now made me interested in this sequel. Until your comment.

Both of those cartoons are amazingly done. Each episode completely draws you in. It's not just about the director, though, it's the voice actors, the artists, the musicians, and especially the writer.

If the Dark Crystal 2 will have the same quality throughout the staff as its director, it'll be a movie to remember. We can only hope.

The Dark Crystal is my sister's favorite movie. I barely remember it, but I guess I'll have to watch it again.

Re: Genndy Tartakovsky: FTW!!! (1)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800073)

Agreed. Samurai Jack is very psychedelic, and I enjoy watching it when I can. Love the Powerpuff girls, and Dexter's Lab too. Definately watch 'em before you knock 'em, this guy is good.

It doesn't need a sequel (3, Insightful)

Old Spider (948471) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799516)

The original movie wasn't unique for the time, but was still an excellent creation with a finite storyline. Creating a sequel to Dark Crystal is like creating a sequel to Highlander and Never Ending Story. The only points for doing so are: "Hey, I've got this cool (crappy) script and the connections to make it happen!", and "Hey, let's make some more money off this thing!" It won't have the same spirit which only comes from something that's new. This sequel won't have the spark of beginner's luck to it that made the first one so special. Leave it be, remaster the original, repackage it with two or more DVDs full of extra material, and I'll be more than happy to line your pockets --but please keep the innovative new (crappy half-baked) script in the dust bin where it belongs.

Re:It doesn't need a sequel (1)

great om (18682) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799848)

neverending story is slightly different, as the first movie only covered about half of the children's book. The 2nd movie's plot is actually sorta similar to the 2nd half of the book

Re:It doesn't need a sequel (1)

$1uck (710826) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799905)

I agree completely, I own the movie (watched it as a child in the theatre, watched it in college as a ... um yeah) and now watch it for nostalgia. I just don't see a reason for a sequel, I think prequel might be interesting. And I also want to add, watching it w/o the sound while listening to Shpongle's Are you Shpongled? is a rather interesting experience.

impressive? (0)

illtron (722358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799542)

That's awfully big (and opinionated) talk to call The Dark Crystal "impressive." Fucking heebie-jeebies inducing is more like it. Even the good guys in that movie are fucking creepy. I've always hated it and always will. I don't even remember what the story was about -- only that if I ever met one of the characters in a dream, I'd set his creepy muppet ass on fire.

Re:impressive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799591)

girlie-man

Re:impressive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799732)

"FUCKING HEEBIE JEEBIES INDUCING HATE HATE HATE FUCKING CREEPY SET ON FIRE etc. etc."
Yeah, you're definitely less opinionated than someone saying that creating a world with creatures and races and such just for a single movie is impressive. I mean God forbid!

Re:impressive? (1)

illtron (722358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799787)

I'm posting a COMMENT not NEWS, jackass.

Re:impressive? (1)

DevolvingSpud (774770) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800197)

> if I ever met one of the characters in a dream, I'd set his creepy muppet ass on fire

You made Fresca come out of my nose.

While I'm a fan of the movie, I remember it being fairly disturbing as a child when I first saw it, but in a weird, good way. I think that's why it stuck with me all these years.

Jar Jar Binks, anyone ? (2, Insightful)

lbalbalba (526209) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799613)

In addition to the live-action animatronics that in my opinion made the original such a masterpiece, this sequel will include CG animation elements as well. I just pray that they won't mess that part up, as it can ruin an entire movie for me - just as the CG in the Star Wars prequels (instead of sticking to the suits & animatronics used in the originals) ruined those films for me.

Re:Jar Jar Binks, anyone ? (1)

Bacon Bits (926911) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799659)

And what about Lord of the Rings? Or King Kong?

CG done in moderation or with good direction is excellent. So many entire scenes in Star Wars were shot with full green screen. George simply wasn't up to the task of directing the actors properly, and they needed more direction since no props existed at all. I mean, Natalie Portman and Hayden Christiansen are good actors. Look at their other work.

The editing was good. The cast was good. The special effects were really good. But the scripts sucked, and the direction was lacking.

Oh goodie (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799666)

Don't get me wrong I loved the movie and a sequel would be nice in theory just because it means we might get a fantasy movie. We are not exactly being flooded by them.

But I am also reminded what happens time and time again when some non-movie director gets his paws on a famous property. Usually it is some guy who did some music videos who gets to do a full movie and screws up.

This time it is a cartoon director. I only seen dexters lab and powerpuff girls. Dexters lab was okay powerpuffs was a bit to much for me. The others I only seen and episode or two off.

None of them are exactly, how shall I put this nicely, the kind of stuff you want to watch as a full length movie.

They are good cartoons but would make lousy movies especially of the slow dreamlike fantasy stuff that is the dark crystal.

The style mismatch doesn't give me high hopes. Just because someone has awards in one style doesn't mean they are any good in another.

As for making the dark crystal into an animated series. Oh boy, either Henson studios is swimming in cash or it is going to suck so bad it will stagger believe.

Current cartoons are drawn in a simple way, part style and part because it saves a bundle of cash. That is okay if it suits the story but the dark crystal was in a large part the beautifull enviroments. Super stylised (ala powerpuff girls) dark crystal? Ewh.

Nice to see they are trying, hope it turns out better then the last few muppet movies, but couldn't they have gotten a director who has some experience with this kinda stuff.

Re:Oh goodie (1)

loimprevisto (910035) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800132)

As for making the dark crystal into an animated series. Oh boy, either Henson studios is swimming in cash or it is going to suck so bad it will stagger believe.
The two are not mutually exclusive...

Re:Oh goodie (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800225)

The style mismatch doesn't give me high hopes. Just because someone has awards in one style doesn't mean they are any good in another.

Very good point. Mod parent up here. But...

either Henson studios is swimming in cash or it is going to suck so bad it will stagger believe.

Not every movie taken to a series has sucked. In fact, when I show people the Stargate movie, they can't believe how much better the series was.

I'm not going to say more about Stargate, because I don't know what the original budget of Stargate was. I'm just saying that a series from a movie doesn't have to suck.

Nor do movie sequels have to suck. It's pretty much the same case with Chronicles of Riddick -- people often aren't even aware that it was a sequel, and are amazed when they see Pitch Black. Movie sequels can be significantly better than the original.

And, low-budget things can be good. I'm not talking about Blair Bitch crap, I'm talking about things like Clerks. I'm not saying I'd want Dark Crystal to be done like Clerks, I'm just saying that intelligent low-budget can be good. For that matter, giving too much of a budget to some people will ruin the movie -- most agree that the original Matrix was the best in the trilogy, and it had by far the lowest budget.

Whether this can all be done at once, I don't know. But to assume that budget == good is wrong, because good things don't always need a huge budget, any more than a huge budget implies a good thing.

Super stylised (ala powerpuff girls) dark crystal?

Don't think Powerpuff girls, think Samurai Jack. I haven't seen Dark Crystal, but you don't have to immediately assume Powerpuff Girls. This guy is versatile, at least.

fetzkiek (1)

goarilla (908067) | more than 8 years ago | (#14799679)

We had this movie when i was young dubbed in french
although i could not understand a word of what they were saying
i watched the movie frequently and remember
i was scared to death when that monsterdog fetzkiek popped out of his mousehole and said graawwwlll.

Some advice to any 30-somethings (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14799956)

If you're in your mid-30s like me, and are tempted to run out and rent the Dark Crystal DVD now that you've heard about this sequel, be prepared to be disappointed.

I was absolutely enthralled by the original when I saw it on the big screen back when it first came out, so I was excited about watching it again for the first time in 20-odd years when I saw the DVD in Blockbuster a couple of years ago.

Wow, do I regret it. Watching it as a 34 year old is a totally different experience from watching it as an 11 year old. I should have left it on the shelf.

In fact, the first thing I said to my girlfriend as the ending credits started rolling was "wow, that movie sure seemed a lot better when I was 11." And her reply (she hadn't seen it in 82) was pretty much along the lines of "yeah, that movie sucked."

I'll probably avoid this sequel like the plague. I have a hunch it'll be like watching Phantom Menace all over again. You know, that sinking feeling about 10 minutes into the movie where you realize this movie wasn't made for you at all, but that group of 11 year old kids sitting a few seats down the aisle.

Plus, I don't think anyone can possibly underestimate the impact that Jim Henson's absence will have on this sequel. That man was a freakin genius.

Re:Some advice to any 30-somethings (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800353)

i completely agree with you. i saw it in the theatre on first release and loved it. recently i saw it was on tv and sat down to watch it and apart from getting a fresh memory of the vultures which were cool, it was a suck-tastic movie for a 30 something to watch. it had its place and audience and that was the 80's and being very young. rent it for the kids though, unless they require all CGI these days.

Why sequels? (1)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800033)

I don't see the real point in making sequels, except perhaps to piss people off when it's not like the original.

There have been very, very few sequels that were better than the original -- Army of Darkness, Empire Strikes Back, The Wrong Trowsers ... (Mallrats, but on a different level) ... and each of these was absolutely nothing like the original, and they had the advantage that they weren't just copying the original story.

I thought it was cool that Henson allowed Mirror Mask to be made -- I'd prefer seeing more stuff along those lines -- one off, original stories. Yes, some of them might suck, but as with anything, you take risks, and you release a few, some might flop, some might be great, and hopefully in the end it's a net gain.

A Sequel.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800056)

"Set hundreds of years after the events of the first movie"
I think I might be more excited for a prequel, detailing the original fall
of the crystal. That, at least, makes things more probable then the crystal being split again. The prequel would be much much darker though.. (Gelfling genocide). It would also be an excuse to show younger Skesis, who are really the creepiest muppet/puppet creations of all time.

Britney Spears' boobs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800087)

The MPAA (I use that acronym whenever I want to refer to Hollywood, collectively and derisively) will fuck this one away, too. Just another "safe" sequel to completely fuck away, instead of letting some future generation do a good job with it.

Screwed Xmen3? Check.
Screwed Star Wars? Check.
Screwed Shrek? Check.
Screwed LotR? Check.
Screwed ET? Check.
Screwed Tomb Raider? Check.
Screwed Dark Crystal? In work.

They should screw Labyrinth, Time Machine, Muppets, and Point of No Return. Put Britney Spears in for Labyrinth; she's got the boobs, now, to do the part.

Not my favorite animation style (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800192)

Honestly I just don't like the current animation style. It doesn't have that hand-crafted feel to it like Akira or something similar does. IMHO when a story has as big a scope as Clone Wars, the medium should match it.

"impressive Dark Crystal" (1)

lee n. field (750817) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800205)

that a sequel to the impressive The Dark Crystal

Uhhh.... exactly what was impressive about The Dark Crystal beyond the animation? Certainly not the story.

Re:"impressive Dark Crystal" (1)

tezbobobo (879983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800341)

Sorry... you've directed exactly what lately?

I kid, I kid....

Re:"impressive Dark Crystal" (1)

solitas (916005) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800682)

DC2 will suck. DC1 was a complete movie - the story ended with "sunshine and butterflies". What's GK gonna DO after that?

Also: it takes nothing to make a CGI movie; compared to the original - in DC1 everything was live: there wasn't any CG in it.

Prediction: GK will make a Skeksis-movie that'll look like Dexter's lab.

Animation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800729)

Uhhh.... exactly what was impressive about The Dark Crystal beyond the animation?

Uhhh.... there was probably a grand total of 30 seconds of "animation" in The Dark Crystal.

Fuck That (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800261)

When do we get our Buckaroo Banzai sequel?

I feel sorry for some of you -- I really do (2, Insightful)

Nicky G (859089) | more than 8 years ago | (#14800319)

Wow, the people who are like "I loved this movie when I was little, so I rented it, and was like man, this sucks" really are pathetic IMHO. The Dark Crystal is simply a classic. I'm sorry, but it is. Deal with it. If you liked it as a child, and then rented it as a late 20-something or early 30-something, and found yourself hating it -- well, I'm sorry, but that means part of your soul died. This movie is one of the fantasy greats, with an epic story, great puppetry, deep music and some very heady ideas. It is waaaay beyond most crap made for kids, and I daresay, probably encouraged me to think about some deep thoughts as a young kid that most other children's media never would have compelled me to think about. This movie was Henson at his best, up there with Labyrynth (or is that a crap movie too?) Now, I love Genndy's stuff, although I'm not sure I see how his style would work with this kind of movie. But, I'm willing to give it a chance, that's for sure.

How is he, Magro ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800608)


    I'm a quiet Tartakovsky fan. The Dexter glued on top of my monitor proves it. And, when I saw this plug^H....^Harticle, well... I'll have to let The Bald Eagle make the following little speech for us all :

      "... and, right next to Tim Burton or Jhonen Vasquez, I'm sure that he's *exactly* the right choice to carry on with Jim Henson's well loved legacy."

    "Specially the look and feel - and the atmosphere, and the ideals. That special gift Henson had for being ironic, even sarcastic, without even the slightest bit of bitterness or bile manifesting itself."

    Thank You. :)

P.S.
      Can you imagine Kermit going to New York and tryng to get on the Plane ? For starters, he doesn't wear shoes. So.... :>

   

sequels and prequels (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14800619)

I'm still waiting for them to make "The next to last unicorn"
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?