Via FilmIck comes the news that David Slade, the man who directed Hard Candy and the upcoming 30 Days of Night (sidenote: I've heard a lot of grumbling that the trailer for 30DoN stinks, and I must say I heartily disagree; I thought it looked kinda kick-ass, plus Josh Hartnett mmmm), is set to direct the adapation of Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere.Neverwhere was already filmed as a BBC miniseries thing, which I have not seen but from the reviews I have read the thing was DOA. But I am a large fan of the novel; it's a brisk entertainment, much like Stardust (the book) was, and could make for a fun movie.
Another sidenote: Stardust (the movie)'s semi-dismal opening weekend will hopefully not hinder the momentum of Gaiman-adaptations; I will not rest until I see American Gods on the big screen I say!
Oh, and Stardust, which I did see over the weekend, is muddled and strangely lacking magic, if it's not trite of me to use that phrase;
Michelle Pfeiffer is indeed terrific, and I thought Claire Danes and Charlie Cox (new crush alert!) were both fine leads, but the movie could've used some tightening (like leaving a big chunk of De Niro on the cutting-room floor) and there was never really a moment where I felt bowled over by spectacle, while the novel presented plenty of opportunities to do so.As a small example of the overall problem: the burning of the Babylon Candle was so poorly done; Gaiman describes it beautifully - the way Tristran moves hundreds of miles with each step he takes and how he can actually see himself ripping through different landscapes - but in the film all we got was a flash of light and whoosh, he's somewhere new? It was that sort of whittling down the wonder in the book for been-there-seen-that CG bullshit effects that dampened the spriteliness of Gaiman's imaginative flourishes and made the film merely adequate.
So hopefully David Slade can capture that magic a little better than Matthew Vaughn managed.
.
Posts
7 comments:
I agree with you on Stardust. It just seemed to peter out with all of its magic, and it was the sort of movie you could tell there had been great intentions behind, but no one had any decent follow-through. Pfeiffer was indeed the standout (though I loved Peter O'Toole's cameo), though I rather detested the blandness of Claire Danes's perf (I did not watch My So Called Life, so I've never had the attachment to her that fans of the show have). And Charlie Cox-yummy, yummy, yummy (particularly when he came onscreen with the long hair).
I usually go back and forth with Danes - sometimes she's too mannered for me - but I really liked her in this. She seemed to get the light touch that a Gaiman adaptation needs. I found myself charmed by her, something she hasn't done in awhile.
And I am convinced she's the greatest crier working in film today; when she made her lip tremble in that scene under the bushes at the side of the road with Cox, it was like a lightning bolt to my own tear-ducts.
Charlie Cox, post-makeover, with the long hair and the swashbuckler outfit... swoon.
Greatest crier? I don't know, I'm fairly certain that Julianne Moore would take that title. You're right though, that was definitely the best scene that didn't have Pfeiffer in it.
And Cox, particularly that first scene with the new hair/duds, with that cocky little grin-I felt a sudden urge to pounce onto the screen. I'm going to have to investigate Stone of Destiny, his next flick, when it comes out.
This Neverwhere news is fantastic. It's a great story and will make a great movie and it deserves better than the glorified Doctor Who episode we got on BBC.
I just...I just can't get excited about seeing Claire Danes with an accent and Robert DeNiro's further descent into self mocking oblivion
I am so glad Charlie is going to (hopefully) become a photographic fixture here on MNPP. I actually think I let out a "swoon" when he appeared, post-transformation in Stardust.
Neverwhere? Big Screen. eeeeeeeeeeeee!!!! American Gods, that would be difficult, but if done right, so good.
Post a Comment