Welcome to Gaia! ::

I kinda was kinda a huge LKH fan from early on in her career...so as stupid as it may sound I felt betrayed when she ventured into land of the neverending sexcapade in Narcissus in Chains. I tend to get irate when discussing her. sweatdrop

Oh wow heart

8D

I've heard long and involved rants about her devolution from devoted fans, and it's generally merited. I skipped the vampire stuff and read her faerie series, which was essentially ready, set, porn! although somewhat engaging until about halfway through the second novel when Merideth became this amazing individual who unlocks an individual's godhead by sleeping with them. I am not exaggerating even slightly when I say this. Sex in literature is not a bad thing, but when your novels become simply the pretext for kinky sex with fantasy creatures, I tune out, which is unfortunate because she had the opportunity to create and expound upon a number of fascinating societies with a myriad of approaches to and understanding of sexuality.

I mean think about how achingly asexual a lot of popular male oriented fantasy literature is (I'm thinking largely of the D&D spinoff type material), and how misogynistic and stale the stuff that does engage in more overt sexuality is. There's potential there that needs more exploring in a less crass and exploitative way. Somehow the literary novel manages it just fine, and yet fantasy just cannot get it's s**t together.

I think we've gone off the reservation. The directors you bring up that have made popular kid's movies and critically acclaimed ones are usually working with original material. The Spy Kids franchise and NBC were not based off a children's book. We're talking children's movies based on children's books. Let's toss out Transformers and Voltron sunce they were cartoons and just stick with books.

Not only that, let's stick with books comparable to WtWTA. No Harry Potter or Golden Compass or Eragon because they are much longer and more complicated than WtWTA. So...what's left? The Seuss books which are of comparable length and have less complicated plots.

Recent history that these movies are a disaster. Grinch was directed by a man who has been critically acclaimed and made popular movies, Ron Howard. Bo Welch(Cat in the Hat) worked on a bunch of popular and critically acclaimed films. Horton Hears A Who got favorable reviews and was directed by people who worked on Pixar movies. But we all know that popular does not equate to good.

And when Hollywood starts adding things to existing stories to stretch for time it usually is a recipe for disaster.

Yeah, I'm of the complete opposite mindset on Tarintino. Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are masterpieces. Jackie Brown wasn't quite at that level, but it worked. Kill Bill Vol. I was great, but I wasn't digging Vol. 2. I'd have to say the first Tarintino movie I actively disliked was Death Proof, though. All "homage," no substance. Tarintino works because he has well-thought out stories interwoven with his unique and interesting dialog. When you take out the first part, you get a movie that's barely worth watching. As for Roth... Eh. Hostel wasn't so much a commentary on the darkest aspects of the human condition as it was exploitative bullshit. Saw without the cleverness. Though I can see where you're coming from. Truth be told, Roth didn't look bad in the trailer.

I absolutely love the book Choke. Palahniuk's books are just oozing with cynical truisms. Choke's especially good for that, and the film barely scratched the surface.

I remember liking Blade II. Then again, that was some time ago, and I was probably just comparing it favorably to it's abysmal sequel. But him doing Twilight? I really don't see it. I mean, talk about exploitative bullshit. Sure, he could twist it around into a story worth telling, but it's fanbase would have an absolute fit. It's not like Wolverine: Origins where they can ******** up Deadpool and the comic fanboys will be pissed to all hell, but the movie-going public will be none the wiser. Twilight has such a massive fanbase that the backlash would be too much. Besides, why twist a shitty story around to make a good one when you can just start from scratch?

I think it's infinitely more doable to make Twilight what Del Toro wants because every interview I've read with the main actors basically scream "we hate this crap, we just want the damn paycheck". So getting a better script in front of them should be rather easy. Besides, if the big picture is unchanged, then what's there to worry about? Everyone knows that the details don't always make it into the adaptation. And because it's Twilight, I feel compelled to say this: Goddamned sparkly ******** vampires.

On a different note, apologies if this has been posted before, I present There Will Be Brawl.