What Makes a Good (Live-action) Fantasy Movie?
Michael Martinez
but it's not as easy to think of "good" fantasy movies. Any good movie has
excellent acting, directing, and a decent script. The same applies for the
Fantasy genre, but you also have to allow for costuming, scenery, and
special effects. "Hercules Versus the Moon Men", for instance, is not a
good Fantasy movie. "Clash of the Titans", however, would be regarded as a
good Fantasy movie by most people.
There are fantasy "chick flicks", such as the very forgettable "Warrior
Queen", and bash-em fantasy flicks like "Ironmaster" and the Deathstalker
series. These movies can really only be appreciated either for their
badness or the scantily clad women in them (although I suppose from threads
I've seen over the years there is a core group of Deathstalker fans).
"Kull the Conqueror" was not well received, although I enjoyed it somewhat.
I feel it would have been much better if the soundtrack had not used
electric guitars.
And why is it that so many of these bad movies use rock music for the
soundrack? It's just that much cheaper than some sort of softer music?
I think a good Fantasy movie makes its world seem real: that means the
acting has to be good, the sets have to look like a civilization made them
and not some Hollywood backlot carpenters, the actors have to deliver their
lines like they are really speaking to each other, and the whoe project has
to be taken seriously by everyone involved.
The chief difference in quality between "Conan the Barbarian" and "Conan
the Destroyer" (for me) was that the first movie was a major production. A
lot of time and thought obviously went into it. The second movie didn't
seem to take Conan as seriously as the first. And, of course, "Red Sonja"
was just a joke in a lot of ways.
--
\\ // Worlds of Imagination on the Web in...@xenite.org
\\// RealName: Science Fiction and Fantasy Xenite.Org
//\\ [http://www.xenite.org/index.htm]
// \\ENITE.org...............................................
Alain Homsy
have ever seen 'Cadfael', a British series about a monk in the middle ages,
then yo can imagine what a good fantasy film requires. Cadfael has medieval
music to die for (mainly consisting of gregorian church hymns, which are
brillinat nontheless). Then, you need very realistic settings, and props. Once
again, look at cadfael. Everything looks so realistic. Compare that to Xena and
Hercules, and the difference is evern more apparent.
Oli
doug-tr...@msn.com
Mic...@xenite.org (Michael Martinez) wrote:
> I can think of maybe a dozen "bad" fantasy movies off the top of my head,
> but it's not as easy to think of "good" fantasy movies. Any good movie has
> excellent acting, directing, and a decent script. The same applies for the
> Fantasy genre, but you also have to allow for costuming, scenery, and
> special effects. "Hercules Versus the Moon Men", for instance, is not a
> good Fantasy movie. "Clash of the Titans", however, would be regarded as a
> good Fantasy movie by most people.
Count me out of that group; I think CLASH OF THE TITANS is a terrible film.
> I think a good Fantasy movie makes its world seem real: that means the
> acting has to be good, the sets have to look like a civilization made them
> and not some Hollywood backlot carpenters, the actors have to deliver their
> lines like they are really speaking to each other, and the whoe project has
> to be taken seriously by everyone involved.
I believe you've answered your own question.
The only other problem I see here is that you are defining "Fantasy" so
narrowly that you only seem to be including the "Sword & Sorcery" subgenre.
Fantasy is one of the genres that Hollywood tends to get right more often than
not. There have been many great fantasy films of the past decade or so, as
long as you aren't exclusionary. Some which immediately come to mind are
FALLEN, THE CROW, L.A. STORY, ALL OF ME, CROSSROADS, DEAD AGAIN, INDIANA JONES
AND THE LAST CRUSADE, FIELD OF DREAMS, BIG, THE MASK, THE HUDSUCKER PROXY,
GHOST, JUMANJI, and so on. Even some of the B pictures like BEASTMASTER and
WARLOCK are pretty good.
Doug
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
John DiFool
Michael Martinez wrote:
> I think a good Fantasy movie makes its world seem real: that means the
> acting has to be good, the sets have to look like a civilization made them
> and not some Hollywood backlot carpenters, the actors have to deliver their
> lines like they are really speaking to each other, and the whoe project has
> to be taken seriously by everyone involved.
Unless you are deliberately shooting for camp (which isn't such a terrible
goal if that's what you want), there is a fine tightrope which must be walked.
On the one hand, the world must be consistent-have a believable
verisimlimitude, thus able to cause the audience suspend their disbelief.
The scriptwriter/director almost need to forget that they are making a
FANTASY movie, because if they don't, they risk drowning the film
in a bunch of FX, bad acting, and bad dialogue. For good or bad, there
are not an unlimited number of basic plot alternatives and you ignore
basic dramatic theory at your peril.
On the other hand, a fantasy movie also needs a real good dose of
OTHERNESS-if it is basically a run-of-the-mill plot with no truly
fantastic elements than it really isn't a fantasy film despite what eye &
ear candy you bring to it. Ordinariness can sink it right quick.
If however you are able to present something truly out-of-this-world
AND combine this with point one above (I didn't say it was easy!),
then you have a chance to create something truly magical AND
compelling.
John DiFool
Glenn Saunders
Cadfael is a period drama. It isn't a fantasy film. It lacks the
action and mythical quality you need in a fantasy film. I agree about
getting the look and feel right. Braveheart is a good example of
that. But you also need to have some of the fantasy element, not just
pure medieval realism.
Glenn Saunders
>The only other problem I see here is that you are defining "Fantasy" so
>narrowly that you only seem to be including the "Sword & Sorcery" subgenre.
Okay, then why is it that there are so few quality Sword and Sorcery
films? I would argue that it is the inability of filmmakers to
_believe_ in a romantic genre where good is good and evil is evil.
Most successful stories of fantasy place the story in a more familiar
(often dystopian) setting which we can relate to more directly than
than the more idyllic (i.e. simplistic, childlike) setting of
traditional medieval fantasy.
That's why you have Xena and Hercules, or Knights of Tir Na Nog, or
the recent Sinbad or Tarzan. They make it fun in a Batman TV Series
sense of the word. They don't make the world feel real. If they
succeed, it is only in spite of the lack of suspension of disbelief.
wes :O)
the thieves world series where most of the heroes are bad. would probably go
over pretty well if they had decent actors.
--
Walking across the thin ice of my dreams,
fearing the cold waters of reality,
Yet onward I tread.
wes :O)
ICQ 33976014
Glenn Saunders <cybp...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:37326252...@news.earthlink.net...
Paul Andinach
> Okay, then why is it that there are so few quality Sword and Sorcery
> films? I would argue that it is the inability of filmmakers to
> _believe_ in a romantic genre where good is good and evil is evil.
Interestingly, me and a group of friends were discussing this
recently.
One of my friends, who's doing his postgrad work in mythical themes in
sf film, suggested that S&S films generally fail because there's no
sense of culture, no feeling that the world is inhabited.
Many films, there's background, there's people walking around in the
shot who have nothing to do with the story, etc.
In S&S films, heroes with no past wander across barren uninhabited
landscapes and occasionally stop in generic villages with tiny
populations.
It's theoretically possible to write an S&S film that doesn't have
these disadvantages, of course - but whoever you pitch it to will
immediately go, "Costume drama with special effects?! Are you nuts?!"
So said my friend. What do you think?
Paul
--
"...the hockey mask is so tightly woven into our collective
subconscious as a symbol of psychotic murder that even *hockey
players* don't wear them anymore. Unless, of course, they *want* to
look evil. And leave the back of their heads completely unprotected."
matt jones
> And why is it that so many of these bad movies use rock music for the
> soundrack? It's just that much cheaper than some sort of softer music?
>
I wouldn't mind them using rock songs...if, they used the right rock
songs....you can't watch a guy swinging a sword or a magician hurling
fireballs and listend to motley crue or metallica...BUT i could watch the
same them with some Manowar, a few type o negative songs, and some of the
other (xcept Type o') fantasy based bands....Manowar has guitars but you
really only hear them in their non-fantasy songs...in the fantasy songs they
act as background rythyms much like violins or chello in an orchestra
...instead they rely on a MASSIVE drum set up, with HUGE 22' bass tomtom
drums, deep gongs, wind chymes (etc..), the singer has a massively broad and
loud voice, and they have coral arangements in the style of Gregorian
Chanting, Beethoven's 9th and Orff's Carmina Burana (did you see
Excalibur??). These guys would be awesome...There are a couple of songs inc.
('King', 'Today is a Good Day to Die', 'The Crown and the Ring', 'Kingdom
Come', 'Defender', 'Holy War', 'Black Wind, Fire and Steel', 'Carry On',
'Blood of the Kings'...) that when listened to acctually remind me of parts
of the Wheel of Time. the song 'King' has a big 50 man choral arangement
and is about a King who is trying to pull his kingdom together to fight the
enemy. If Rand sang this song with his male Aiel (who sing battle hymns) it
would kick major butt.. If i made a Live action movie on the Wheel of Time
Manowar would be all over it....with some Orff, and some Beethoven...
As far as good live action....i liked both Conans (the first one was
better), Beastmaster is one of my favorites (although 2&3 sucked ass),
Excalibur was great (i consider it fantasy), the Merlin made for TV movie
was really good but the color and choice of film made it look like a
Xena/Hercules show (not that they are bad, i really enjoy them, it just
doesn't have that movie LOOK). There are someothers but i can't remember
them off hand...
indii
Colin Watson
matt jones <in...@vistatech.net> wrote:
>I wouldn't mind them using rock songs...if, they used the right rock
>songs....you can't watch a guy swinging a sword or a magician hurling
>fireballs and listend to motley crue or metallica...BUT i could watch the
>same them with some Manowar, a few type o negative songs, and some of the
>other (xcept Type o') fantasy based bands....Manowar has guitars but you
>really only hear them in their non-fantasy songs...in the fantasy songs they
>act as background rythyms much like violins or chello in an orchestra
>...instead they rely on a MASSIVE drum set up, with HUGE 22' bass tomtom
>drums, deep gongs, wind chymes (etc..), the singer has a massively broad and
>loud voice, and they have coral arangements in the style of Gregorian
>Chanting, Beethoven's 9th and Orff's Carmina Burana (did you see
>Excalibur??). These guys would be awesome...
That I could live with, I think. There are many scenes in fantasy for
which large-scale choral music would be appropriate, though it should
be remembered that in many respects fantasy is a descendant of romance
(romantic legend, not the slushy blockbusters you find today), and
that any fantasy film should have a lot of lighter music around as
well.
>There are a couple of songs inc.
>('King', 'Today is a Good Day to Die', 'The Crown and the Ring', 'Kingdom
>Come', 'Defender', 'Holy War', 'Black Wind, Fire and Steel', 'Carry On',
>'Blood of the Kings'...) that when listened to acctually remind me of parts
>of the Wheel of Time. the song 'King' has a big 50 man choral arangement
>and is about a King who is trying to pull his kingdom together to fight the
>enemy. If Rand sang this song with his male Aiel (who sing battle hymns) it
>would kick major butt.. If i made a Live action movie on the Wheel of Time
>Manowar would be all over it....with some Orff, and some Beethoven...
A while back, I heard of a German heavy metal band whose songs were
largely based on Tolkien; they have a website somewhere with a lot of
the lyrics on it. I'm not a heavy metal fan myself (give me orchestral
or choral music any day), but I imagine a lot of fantasy fans would
like that, and it mightn't be bad in moderation.
Colin
--
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for they will say both
'No' and 'Yes' and 'Try another newsgroup'." - Usenet Rule #17
Selsick
There was a movie called Legend with Tom Cruise, Mia Sara and Tim Curry. It
had a terrible story line, but a perfect atmosphere. The opening scene with
unicorns, rainbows, petals and Mia Sara in a beautiful forest was so
idyllic.
Hugh
chris martin
Selsick <re...@global.co.za> wrote in message
news:01be9aeb$d888f940$641ccbd1@selsick...
b_fraser
>
> There was a movie called Legend with Tom Cruise, Mia Sara and Tim Curry. It
> had a terrible story line, but a perfect atmosphere. The opening scene with
> unicorns, rainbows, petals and Mia Sara in a beautiful forest was so
> idyllic.
>
> Hugh
I love this movie. My friends and family point and laugh at me whenever
I admit to it but I still love this movie!
Aimee
Zuben
>I love this movie. My friends and family point and laugh at me whenever
>I admit to it but I still love this movie!
>
>
I love it too. Don't mind the finger pointing...they just don't
understand :)
Dave
Michael Martinez
wrote:
>On Tue, 04 May 1999 22:06:30 GMT, doug-tr...@msn.com wrote:
>>The only other problem I see here is that you are defining "Fantasy" so
>>narrowly that you only seem to be including the "Sword & Sorcery"
subgenre.
>
>films? I would argue that it is the inability of filmmakers to
>_believe_ in a romantic genre where good is good and evil is evil.
It does seem like "Sword & Sorcery" is about all we have left for Fantasy
any more. The old Sinbad and Greek myth movies just don't seem to get
remade (and, please, let's not go into Disney-bashing here).
>Most successful stories of fantasy place the story in a more familiar
>(often dystopian) setting which we can relate to more directly than
>than the more idyllic (i.e. simplistic, childlike) setting of
>traditional medieval fantasy.
>
>That's why you have Xena and Hercules, or Knights of Tir Na Nog, or
>the recent Sinbad or Tarzan. They make it fun in a Batman TV Series
>sense of the word. They don't make the world feel real. If they
>succeed, it is only in spite of the lack of suspension of disbelief.
Well, I think a lot of Hercules and Xena fans would disagree with you on
how real the world feels. They have built up quite an inventory of tricks
for those shows (and the now defunct YOUNG HERCULES). In the early seasons
you'd see six guys come on screen and that would be "the warlord's army".
You'd wonder how the warlord could be so terrible with only six henchmen.
Now they're using CGI or related technology to create crowd and army scenes
that are more convincing. And they usually do a good job with the giants
(the centaurs sometimes look a little shaky). They don't actually
superimpose the giants on the scene, but have the actors playing
giants stand on a platform close to the camera and have everyone else in
the scene much farther back. They use a special lens to make it all seem
like they are facing each other.
But the rule applies to all shows, all movies. If the world feels fake,
the experience is disappointing for the audience. I think one of the best
fantasies I've seen on television this season actually came from STAR TREK:
VOYAGER. I don't recall the name of the episode, but Neelix took the
little girl, Naomi Wilder, into the Holodeck where she played with
Flaughter (sp?) and Treevus (sp?), two characters in a series of children's
"holonovels" (I think that's what they were called). The story matched the
special effects, the set design, and the costuming.
Michael Martinez
<Pine.LNX.3.96.990508...@mermaid.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>, Paul
>> films? I would argue that it is the inability of filmmakers to
>> _believe_ in a romantic genre where good is good and evil is evil.
>
>recently.
>One of my friends, who's doing his postgrad work in mythical themes in
>sf film, suggested that S&S films generally fail because there's no
>sense of culture, no feeling that the world is inhabited.
That's a good point. Sets are expensive to design and build, so naturally
they are rather limiting in what they can add to a world. I was watching
the video of "Stargate" (the theatrical release, not the television sequel)
earlier and was impressed (yet again) with the sheer immensity implied for
the world of Abydos. We actually don't get to see much of it, but there
are literally thousands of people in the movie (or else they are using
computers to make it seem like there are thousands of people). When the
hordes of rebelling slaves come pouring over the sand dunes at the end of
the story, and Ra looks out over the multitudes, you suddenly get the
feeling there are a LOT of people here.
Of course, the attention to detail, such as the language (they even used
sub-titles in many scenes) the native Abydosians use, the domesticated
animals (sort of a cross between a camel and a horse), and the hieroglyphs
(of which we only get to see a few) all add to the sense of a broader world
behind the story. I suspect they could start a whole series of movies or
stories set on Abydos which really have nothing to do with the Stargate
theme.
>Many films, there's background, there's people walking around in the
>shot who have nothing to do with the story, etc.
>In S&S films, heroes with no past wander across barren uninhabited
>landscapes and occasionally stop in generic villages with tiny
>populations.
Right. One of the neat things about "Conan the Barbarian" is that we see
his past as a child and how he grows up as a slave (although that idea
turned off a lot of REH purists -- Howard's Conan was never a slave). And
when he finally gets his freedom he goes from city to city. The movie
gives you a sense that a lot of landscape is being covered.
"Conan the Destroyer" tried to replicate that effect, but the story was
pretty week and most of the action took place out in the unpeopled
wilderness.
>It's theoretically possible to write an S&S film that doesn't have
>these disadvantages, of course - but whoever you pitch it to will
>immediately go, "Costume drama with special effects?! Are you nuts?!"
>
>So said my friend. What do you think?
Your friend is probably right on the money. The film industry just doesn't
seem to take Fantasy movies seriously any more. About all we get any
more are bad horror flicks and bad S&S flicks. But perhaps Peter Jackson's
"The Lord of the Rings" will change that. If nothing else, he seems
committed to showing off Middle-earth as much as the story itself.
Michael Martinez
>Based on the way films are being made nowdays maybe someone should do one
>on the thieves world series where most of the heroes are bad. would
>probably go over pretty well if they had decent actors.
Would that be the earlier Thieves World stories or the later ones. I never
read any of the novels, but I stopped collecting the anthologies after the
fifth one. They kept getting darker and more depressing. I would prefer a
movie based on some of the earlier stories.
suhaimist
but i must admit too hard a song would spoil a movie.
I saw one story once..."mortal kombat" i think.... the songs used were too
fast and out of placed. (forgive me if i'm talking 'bout the wrong show)
and then, there was one sci-fi (a low budget most probably) that uses the
song from the group Wings ..... a really bone-crushing piece indeed.... to
show a wizard trying to overcome a spell he broke.
Anyway, some soft-rock or maybe ballads can do just nice in those
films......
matt jones wrote in message <3736...@news-out2.newsnerds.com>...
Sable
>verisimlimitude, thus able to cause the audience suspend their disbelief.
>The scriptwriter/director almost need to forget that they are making a
>FANTASY movie, because if they don't, they risk drowning the film
>in a bunch of FX, bad acting, and bad dialogue. For good or bad, there
>are not an unlimited number of basic plot alternatives and you ignore
>basic dramatic theory at your peril.
Here I strongly agree... Suspension of disbelief is the key to a good
series OR movie of 'fantasy'.
The world should have that real feel to it, and the characters should seem
real, not just bottled cliches in armor that doesn't protect, but boy does
it ever lift those breasts....
The things requiring special effects should seem like they belong in the
world, are a part of it, unless there is a very good reason for it not to
be. Fine, there is a society of one eyed orange creatures there. They
should be treated like normal actors, not given special camera treatments to
show their differences. This would let them blend in.
Also, in many series it seems like people try too hard to show magic with
amazing special effects. How many times have I actually expected the wizard
to turn to the camera and say "Looky look!!! I cast a spell!"?
Of course, the biggest detractor from suspension of disbelief is when
something is obviously WRONG. This makes you step back from the show and
say 'what the hell???', breaking your immersion in that alternate reality.
Things such as painted-wool chainmail being used in close-ups, corny
cliches, in your face special effects, and half-baked archaic language,
"Hark! Thus do it beith that I slayeth thee, foul knaveth!" are all things
that take away from the realism, make you wonder why. Ruin the effect.
(Personally, just for me, bad swordplay is one of the worst. Practicing
several types of swordfighting, I just can't watch certain modern fantasy
TVshows without asking constantly, "Why doesn't that moron quit watching the
acrobatics and just stab her!?!?"
Just my opinions.....
Glenn Saunders
Martinez) wrote:
>Well, I think a lot of Hercules and Xena fans would disagree with you on
>how real the world feels. They have built up quite an inventory of tricks
>for those shows (and the now defunct YOUNG HERCULES). In the early seasons
>you'd see six guys come on screen and that would be "the warlord's army".
>You'd wonder how the warlord could be so terrible with only six henchmen.
>Now they're using CGI or related technology to create crowd and army scenes
>that are more convincing. And they usually do a good job with the giants
>(the centaurs sometimes look a little shaky). They don't actually
>superimpose the giants on the scene, but have the actors playing
>giants stand on a platform close to the camera and have everyone else in
>the scene much farther back. They use a special lens to make it all seem
>like they are facing each other.
I don't have a problem with the CGI-- it's the overall production
design and writing that destroys the suspension of disbelief. Most
interior shots are lit with red and blue gels rather than trying for a
torch/candle-lit look. Interior shots look extremely "soundstagey" in
a bad sense of the word.
The "Tie-Fighter" sound effects when you see projectile weapons go by
and other kitsch sound effects also destroy suspension of disbelief.
That's the Batman-TV-Series-factor.
Also, the anachronisms in the show are just plain stupid. There is a
mixture of Greek, Roman, asian, celtic, medieval, and modern culture
on these shows. On several occasions they have gone ahead and broken
the 4th wall (like the one where Kevin Sorbo goes Awol) so there just
isn't much of a desire on their behalf to create a world you can
believe in.
That doesn't make them bad shows. They succeed on their own limited
level, if that's what you want to see.
>"holonovels" (I think that's what they were called). The story matched the
>special effects, the set design, and the costuming.
Don't get me started on how Voyager uses the Holodeck as a crutch.
Stygia
I bought it when it came out in video and now my kids watch it...my
husband makes fun of it, but we point and laugh right back! Tim Curry
stole the show as Darkness (Big D) IMO. :)
--Ivalynn
--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Greg Muir
> Chanting, Beethoven's 9th and Orff's Carmina Burana (did you see
> ('King', 'Today is a Good Day to Die', 'The Crown and the Ring', 'Kingdom
> Come', 'Defender', 'Holy War', 'Black Wind, Fire and Steel', 'Carry On',
> 'Blood of the Kings'...) that when listened to acctually remind me of parts
> of the Wheel of Time. the song 'King' has a big 50 man choral arangement
> and is about a King who is trying to pull his kingdom together to fight the
> enemy. If Rand sang this song with his male Aiel (who sing battle hymns) it
> would kick major butt.. If i made a Live action movie on the Wheel of Time
Sounds neat. What are their best albums? there's another band out there,
Blind Guardian, who did an album called "Nightfall in Middle Earth." I
like just about everytthing about it except for one of the lead singers.
The rest of the vocals are well-done but he does too much screaming,
really detracts from the quality of the rest of the music.