Stardust

[Dib]

So, I saw Transformers the other night and it was the most awesome movie ever, second most amazing of the year as well... but that's not for here...

Before the movie came up it was the previews of upcoming movies (as always) and one of them turned out to be Stardust :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin:

I knew they were doing a movie, but I didn't know it would be ready so soon... Its been a while since I read the book, but I still hope they dont mess it up... I also dont remember the family with all the brothers being 'pirates'... I remember the castle in the clouds thing, but not the pirate bit about them...

What does everyone else think about this then?

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Well, I wasn't too impressed with the book myself. Neil Gaiman is always hit or miss with me. I mean, it was imaginative... and the characters intriguing... but frankly the plot stunk.

The movie looks cool though, and for once I won't much care if they mess with the plot a bit, so I might enjoy it more because I'm not expecting nor particularly wanting it to follow the book word for word.

Just hope they don't make this another Eragon where neither the fans or the newcomers could make heads or tails of the thing.

[Attilargh]

I saw the trailer somewhere, went "I can't remember any flying pirates!" and just had to read the book again. Not a bad read, but not Sandman either. The plot was pretty simple, there were a few pretty big coincidences and stuff like that, but it was fun to read. The movie looks rather promising, as it seems it's got a bit more action than the book, and the trailer never fails to make me laugh at the "dashing princes" part. :smallcool:


Just hope they don't make this another Eragon where neither the fans or the newcomers could make heads or tails of the thing.
I found the movie absolutely hilarious, actually.

[bosssmiley]

Well, I wasn't too impressed with the book myself. Neil Gaiman is always hit or miss with me.

Oh wow, it's like VT read my mind or something.

"Sandman", "Signal to Noise", "Now we are Sick" and "American Gods" - Gaiman channelled godly win :smallcool:
"Neverwhere" (I mean "Gah!" did you see the BBC adaptation?), "Anansi Boys" and "The Books of Magic" - Gaiman manifested the element of self-indulgent tossery that is the flipside of his skill as a talespinner :smallannoyed:

(all IMO of course)

[Mr Croup]

"Neverwhere" (I mean "Gah!" did you see the BBC adaptation?)

Actually the BBC miniseries was the original format of Neverwhere, and Gaiman made the novelization later. As you can probably tell from my screen name, I'm a bit partial to Neverwhere, so while I think it is amazing, I recognize that my unreasoning love of the book is not held by all.

I like Stardust, and while I don't think it's his best work, I fiercely enjoy it. I think it's the fairy tale nature of the story that does it for me. I enjoy it for many of the same reasons that I enjoy Lud-in-the-Mist. Besides Anansi Boys, it's probably the book that I find most people put on the bottom of their list of Gaiman's novels. Speaking of Anansi Boys, while I enjoyed it, it is probably the least favorite of any of Gaiman's works for me. Now, a friend of mine who's quite big on African folklore, and comes from a family of practitioners, it's one of his absolute favorites, because it speaks to his cultural experiences. This is one of the reasons I like Gaiman so much, the fact that while he has the ability to write in different distinctive voices, but still maintains an unmistakable style.

Right, I'm sure I had more of a point when I started typing, but bugger all if I can recall what it was now.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Yeah, Neverwhere was actually my favorite of his I've yet read.

American Gods, which everyone seems to prize so highly, literally made me queasy. I'm sorry, but Gaiman came off as nothing less than a sick, sick man for having written that thing.

Its like he said to himself, 'To what levels of perverted thought can I attain in this book...'

And then he has to describe it all in his meticulous way down to the smallest detail. In some instance that is fine, but in others I do NOT want to read that.

Its like the difference between someone taking a picture of a crime scene or going up and literally shoving the camera down their throat so you can see necrosis from within as well as without.

[Dib]

Like I said (did I say it?) I haven't read much Neil Gaiman stuff... just the first 6 Sandman books, Stardust, Neverwhere and 'Smoke and Mirrors'

I liked some of the Smoke and Mirrors stories, but others were just not very intriguing, though I read it all anyway... I loved the other two and loved the Sandman graphic novels even more...

It's interesting to see such varied opinions as well... and I think I'll have to read American Gods after that last post :smallwink: :smallbiggrin:

[LordShaper]

I'm a huge Gaiman fan and I buy and read everything I can get my hands on, especially the Sandman, of which I am the proud owner of all ten volumes of the original series:smallsmile: :smallsmile:

I read Stardust a few months back, just after I saw the trailer for the first time. Granted, several things in the trailer don't appear in the book (sky pirates or Ferdie the Fence, for example) but I don't mind the movie adding these things be cause: a)I'm not one of those purists that expect that any adaptation of a book to movie is 100% word-for-word:smalltongue: and b)just because some of the plot of the book is changed, ommited or added does not mean that the movie will be bad.:smallsmile:

The book was interesting and sweet and had a kind of innocence to it that distinguishes it from more contemporary fantasy works (just like the cover of the book says, it's more in the vein of Lord Dunsany than Tolkien) and it also reminded me of Books of Magic (the part where Tim visits the Faerie).

All in all, Gaiman is a talented writer and an artisan and I can't wait for the movie (not because the trailer looks promising and exciting and DeNiro plays a sky pirate but also because it has Claire Danes in it:smallsmile: )

[MrsbwcMD]

I've become a huge Gaiman fan over the past couple of years, though I've never read any of "Sandman." I've been sticking with his novels and short story collections for now. I actually started with American Gods, which is still my favorite, probably because it speaks to my inner Viking (my great-great grandmother was from Sweden) with all of the references to Odin and Norse mythology. I also love his short story collections because, having a young child at home, it was easy to pick up the books and put them down again for a long time without having to remember where I left off. I have a few of his books at home that I still have to read (Anansi Boys, for one), but when I read on his blog (which I actually was introduced to before I ever started reading any of his works) that there was going to be a movie about Stardust, then I knew I had better pick it up and try to finish it before the movie came out. Am I the only one who remembers the ship in the sky and the pirates/traders who collect lightning to trade for other things at the big tree? Granted, it was a very small chapter (maybe not even the entire chapter), but I distinctly remember there being a sky ship on which Tristran and Yvaine have a small respite before continuing their journey. Gaiman does admit on his blog that many parts of the book are expanded upon (especially the sky pirates), but he is a producer on the movie, and he seems very happy with the end result. I am looking very forward to it being released in theaters, soon! Every time I see a trailer for it, I do a little fangirl squeal inside!
If you're interested, here's Gaiman's personal blog, which he's been writing since the beginning (even before the beginning) of the popularization of blogs: http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/

[Mr Croup]

Am I the only one who remembers the ship in the sky and the pirates/traders who collect lightning to trade for other things at the big tree? Granted, it was a very small chapter (maybe not even the entire chapter), but I distinctly remember there being a sky ship on which Tristran and Yvaine have a small respite before continuing their journey.

In the book they were described as "lightning fishermen," or some such, and weren't represented as pirates. Still, changes from the book are inevitable, I just am a bit hesitant about changes that may not necessarily have been needed, or don't inherently improve upon the adaptation. Each time I see a trailer for the movie, or a poster, I think to myself, "why sky pirates?" But then I try and step back and tell myself not to start making judgments on it yet, as I haven't seen it. I know that the movie will be different from the book, it's inevitable, but I try to keep reminding myself that that doesn't necessarily mean it won't still be a great movie.

[storybookknight]

I'm going to see it tonight!

As for Gaiman's work, I actually thought Anansi boys was one of my favorites of his stuff, and I'm just your average white boy.

What made you think American Gods was perverse, Vorpal?

Also, if there is ever an American Gods movie, I say Vin Diesel as Shadow, Morgan Freeman as Anansi, and ... I'm not sure who I would want for Wednesday. Any thoughts?

[Cyrano]

*snipitty snip sniiip*
Now, see, I find that ridiculous. To me, it was the difference between a man taking a picture of a crime scene and a man taking the family inside, trying to be kind, asking them to identify the victim and talking them through it. It was brutal, in parts, sure, but it was presented well. It's hard to explain, but it was sympathetic.
It didn't hurt that I loved the plot, and the new gods (Media and Automobiles being particular favorites) were amazing.

[Prustan]

I liked Stardust. It wasn't quite what I expected, and I think my library may have rated it slightly too young, but it was pleasant enough. Maybe a little too descriptive in a couple of places.

[Dryken]

Ricky Gervais and Robert De Niro stole the film for me. :)

[Wolfgang]

Its like he said to himself, 'To what levels of perverted thought can I attain in this book...'

And then he has to describe it all in his meticulous way down to the smallest detail. In some instance that is fine, but in others I do NOT want to read that.

Its like the difference between someone taking a picture of a crime scene or going up and literally shoving the camera down their throat so you can see necrosis from within as well as without.

I have to second this. The setting, plot, and godly characters of American Gods were absolutely amazing. Shadow and his pathetic wife nearly ruined the book for me and can both rot in hell.

Also, I actually enjoyed Anansi Boys more than American Gods. I've come to the conclusion that I'm pretty weird.


Now, see, I find that ridiculous. To me, it was the difference between a man taking a picture of a crime scene and a man taking the family inside, trying to be kind, asking them to identify the victim and talking them through it. It was brutal, in parts, sure, but it was presented well. It's hard to explain, but it was sympathetic.


Except it was brutal just for the sake of being brutal, because I was given no reason to care about these "people" or what happened to them. They have no sympathetic character traits. Shadow's lack of personality was kind of a plot point I guess (although that was never explained, or it wasn't memorable if it was), but we don't know anything redeeming about his wife. Is she nice? Is she fun? Is she caring? I don't even remember her name; all I can recall is that she was unashamed and even occasionally happy about cheating on her husband. And her "redemption" toward the end? Come on. Suddenly she has this earth-shattering love for Shadow when she's shown nothing for him throughout the entire book? Even in flashbacks when she was not undead and should have had some feeling, the only thing she ever did was come up with a pet name for him. Truly, such star-crossed lovers there never were.

Perhaps if I was ever shown anything good and genuine, even just one good thing amidst all the bad, about either of them the whole thing might have been compelling.


...Okay, there's pretty much no way to redeem myself for ranting that much. I want to see Stardust? :smallredface:

[orcmonk89]

Saw Transformers too, and this was previewed. Plan to go see it, but also hope to get a chance to read the book first. It looks rather good, and I'm a big fan of Ricky Gervais.

[Pendragonx]

So I actually saw this movie.. not just the trailer... :) ..It was pretty good, I thought. I'm unfamiliar with Neil's works, so I didn't have any expectations, other than what I saw in the trailer. It reminded me in many ways to the movie the Princess Bride. So yea, I recommend seeing it :)

[Ego Slayer]

Well, I haven't read the book, and maybe I will after I see the movie. Might be seeing it tomorrow, to we'll see... Looks interesting, at least.

[Flipkat]

Looking forward to the movie! (I snagged a bunch of free posters at Otakon.) :smallsmile:

On a related note: I think I recall reading that the director of "Nightmare Before Christmas" would be similarly tackling Coraline. I can't think of a more appropriate treatment.

[Ego Slayer]

Well, I saw it (ugh... movie theaters. :smallyuk:)

Well, it was cute, and fairly entertaining... and even a little funny at times. I rather liked it, actually. [And when Tristan (Cox) got that long hair half way through the movie.... daaamn.:amused:)

Okay, I'm done... guess I'll go look for the book now.

[Rachel Lorelei]

Oh. Em. Gee. SQUEE.

Saw it. Go go go GO. It was absolutely fantastic. And Robert DeNiro has his best role ever.

[Indurain]

Oh. Em. Gee. SQUEE.

Saw it. Go go go GO. It was absolutely fantastic. And Robert DeNiro has his best role ever.

Alright, I really have to disagree with you there. Sure DeNiro is funny and quite entertaining, but best role ever? Okay, so it's better than his stuff in the Meet the Parents/Fockers movies, and certainly better than Analyze This/That, but this is Robert DeNiro (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/) we're talking about.

Raging Bull, Deer Hunter, Taxi Driver, The Godfather, Heat, Casino...the list goes on and on. All of these are far better roles than in Stardust.

Please, go watch the above listed movies, and then try telling me that his best role is as a homosexual lightning pirate.

As for a review of the movie itself. I read the book, I quite liked it. It was a fun, fanciful, fairy tale. And it works. It's light reading, and a good way to spend a Sunday afternoon. The movie, on the other hand, can't make up its mind what it is. Sometimes it tries to be that fairy tale, sometimes it tries to be an epic LOTR movie, sometimes its trying to be a comedy. And, it doesn't quite work.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie. But it was not as good as it could have been. Slo-Mo horse riding was not needed in this movie. Had Matthew Vaughn just stuck with the fun fairy tale that he used as source material this movie could have been great, but instead he tried to be Peter Jackson and failed.

For a movie filled with wise-cracking ghosts, and man-goats, you just can't try to take yourself seriously, it just ruins the atmosphere you've created.

The acting was great, and I'm really happy about seeing Michelle Pfeiffer on the big screen again, but it sometimes felt like a waste of talent.

Now again, I enjoyed this movie; moreso than the people I went with, but I wanted more...well, not more, just different.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Had meant to post a review on this first thing, but Indurain put it the best I think.

Basically decent movie, not too great adaption of the book. It didn't do much if any better than Eragon in that regard, but it was just fine as a standalone. Whats funny is I thought it had a stronger plot than the book for it.

I swear, miss star started out kinda annoying, but man but didn't she become adorable by the end.

My main complaint is the stupid bit with making the captain a fruity cross-dresser. It didn't fit the movie, was really dumb, and made me want to twitch. Totally pointless, and though it could have been partially saved by him being a dashing swordsman even in his frocks, putting up a grand fight and all, it's like 'I have on the dress, so I must become an absolute wuss'.

[DreadArchon]

The movie, on the other hand, can't make up its mind what it is. Sometimes it tries to be that fairy tale, sometimes it tries to be an epic LOTR movie, sometimes its trying to be a comedy. And, it doesn't quite work.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie. But it was not as good as it could have been. Slo-Mo horse riding was not needed in this movie. Had Matthew Vaughn just stuck with the fun fairy tale that he used as source material this movie could have been great, but instead he tried to be Peter Jackson and failed.
Feh, I disagree. Fairy tales do need a few "Bang, whoosh, zoom, slow! This being significant!" moments. "Larger than life," overstressed importance of all the main characters, that sort of thing. Also, the occaisonal "funny" moments are pretty natural and fit well with the flow of things, they're not a matter of forced "this is a comedy and you haven't laughed recently enough."

Anyway, I thought the movie was zomgwtfawesome, though I haven't read the book.

[Midnight Son]

I just got back from seeing it with my cousins. What a fantastic movie! I knew I liked Michelle Pfeiffer for some reason. The problem I have with most fantasy movies is that the actors who play the villian have a hard time keeping their evil toned down. They over-act it and ruin the movie. Just a fantastic job all around in this one.

Oh, and it may not have been De Niro's best job(he's had so many great roles), but I would rank it among his best. He was obviously having fun with it and really sold the part.

Again, fantastic movie!

[JabberwockySupafly]

So I actually saw this movie.. not just the trailer... :) ..It was pretty good, I thought. I'm unfamiliar with Neil's works, so I didn't have any expectations, other than what I saw in the trailer. It reminded me in many ways to the movie the Princess Bride. So yea, I recommend seeing it :)

That's quite possibly the biggest compliment you can give to Stardust as it means it achieved it's goal. Neil Gaiman wrote Stardust to be a Fairy Tale for Adults, so if it reminds you of another distinctly Fairy Tale book/movie, then it's doing a damn fine job.


Also, to the people upset about Shadow in American Gods... he was the protagonist. The book would not exist without Shadow. He also represents the messianic demi-god aspect of most major religions and even the older ones (Jesus, Coyote, Osiris, so on & so forth). I personally still think American Gods is Gaiman's best non-graphic novel work.

[Leather_Book_Wizard]

I've not seen the movie yet, but I've read the book. It's good, not great. Has anyone here heard that "How many miles to Babylon?" nursery rhyme before?