Cool article regarding fantasy films and the current economic crisis

[thtoneguy94]

thought some of you might find this interesting

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/can-fantasy-epics-survive-the-credit-crunch-chronicles-1213848.html

[Fluppeteer]

Lord of the Rings was epic, Harry Potter was okay, Twilight, I didn't even bother to see. Too many companies are copying other fantasies. It's time to get original.

[WesScog]

Unfortunately, it's not a very profitable time to be a filmmaker. Things will be hard not just for people like us, but for the professional sector as well.

But, it's not necessarily a bad time in general, the 30's were terrible economically, yet it produced a lot of classics, "Snow White", "Mr. Smith goes to Washington", "Wizard of Oz", "Frankenstein", "Anna Karenina", "42nd Street".

The recession in the early 80's, they produced "Raging Bull", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "E.T.", "Blade Runner".

So, even if things go terrible, the industry will preserver. The economy doing poorly doesn't necessarily equate with bad movies, people just may perhaps have to get a little creative.

[Fluppeteer]

Unfortunately, it's not a very profitable time to be a filmmaker. Things will be hard not just for people like us, but for the professional sector as well.

But, it's not necessarily a bad time in general, the 30's were terrible economically, yet it produced a lot of classics, "Snow White", "Mr. Smith goes to Washington", "Wizard of Oz", "Frankenstein", "Anna Karenina", "42nd Street".

The recession in the early 80's, they produced "Raging Bull", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "E.T.", "Blade Runner".

So, even if things go terrible, the industry will preserver. The economy doing poorly doesn't necessarily equate with bad movies, people just may perhaps have to get a little creative.
Plus, I hear the number opening at the box office a week or a few weeks ago was Yes Man, and that was supposed to be grossing around 16-18 million I think. No one ever comes up with something original. There always adaptions and remakes of other successful works. Even Yes Man was based on something before it was a film.

[WesScog]

Actually, no it wasn't. "Yes Man" was based on an experiment that the author of the original book undertook personally. It wasn't based on anything.

I don't see adaptation as being un-original or resulting in inferior work.

The majority of Kubrick's cinematic output were adaptations of novel's, and yet I consider him one of the great American filmmakers.

[Fluppeteer]

Actually, no it wasn't. "Yes Man" was based on an experiment that the author of the original book undertook personally. It wasn't based on anything.

I don't see adaptation as being un-original or resulting in inferior work.

The majority of Kubrick's cinematic output were adaptations of novel's, and yet I consider him one of the great American filmmakers.
Good point. Adaptations at this point can either be bad or good. I have read Ian Fleming's Casino Royale, and I saw the movie, the adaptation was fresh. They had some new stuff, without taking away the creativity of the author.