It's going to have Skeksis and Mystics? What, does the crystal break again or something? They should really get some bubble wrap.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
The girl with the fiery hair cracks it to get a shard, causing the "Urskeks" to divide again.
So careless, these Fire Maidens From Inner Space.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Bummer.
Posted by Seatarsprayan (Member # 7634) on :
But... didn't the Urskeks ascend to a higher plane or something? They left, leaving the Crystal to Jen and Kira to make a new world in its light, or some such. They shouldn't even be around any more to divide again!
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Maybe they forgot their keys and had to come back and get 'em.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Maybe the girl from the center of the earth in taking a shard from the crystal inadvertantly creates the mystics and the skeksis? I dunno, personally find stories about crystals shattering and being put back together boring and repeatative. But then again maybe thats Final Fantasy's fault more so then the Dark Crystal.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
I've said it before, and I'll say it again:
I think the real profit they're hoping to make is energy generated by the spinning motion within Jim Henson's grave.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
What would Jim Henson hate about this? I think he'd be pleased that the project he cared so much about in life has evolved from a much dissed flop into a cult classic. And that many of those involved in the original film are set to work on the sequel.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
I hate The Dark Crystal.
And I've watched it three times to be certain. :-\
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
I love the Dark Crystal the exact same way I love Dulce De Leche that was made from condensed milk. As I eat it, it's the best thing ever and I can't get enough. But give me 4 hours afterwards and my insides start to wonder what possessed me to eat the whole can.
That said, I'm excited, but I'll regret being excited.
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
It's got Brian Froud, so I offer tentative approval. I'm interested in seeing Tartakovsy's directing on something that isn't animated, too.
--Enigmatic
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Was the original much dissed? I was young enough that I wasn't paying a lot of attention to reviews, but other people my age that I knew loved it, as did I. Of course, I loved Clash of the Titans, Tron, and the Flash Gordon movie that was released around the same time, so it's not like I had remarkably good taste or anything.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Yes, it was Noemon. It was a flop at the box office, not just with the critics.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Interesting--I had no idea!
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Jim Henson was rather depressed by its rejection. That's why he tried so hard to make Labyrinth more accessible...and even that film didn't become popular until its home video release.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
I'm excited, the really cool puppets made the original awesome. I'm usually happy with a movie if it has nice costumes, sets, cinematography, or soundtrack anyway.
edit: is that why Labyrinth is so.... poppy? I hate the Labyrinth with a passion Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I love both films. *laugh*
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I really like them both, but there were parts of Dark Crystal that seriously horrified me as a kid.
Labyrinth didn't traumatize me until college, at least.
--Enigmatic
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
Bowie traumatizes me until this day. And the parts where the baby is shook and thrown around like a sack of potatoes. And the muppets serenading Bowie's spandex! AAAH!
Posted by Malakai (Member # 8731) on :
I loved Dark Crystal as a child. Through my little kid eyes it was so un-Disney and the first time I was introduced to anything that had a little darkness in it.
The Skeksis and Ograh really grossed me out, but I LOVED that.
Posted by Malakai (Member # 8731) on :
I think the Dark Crystal breaks in the sequel while someone was cleaning it. I think that's pretty believable, it happens to items in my home all the time!
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
Yes!
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
According to boxofficemojo.com, "TDC" had a domestic gross of $40.5 million (not bad for 1982), and ranked 16th in overall gross for the year. Whether it was perceived as a flop at the time, particularly by its creators, I couldn't say. But I will note it did better than "Conan the Barbarian", "Tron", "Victor/Victoria", and "Blade Runner" in the same year.
My feeling is that most storytellers, having created a project with a definite beginning, middle, and end, would prefer that their stories remain that way. Re-sundering the Crystal, in this case, seems like a particularly egregious way to carry on the story, rendering much of the struggle that ocurred in the original movie meaningless.
Sequels, particularly sequels made more than twenty years after the originals, smell of attempts to mine the graves of the past for money. It's one of the things I most despise about modern corporate Disney.
I would be less than surprised if, like, say, "The Muppet Wizard of Oz", this ends up going straight to video. In any case, barring truly astonishing reviews, I'm not going to see it.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Sterling: Disney does not own the Dark Crystal, in case you meant that the sequel is being done by them.
The remnant of the Jim Henson company still owns the DarK Crystal, Labyrinth, Fraggle Rock, and a few other properties.
The sequel is being done by (for the most part) the those who worked on and wrote the original film, except for those who obviously are no longer with us.
The sequel takes place centuries after the first film. It's not a "one year later" type of sequel.
And speculating that Jim Henson felt the story was complete is moot...judging by the original "World of the Dark Crystal" book (which I used to own a copy of) he had enough background material and follow-up ideas for several films. I don't think it could be definitively said "He was done with this story".
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
I recognize Disney doesn't own the Dark Crystal. Different patient, same disease.
Despite that material, Henson didn't choose to continue that story in the eight years between TDC and his death. He chose to create new ones. Whether that was because he felt the story was complete or that the film had failed, I won't speculate. But the ending of the film would certainly appear to be a complete resolution to most viewers. Resundering the crystal to create the Skeksis/Mystic duality isn't imaginative; it sounds far more like a marketer's notion to capitalize on past assets than a creative attempt to re-imagine them.
I'm standing by my stance.
Posted by Malakai (Member # 8731) on :
If I remember correctly, I think Jim's daughter, Lisa Henson, is greatly involved in the Dark Crystal Project .
There's no way the sequel can be as good, and the first should most definitely be left to stand alone. Still, no matter what kind of train wreck it turns out to be, I'll end up seeing it. Sigh...
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I love the original. I loved it as a kid, and I love it now. In a choice between "The Never Ending Story" and "Dark Crystal," I would say the "Dark Crystal" is more enjoyable as an adult than the other one. Both of them were my childhood favorites. (I suppose I could say "Star Wars" was my actual childhood favorite movies, but I consider them in a class by themselves.)
As for this new one? Forget it! I'm with those who think the first one was nicely finished. I agree that this sounds more like a money making gimmick than serious creative work. I don't care who is involved.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)