!!!

[tealin]

A Wee Free Men movie?!

Not the book I'd have expected anyone to start with, but it did seem to get the most attention in the States and won some sort of award. Now if only Dreamworks would do something with Bromeliad. NO, I take that back! Not till I get there! You guys are still waiting for me, right?

;)

Comments

[sammysmee.livejournal.com]

I am still holding out for GOING POSTAL The Movie. im not sure who would make a good moist, Matt Damon in his Grimm attire reminded me of him, but im not sure if hed pull it off :D but it would be fab.

also Unfortunate events 2, gah!

you should work for dreamwords so then the whole world could see some tealin magic, it'd stick some dynamite up disneys ass lol

This just in from Variety: TWIRLYNOODLE TO SIGN CONTRACT WITH DREAMWORKS

[(Anonymous)]

Well, now you've done it - now you HAVE to get a job with Dreamworks because everyone expects you to! Let me know if you need a good contract lawyer...
BTW, you're absolutely right: I think Mr. Campbell is an absolute genious - tragically underused - but he's not right for EVERY role, obviously (he was miscast, although humorously so, as the dooomed boyfriend in "Congo")
---Mark

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Re: Dreamworks

I am afraid.

Dreamworks

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, well, some people would say you should be. Like many corporations, I hear they tend to take as much advantage of you as you'll let them. A lot of weekend and overtime work (paid) is apparently "expected" in exchange for free food and 2 weeks off for Christmas, although a friend of mine, Barry Johnston, worked there (has since moved on to Pixar apparently), and he flat out refused to do it, with no apparent repercussions. Sounded like nobody wanted to rock the boat, assuming there'd be trouble, but it it was more bluff than business. Anyway I have friends who didn't like working there and didn't stay long, and others who have worked there for a while and like it as much as any other place - their next few projects look pretty, at least. ( I can put you in touch with some of them if you want their candid opinion, although there is reason to believe that Disney,at least, may be doing some traditional projects in the future...maybe keep this part out of your blog - it's kinda hush-hush. Just something to think about)
---DisneyBoy

[lepitot.livejournal.com]

I still haven't read any of his books...

But, yes, I wish they'd make Unfortunate Events 2 as well! Why did they stop? Grr!

Yes, that would be great if you worked for Dreamworks. But isn't Dreamworks now Paramount??? I thought they were bought out?

Jon

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Dreamworks is now owned by someone else, but I got the impression the animation division was still independent. Dunno for sure.

Unfortunate Events 2

[(Anonymous)]

Apparently it (the first film) didn't make enough money. Too bad - fantastic production and costume design.
---DisneyBoy

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

But inappropriate casting. : P

casting

[(Anonymous)]

Again, I must defer in judgement to one who actually read the books - how would I know? I liked the kids (though it seemd like the boy should wear glasses at least, being a reader), and Timothy Spall's character, as well as Billy Connelly and Meryl Streep, but I have no idea if they were anything like that in the books. By virtue of incredible makeup, Jim Carrey seemed to look like the illustrations of Count Olaf, if nothing else, but I've mentioned my beefs with his performance previously. Maybe I should start readng the books before I say anything else about this...
---La-Z-Boy

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Ahh, see, in the books, Klaus has glasses – they are probably his most prominent feature. I suspect they nixed them to avoid the Harry Potter connotations, though. The fourth book is, in fact, largely dependent on his glasses as a plot device ... heh, maybe that's why they didn't go ahead with the sequel.

Billy Connolly was awesome. But he always is. Meryl Streep was an excellent Aunt Josephine. Timothy Spall was OK (Poe doens't really do much besides cough, and they seem to have cut the coughing), Olaf's troupe was rather disappointing, and I have no idea why Cedric the Entertainer was in there at all. Other than that, um... I wrote a review, once upon a time. Lemme see if I can find it.

TADAA! (http://www.nocturnalsoldier.org/Tealin/snicketreview.html) (Warning ... it's loooooooooooooooooong.)

Read the books! Read the books! They're fabulous and clever, and really quick reads, with wonderful illustrations!

THE Definitive Review of "A Series of Unfortunate Events"

[(Anonymous)]

Well, it sounds like you had almost exactly the same reaction to just about everything in the movie as I did, only you put it a lot better (and went into more detail) than I probably would have. Bravo! Have you considered a career as an online movie critic?
The magnifying glass device probably didn't bother me as much as it should have, probably because Jim Carrey was so all over the place, I had no idea how smart or stupid he was supposed to be. (I'm too lazy to reaffirm all of your excellent pointss in the review, other than a thousand "AMENS" about Jim Carrey's performance and how he, once again, inexplicably, was stupidly being encouraged to run roughshod over the script and the character!) Which reminds me of one last nagging doubt: although Klaus assumes (correctly, I assume?), that Olaf has covered his ankle tattoo in makeup, nobody ever bothers to explain how he apparently gets a real peg leg in his captain costume! I realize this is a small point, and the film obviously isn't going for strict realism, and maybe it was intended to be random, wacky fun (like the rest of the film's Olaf) but this seemed a little sloppy to me. But like you, I really did mostly like the movie - there were times when I was surprisingly moved as well as entertained. And I thought the end credit sequence (I met a guy from SLC whose firm actually did that!) was worth the price of admission all by itself! And I really liked the music, too.
---DisneyBoy
P.S. although I generally agree with the idea that true heroes should refrain from resorting to the same tactics as their nemesi(?) - insert political rant here - it didn't bother me too much that Klaus was using the weapon to destroy a piece of paper, obtained through deception and blackmail (and nobody got hurt), and, hey, I think it looked cool on film. What I really hate is the tendency to make Batman resort to murder (both by commission and ommission) in several of the films, which he was utterly opposed to, even in the darker comic books - it was the biggest thing that set him apart from the villains.

PPS

[(Anonymous)]

I kinda liked Violet's dress and hair, but it was a weird contrast to Klaus's comparatively conservative, contemporary, tasteful-if-unremarkable outfit (The Oscars in hollywood tend to be this way, when you compare the actors and actresses red carpet attire) - I they should have tried to match them a little better, or managed an explanation as to the discrepancy. Again, not enough to ruin the movie for me, but still...
---DisneyBoy

PS

[(Anonymous)]

I will say that I thought putting Cedric the Entertainer in the movie was just weird.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

You can put a costume and hairstyle on anyone – what matters is the talent and style of the actor. Matt Damon as Moist? No. Oh, no no no. It would be a very, very tricky part to play, because a lot of the character is based on putting on a completely disarming front, while at the same time the audience has to know that he's really a scheming fraud. He has to be able to do sincere, as well as a completely convincing and yet very different false sincerity that cannot look like false sincerity. That takes a LOT of finesse! A LOT!

As for a second Snicket movie, I'm very glad they didn't ... the often goofy style they went with could squeak by with the first few books, but as they get darker it would be more and more out of place.

That said, they have to make The Vile Village in Christian Bale's lifetime because he has to play Jacques. ; )

[fryingpanofdoom.livejournal.com]

I agree. For all of Pratchett's, you really need acting talent. And honestly, a lot of talented Scottish "unknown" actors would probably be best as wee free men.

However, I do hope they give Stephen Briggs a cameo role as a Nac Mac Feegle, although I know they probably won't. He reads the books so well!

[chipsareonfire.livejournal.com]

JAMES MACAVOY!!! :p one of the few i know! :) but you're right, the actors have to be perfect to pull off pratchett, whose humour really lies in the language used... i'm not sure if they'll pull it off!
and hey, if they're really stuck, they can have sean connery as the gonnagle!

Spoke too soon about Unfortunate Events 2

[(Anonymous)]

I posted my comment before I read your reply, fool that I am. Not having actually read any of the books (please don't throw that stone at me) I probably shouldn't express any opinion about the worth of the movie. My biggest complaint about the film was that Jim Carrey, while often funny, felt to me like he was usually winking at the camera, or doing anything to get a laugh, rather than creating an actual character - even one as bizarre and apparenly schizophrenic as Count Olaf. I think he's actually capable of great stuff when reigned in (I think many directors encourage him to just run wild). Anyway, I mostly enjoyed the film and wouldn't puke if they made another. I must admit the film felt nicely self-contained as-is (hardly any movies really NEED a sequel), though I would like to see the boy and girl leads in other movies before they completely grow up.
---DisneyBoy