Have a question about something fantasy-related? Ask the Oracle! (Be sure to include your first name and the city, state, and/or country you’re writing from.)

Q: Will there be a film version of Jonathan Stroud’s Bartimaeous books? If not, there should be! The first book in the trilogy especially would make a fantastic movie. — Abby, New Orleans, LA

A: The oracle agrees with you whole-heartedly! These books about an pricky boy and his supremely arrogant genie are some of the best fantasy written in the last ten years, young adult or not.

And yes, the oracle can reveal there is a feature film in the works based on The Amulet of Samarkand, the first book in the series, with Shakespeare in Love’s John Madden attached to director. But interestingly, both of the project’s producers died in the last year: Sydney Pollack (Tootsie) and Anthony Minghella (The English Patient).

A Bartamaeous curse? No, just bad luck.

Miramax, which is producing the film, is proceeding nonetheless. Let’s just say: the film success of Harry Potter and now Twilight (and to a lesser extent, A Series of Unfortunate Events and The Spiderwick Chronicles) has changed everything in Hollywood. Expect an absolute avalanche of fantasy films in the years ahead, many based on teen and children’s books. Everyone wants a piece of the Harry Potter pie!

Q: Will there be a movie based on the Percy Jackson novels? — Emma, Spokane, WA

A: What did I just say about everyone wanting a piece of the Harry Potter pie? Rights to Rick Riordan’s Percy Jackson kids’ books, about a boy who discovers he’s the son of an Ancient Greek god, were snatched up quickly, and a movie is currently in pre-production, for a February 2010 release date. Logan Lerman (Hoot, Bobby in the TV series Jack and Bobby) has been cast as Percy.

The director is Christopher Columbus, who also directed the first two Harry Potter movies (which doesn’t bode well for Percy, in the Oracle’s humble opinion).

Q: The main actor in the new TV show Kings is not new to fantasy. Without looking at IMDb, do you know where he’s from? — Maggie, Fort Lauderdale, FL

A: Of course the Oracle knows! He was Eragon’s cousin Roran in Eragon (I confess, I had to look up the character’s name). Interestingly, while he goes by “Christopher Egan” now, he went by “Chris Egan” then.

And no, there is no Eragon sequel in the works. The Golden Compass either.

Q: What’s this about another Robin Hood? The last remake wasn’t that long ago — and what about the BBC series? What gives? — Hollis, Atlanta, GA

A: First, yes, there is yet another Robin Hood coming, this one to be directed by Ridley Scott (Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven) and starring Russell Crowe and Cate Blanchett as Robin and Marion, for a 2010.

Why are we getting movie versions of the same four stories over and over again? Blame the great special effects in movies today, not to mention the beautiful, pampered movie stars. Those things aren’t cheap. To recoup the costs, producers gravitate toward familiar quantities — stories with built-in recognition that are easy to sell overseas, and easy to publicize here at home.

To matters worse, the biggest of the four movie demographic groups — and those least impacted by bad reviews — are males under the age of 25. These familiar stories, which are almost always male-dominated, are the perfect fodder for them. And let’s face it: when Kevin Costner’s Robin Hood: The Prince of Thieves came out in 1991, most of them weren’t even born.

Q: What are some fantasy-themed iPhone aps? —

A: In fact, the Oracle has an iPhone. How did you know?

Fantasy-themed aps include Dragon Bane II ($2.99), Angel Sword ($4.99), Mighty Wizard ($2.99), Mystic Jewels ($.99), but none are very highly rated.

Grimoire ($4.99), a new ap, looks promising, with easy access to all the D&D spells in existence.

To answer this question, the Oracle will have to peer deep into the mists of destiny — which really means: ask the readers. Anyone?

Interested in buying any of these products (or any other media product)? Support TheTorchOnline.com by purchasing them through this link.

Have a question about something fantasy-related? Ask the Oracle! (Be sure to include your first name and the city, state, and/or country you’re writing from.)

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Pan’s Labyrinth director Guillermo del Toro is currently at work on the two-part movie version of The Hobbit. Recently he talked to ComingSoon.net about his plans for the all-important look of the dragon, Smaug.

“The way Tolkien wrote it, already, is magnificent,” del Toro said. “It’s already a fantastic character. So, obviously, dragons, you ask every person what their best favorite dragon is, they will give you a different answer. In my mind, what we’re going to attempt on the design of this creature and the creation of this creature needs to push the envelope beyond anything you’ve ever seen on that kind of creature.”

Del Toro referred to the relatively few dragons that have been put on film over the years — not surprising given the costs involved. “One of the best and one of the strongest landmarks that almost nobody can overcome is Dragonslayer [a 1981 movie]. The design of the Vermithrax Pejorative is perhaps one of the most perfect creature designs ever made….I am bursting at the seams about spilling the beans [about our dragon], but I won’t because I would be shot.”

In anticipation of the movie, TheTorchOnline.com looks at — and rates — the most famous dragons that have existed on film, rating them from worst to best:

Pete’s Dragon (1977)

Hey, it’s a kids’ movie!

Dragon Rating: Two Torches (Out of Five)

Dragonheart (1996)

GGI was newer, and we were all understandably excited. But it’s scary how quickly CGI can look dated. (The dragon in the Dragonheart sequel is downright laughable now.)


Dragon Rating: 2 Torches (Out of Five)

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)

Too many horns.

Dragon Rating: Three Torches (Out of Five)

The Hobbit (1977)

A little clunky now, but it made a strong impression on me at the time:

Dragon Rating: Three Torches (Out of Five)

Beowulf (2007)

Crappy movie, decent dragon, even if it doesn’t quite like a dragon “should”:

Dragon Rating: Three and Half Torches (Out of Five)

Eragon (2006)

Does anyone else think it looks like the Loch Ness Monster?

Dragon Rating: 4 Torches (out of Five)

Reign of Fire (2002)

Another bad movie with good dragons.

Dragon Rating: Four Torches (Out of Five)

The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad

Gotta love a classic. Yeah, it look s a little hackneyed by modern standards, but remember: Ray Harryhausen did this all in stop-motion, often by himself.

Dragon Rating: Four and a Half Torches (Out of Five)

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

Technically this is a “winged nazgul,” or a ringwraith on a perodactyl, not a dragon at all, but like everything about the LOTR’s movies, it’s still flawless.

Dragon Rating: Five Torches (Out of Five)

Dragonslayer (1981)

Del Toro is right: this is still the gold standard of movie dragons — and it was even done in an era before CGI. How the hell did they do it?

Five Torches (Out of Five)

Interested in buying any of these dragon movies (or any other media product)? Support TheTorchOnline.com by purchasing them through this link.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Like any genre, fantasy has had its share of groaning-inducing moments, in both books and film. Here are my picks for some of the absolute worst:

(1) The Giant Mole in City of Ember

In last year’s fantasy-esque movie City of Ember, about the mystery surrounding an underground city, it wasn’t enough to merely stick to the terrifically fast-paced children’s book by Jeanne Duprau on which the movie was based.

No, they had to go and add “action” and “excitement” — in the form of a giant mole. The creature shows up, completely unexplained, for a single scene, almost destroys an entire building, and then disappears again, with absolutely no mention or panic from the residents of Ember. Then at the very end, the giant mole suddenly shows up again in the most blatant case of deux-ex-machina since Ancient Greece.

The movie wasn’t great, but it was better than the studio executive who made them add that stupid giant mole.

Hiding from Ember’s stupid mole

(2) The Tri-Wizard Tournament in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

The tasks in Goblet of Fire’s Tri-Wizard Tournament always struck me as credibility-stretchers, even within a world of wizardry. Fourteen year-old Harry has to risk being killed by a dragon?

But the second task, where Harry is required to find “important objects” in Hogwart’s Lake, is by far the most ridiculous. What are those “important objects”? Four of Harry’s friends, submerged in the lake, on the verge of death if Harry doesn’t rescue them.

If it’s all an illusion, what’s the point? But it seems pretty clear that it’s not all an illusion, especially since there is talk about how the tournament was previously discontinued for being “too dangerous.”

In other words, Dumbledore and the other teachers are just standing by while four students might die if Harry fails the task — all in the name of tradition? (Yes, yes, Dumbledore later says the whole point was to root out Voldemorte. But risking the lives of children?!)

A ridiculous plot contrivance in an otherwise interesting series.

Goblet’s stupid “task”

(3) C.S. Lewis’ Intrusive Religious Views in The Last Battle

Obviously Lewis intended his Chronicles of Narnia to be an allegory for his Christian religious beliefs, which is all well and good. But what made the books timeless classics for even non-Christians is that the stories work on several levels: the religious allegory one, but also a universal, literary one.

In short, you don’t need to be Christian to enjoy the books.

At least until The Last Battle. In the seventh book in the series, Lewis gives his inner Christian completely free reign, writing a book about “final judgment” and heaven — with a preachy, ham-fisted plot that makes almost no sense unless you’re a Christian, and subscribe to the beliefs of that mythos.

The disaster that is The Last Battle can’t mar the simple beauty of the six books that come before. But it’s a disappointment nonetheless.

(4) The Trailer for Bridge to Terabithia

As anyone who’s ever read Katherine Peterson’s classic children’s novel Bridge to Terabithia knows, it’s the understated story of two teenagers who concoct a pretend fantasy world to combat the horrors of their real lives — and the touching 2007 movie, with only modest special effects, was pretty faithful to the book’s vision.

But the trailer for that film, in one of the most misleading advertising campaigns of all time, tried to fool people who hadn’t read the book into thinking that the movie was the story of two kids who find an elaborate, and actual, fantasy world:

The stupidly misleading Terabithia trailer

(5) The “Suit of Armor” Sex in Excalibur

In Excalibur, John Boorman’s 1981 film about the Arthurian legend, Uther pretends to be the Duke of Cornwall in order to seduce his wife, Igrayne. What disguise does he use? A full suit of armor.

In other words, he has sex with her wearing a full suit of armor.

Is this even possible? Wouldn’t a cloak have worked just as well — or how about just turning out the lights?

A cause for laughter in an otherwise excellent film.

(6) Peter Pan’s Ridiculous Racism and Sexism

I’m not sure which is more exasperating about Disney’s 1953 animated film Peter Pan: the parade of shockingly racist Native American stereotypes in, or its sexist portayal of females as spiteful and petulant (Tinker Bell) or completely passive and worthy of only contempt (Wendy).

Okay, I give up: it’s the racism. This clip is so offensive it makes me want to take a shower:

Peter Pan’s stupid racism

(7) Eragon

Don’t get me started.

(8) The Synthesizers in Ladyhawke

This one seems stupid only in retrospect. The 1985 movie Ladyhawke is the story of a pair of doomed lovers who can never be together — one turns into a hawk during the day, while the other is a wolf at night. At the time, it probably seemed like a good idea to give it a more contemporary, teen-friendly feel by having Alan Parsons compose a synth-heavy score.

But oh, how times change! Though the movie is set in medieval times, the distracting mid-80s score now inspires only mood-destroying laughter:

Ladyhawke’s now- stupid music

(9) Tom Cruise Apologizing to a Unicorn in Legend

Ridley Scott’s 1985 fantasy film Legend had an incredible look. The script? Not so incredible.

In just one of many cringe-inducing moments, Tom Cruise apologizes to a unicorn for stealing its horn, and setting all manner of evil into motion.

And hey! More mid-80s synthesizers!

One of many stupid scenes in Legend

(10) Jim Carrey in A Series of Unfortunate Events

Honestly, has the man not already ruined enough movies?

Carrey stupidly hamming it up

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike co.mments Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Feed Me Links Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Hugg Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn LinksMarker Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace MyWeb

Netvouz Newsvine oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Rojo Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Sphere

Sphinn Spurl Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Worlds Movies Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

Copy HTML: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »