Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: In which Year??

  1. #11
    Originally posted by Rollo Tomassi
    The Xanth books. (please oh please oh please oh please....)
    It would take some very clever writing to pull any of those off. Truly entertaining books, but I'm not sure how the myriad of puns would come off on the big screen. I bet someone could make a pretty good cartoon series out of it though. I'd be more eager to see "Sword of Shannara" or one of the other Shannara books turned into a movie (or movie series).

    Originally posted by JEDIpartnr
    I found it a total CHORE to get through those Tolkein books. I found no way to get into the story. Oh, well. Needless to say- I don't give a rat's A$s about the upcoming film. I liked C.S. Lewis' "Narnia Chronicles"... much more interesting to me!
    A Chore? I would wager that any series of childrens' books is probably easier to read than LOTR (tongue-in-cheek, the Narnia books are also literary masterpieces). I thought the first 50 pages of the first "Harry Potter" book were a chore. I couldn't stomach any more after that (at least it was only like 15 minutes of my life wasted . I guess we all have our own likes and dislikes. Try "The Hobbit". It's the prelude to Lord of the Rings, but it's a childrens' book.
    Thomas Lane

  2. #12
    Speaking of Xanth, I bought this screenwriting software a few years ago and the first thig I did was "adapt" A Spell For Chameleon just to humor myself. The one thing I noticed while adapting it visually is that theres a LOT of nudity in it. I showed it to a guy who never read the series and he said it would make an awesome movie, but then Dungeons and Dragons came out and ruined the whole fantasy genre until LOTR gets here. I would really like to find out if anyone has the movie rights to Piers Anthony's books...

  3. #13

    Thumbs up

    I thought 2006, but 2005 is better.
    "It can't rain all the time."

    "Quote the Raven, Nevermore."

  4. #14
    Originally posted by evenflow
    I thought 2006, but 2005 is better.
    Geez There is a 3year gap between the films Classic 1977,1980,1983 New movies 1999,2002,2005
    You fool, my reach is far greater than the Jedi.Only a Sith can wield the force over such a great distance.'' - Darth Sidious

  5. #15
    Originally posted by GNT

    Geez There is a 3year gap between the films Classic 1977,1980,1983 New movies 1999,2002,2005

    It's not that bad...
    The Force is strong with this one.

    Of course, that's my opinion I could be wrong.

  6. #16
    Hmmmm, the merits of the fantasy genre really belongs in the general section. so as long as we keep the thread loosely linked to the title.....

    I think in fairness to the BBC they had little budget to play with because at that time the childrens entertainment genre hadn't begun to flourish as it has now. there were so many compromises they had to make owing to time, budget and the few locations allowed to BBC programme makers. I reckon they had a fair shot at the chronicles of Narnia. They also didn't have the advantages of CGI that programme makers do now. If you take that into account and look at the animatronic Aslan I'd say it's pretty darn good.
    I can't stand to watch them mind you because now we've all become accustomed to CGI masterpieces in TV offerings.
    I just saw the pilot movie for Smallville last night and the technical aspects of filming it blew me away. None of that would have been possible if it hadn't been for Lucasfilm and Dreamworks etc. All the advances in film technology make TV shows like this possible. If the BBC had had this technology back then it would have been a very different story.
    They just made a TV movie adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyles THE LOST WORLD which starred CGI dinosaurs. It looked as good as Jurassic Park. It wouldn't have been made four years ago. It wouldn't have been possible or even considered four years ago.

    The chronicles of narnia are an easy read. Much lighter than the rings trilogy. Lighter than the Hobbit even. They are perfect material for kids. The Hobbit would suit older kids. Both would make excellent movies or TV series now with the digital advantages afforded to film makers. Maybe one day soon now that the fantasy genre is big bucks again. Maybe the bubble will burst soon though with fantasy overkill...?

    And yes, episode three comes out in 2005. Saint Rickus of McCallum has avowed this fact time and time again.

  7. #17

    Talking about great minds!

    I remember The Chronicles of Narnia, I read them when I was like 9! I loved the series sooo much that I have bought it for my daughter who is due Jan 26!!!

    Piers Anthony?!?! AWESOME, the "Incarnations of Immortality" series was one of the most original stories I've read EVER. I always thought it would make a great SET of movies. It's just tooooo long to make in just 1 or 2 or even 6 movies. hehehehehe
    May the force be with you.

  8. #18
    I just read they've green-lit a big screen adaptation of "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" with the other books to follow if it does well. The only problem I had with it is the article said they where "adapting the second book in the series first..." AAAARRRGGHH!! The magicians nephew is NOT the first book in the series... Whatever idiot decided to renumber the series and put them in chronological order needs to spend some time in the White Queen's courtyard....

    Oh yeah, Episode III comes out in 2005. (a little something to appease the moderator gods... )

    Another series of books I'd like to see made into films is Chelsea Quinn Yarbro's "St. Germaine" Vampire novels. They beat the crap out of those crummy Anne Rice novels and THOSE got made into films... The St. Germaine novels are more like historical novels that just happen to have a vampire in all of them. Yarbro's attention to researching the time periods she sets her novels in is nothing short of astounding. I suggest you pick up one of the 20 or so she's written. Every time period from ancient Egypt, to Rome during the fall, to 18th century Paris, to Russia at the eve of WWI, to 10th century China. Basically, the series follows the life of this one ancient Vampire from his "birth/death" in the Carpathians in 1600 B.C. up until present time. Some books span a few months time, others span four centuries. Excellent books. Would make excellent movies.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by JEDIpartner View Post
    Yeah... it's 2005-

    I found it a total CHORE to get through those Tolkein books. I found no way to get into the story. Oh, well. Needless to say- I don't give a rat's A$s about the upcoming film. I liked C.S. Lewis' "Narnia Chronicles"... much more interesting to me!
    So what is your preference now that the Rings are complete and the Chronicles have begun ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo Tomassi View Post
    Chronicles of Narnia!!! yes! I love those also. I used to read them when i was little all the time, maybe once a year. I didn't realize they were a parable for Christianity until about two years ago.

    If I had my druthers they would make these three fantasy series into movie franchises.

    Chronicles of Narnia (good ones with big FX budgets, not those cheapy BBC versions)

    Prydian series (the adventures of Taran, the assistant pigkeeper. They made the Black Cauldron as a Disney film, but it only scratched the surface of this excellent series.)

    The Xanth books. (please oh please oh please oh please....)
    Piers Anthony ? That guy writes some weird stuff.

  10. #20
    I liked Piers Anthony. I read a bunch of his books when I was in middle school. They might make good movies.

    The Lion, the witch, and the wardrobe was a good movie. I'll watch the others, but I'm not exactly counting the days until the next one comes out. I think I like the rings movies more though (and I'm definitely not a big LOTR fan.)


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO