1. Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help with registration or your account login.

  2. "Muppet Guys Talking" Debuts On-line
    Watch the inspiring documentary "Muppet Guys Talking", read fan reactions and let us know your thoughts on the Muppet release of the year.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sesame Street Season 48
    Sesame Street's 48th season officially began Saturday November 18 on HBO. After you see the new episodes, post here and let us know your thoughts.

    Dismiss Notice

JHC planning Dark Crystal sequel

Discussion in 'Fantasy Worlds' started by beaker, May 13, 2005.


Should JHC make a sequel to the Dark Crystal?

Poll closed May 15, 2006.
  1. Yes, take advantage of the new technology

    43 vote(s)
  2. No, don't mess with the magic of the original

    23 vote(s)

  1. Whatever

    Whatever Well-Known Member

    I think the seuel craze a la Disney is stupid. Maybe a prequel. But it already has the perfect ending.
  2. maxdrive

    maxdrive Well-Known Member

    Hey if the movie does do well you might want to show the henson company your work like your castle they mighthire you or at least want to produce it.
  3. Laszlo

    Laszlo Well-Known Member

    I already thought about that... :)
  4. MWoO

    MWoO Well-Known Member

    I like the idea of adding to the story, but like other said a prequel would actually be more appealing. I do hope that this can turn into a series of various epic story movies. I also hope they use mostly puppets and real sets and models. Combining puppets and CGI would be Jim Henson's dream come true.
  5. Sunrise

    Sunrise Active Member

    Prequel vs. Sequel

    So many folks on here are expressing dissapointment that a sequel, rather than a prequel, is being made. It's an interesting thing to mull over.

    I think ultimately I prefer a sequel, unless they were to do a prequel that occured so far before the first film that we wouldn't simply be seeing a visual interpretation of what we already know: the crystal cracks, the races split, mass genocide ensues. How depressing is that? I mean, sure, the visuals would no doubt be wonderful, and the story would be well-told, but I find it difficult to get as emotionally involved with characters if I already know what is going to happen to them, especially if I know they will end up dead. (Why do I suddenly feel as though I'm talking about the Star Wars prequels?)

    I understand the problems with a sequel; no one wants to see Jen and Kira portrayed in any way that is inconsistent with their original looks or personalities, and in a lot of ways it was sweet to end their story nice and tidy where it was, and let your imagination take over from there. But I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt here.

    It is true that the movie's main flaw was a rather ineffective storyline. The silly narrative voice-over didn't help; a direct violation of the film rule, "Don't tell me, show me." Visually, of course, it was as stunning as we all expect a Henson movie to be, and I think they will not dissapoint us in that area this time. So what I'm really concerned about is a stronger story. One of the challenges with DC is that it is not a comedy, unlike pretty much every other Henson production of that era I can think of. It takes itself deadly seriously. And that is a much harder thing to pull off with puppetry, particularly with cute puppets like the gelflings, so you'd better have a rock-solid story to help people suspend disbelief.

    Now, the CG debate: the thing about CGI, to me, is that it has become sort of the "easy way out", in the sense that before it was available, the creators were forced into very innovative, creative ways to do things, and without that necessity we wouldn't have many of the wonderful puppetry techniques available now. But nowadays, it seems like the moviemakers just go, "Well, I can't think of a good way to do that effect...so we'll just do that in CGI." Now, I realize that CGI is an incredibly complex art with its own series of brilliant creative innovations, and I'm not belittling it at all. It has its crucial role in film. I just think many filmmakers have become too dependent on it, at the expense of being creative and innovative themselves. (Again, Star Wars deja-vu).

    I prefer to be cautiously optimistic, in any case. It's amazing they are doing it at all, considering the box-office failure of the original. If they didn't think they could make this film work, they wouldn't touch the material with a fifty-foot pole, let alone make it a theatrical release. At least that's what I believe and hope. If it turns out to be a dud, I'll just ignore it the way I do Neverending Story 2&3, and leave it at that.
  6. MWoO

    MWoO Well-Known Member

    My issue with CGI is that it always looks fake to me. No matter how realistic it is, it has this cartoony quality to it. You can't beat real sets and real puppet characters. Of course, there are things you just can't do with puppets as we have seen with Yoda. So who knows.
  7. cabbageheat

    cabbageheat Well-Known Member

    Prophecy cause all this trouble. . .

    You know, i was excited to see this news story. But at the same time, I'm on the fence about it. There is a heck of a lot to live up to for a sequel or prequel to this film. The cast of characters really made this film. And I don't think another Dark Crystal, wtihout the Skesis, would be all that interesting. And even if they were involved, well, we're back to making the same film. . . again.

    The original was such an "organic" film, made from scratch, with very deep and personal ideas from Jim and Frank, and honestly the most original film I've ever seen. I really can't see Brian or hardly anyone, picking up the pieces and trying to make another one. Even Frank, I mean, he's missing his other half unfortunately!

    The music was incredible too, so without the same composer, you are definately missing the feel/atmosphere of the world. I could go on and on, and if your a fan of the film, you know what I'm talking about. There is just a lot of good and original stuff in the first one, and to attempt to "do it again" will be a HUGE gamble, and honestly very difficult to make. And I could have SWORN Jim was adament that a sequel of any kind to this film was not to be touched or even created. And I would agree with that. The Dark Crystal has a great beginning and ending, and wraps itself up nicely. It's a complete package.

    well, good luck Brian. . . and whoever takes the helm. It's going to be a HUGE challenge both in story and visually. Yeah, you've got Froud, possibly Frank, and Dave, but it was so much more that made the film, and unfortunately the main ingredient, your father, just isn't here anymore to complete that puzzle. Yet God only knows I wish he was, he was the biggest inspiration of my life.

    But what can I say. If they make it. . . I'll go see it.
  8. Mario

    Mario Well-Known Member

    I voted for "No, don't mess with the magic of the original" before I read this. But, now if I could, I'd change it to the other one. I think that a mix of CG and puppetry would be the best. I love the idea of an animated cartoon series, but very much against a japanese interpretation. I'd much rather see a style similar to Black Cauldron, or other dark 80s cartoon shows, which for some reason examples of which have escaped me at the moment. Also, to Krazedmuppet who said "(aka cinderella 2, little mermaid 2, Lady and the Tramp 2... you just cant make a sequil to a classic, well, just for the sake of makeing money anyway, and cuz they ran out of ideas)" They [the creative staff at Disney] didn't run out of ideas. It was about money. The reason that all the sequals were made was because playing off a classic is more financially sound than trying something new. The budgets were set low, which meant that there wouldnt be a theatre release nor money enough for a well thought out script. But, for this film, saying that it will release to the theatres is a huge sign. It shows that they are going to actually give this film a decent budget and a chance. The creative staff will have a chance to express themselves and create, hopefully, another classic.
  9. Imawitchusay

    Imawitchusay Well-Known Member

    Dark crystal 2

    well I am very excited about another movie being made. I LOVED the first one. But what I do not like is that they say the skeksies (Spellling?) are going t ocome back.. How is that possibe??? I hate that Idea! Ihope they reconcider that thought. the skeksies no longer exist...right?????
  10. Squall Leonhart

    Squall Leonhart Well-Known Member

    ...This isen't true...right? Just a rumor...right?

    Somebody...anybody please tell me this isen't true! I would be all for a prequel like the Urskeks coming to Thra and the begining of that, but not a seaquel. I have a feeling thier going to ruin it ... this in my opinion would be like them taking a complete movie and adding onto it. You can't really do that, and look what happens when they do there are inconsitinces all over the place! Are they bringing Aughra back? What about the voices actors? Did Jim Henson , Frank Oz and Brain Froud even want a seaquel? Are Frank and Brain on board? Trevor Jones would have to write the score ... I will go see it if and when it comes out ... I'll just see then I guess.
  11. Ernie101

    Ernie101 Well-Known Member

    As far as I know, I think this is just a rumour.. I hope so, because I love Dark Crystal..
    One thing that made the movie great is how all the "special affects" are ahead of their time. Agreed? I wouldn't go and write over something like that..
  12. muppetsforever

    muppetsforever Well-Known Member

    i don't think it was perfect... there were parts of the movie that seemed to drag out. i would give examples but its been many years since ive watched it.
  13. lowercasegods

    lowercasegods Well-Known Member

    I see what you're saying. But I'm referring mostly to the special effects, not the storyline (I tend to agree that it goes on longer in some scenes than necessary). The animatronic puppetry, in my view at least, was the perfect tool to tell this story. CGI does not equal perfection, and it will not "improve" upon what Jim created over twenty years ago in the original. And I still feel that a sequel will not make up for any shortcomings the original had. If it relies heavily on CGI it will only create new shortcomings, much worse than the original's and making the original look far better by comparison. I repeat myself: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  14. Cantus Rock

    Cantus Rock Well-Known Member

  15. beemer

    beemer Active Member

    im all 4 it as long as they stick stricktly 2 puppets and not the half hearted computer animation like in mirror mask
  16. AndyWan Kenobi

    AndyWan Kenobi Well-Known Member

    I think that if the right people are on this project, they could incorporate all sorts of techniques and still have it feel authentic. In the words of Scotty, "The right tool for the right job."
  17. Krazedmuppet

    Krazedmuppet Well-Known Member

    Im excited. I wanna see it! BUT I just hope they dont have a lot of pointless CGI, you know just to show off how good they are? kinda like some of the stuff in the new star wars *star wars fans throw tomatos at krazed* It didnt add to the movie, it was just there to impress. :p Like it didnt fit the original, the movie looked like it should have been AFTER the old ones, the planes looked cooler, faster, mor tech. I just dont want that happining to The Dark Crystal, where it looks like the movies dont even go together. I usualy have a 5 year rule of how many years can pass for a 2 movie to be made (like Disney making a 2nd Cinderella was just lame) but I think the Dark Crystal might be the exception.
  18. DTWolf

    DTWolf Well-Known Member

    I agree that some of the Star Wars I-III effects and machines looked more modern and advanced than stuff in the original movie (and that lots of what they did was just showing off--the ridiculous, useless Podrace scene being the worst offense). The same was true of Enterprise, the prequel to the original Star Trek show: the equipment and technology looked more advanced even though it was supposed to be a hundred years or so earlier.

    On the other hand, I still think a prequel would be absolutely a better idea than a real sequel. In the Dark Crystal world, it would make perfect sense for everything to look better and more advanced. What we see in the original movie is a time after one wonderful civilization has collapsed (the Urseks') and another civilization has been wiped out intentionally (the Gelflings'). I don't think it's a stretch to say that the environment (around the castle, anyway) has gone through years of devastation and overexploitation. So if we went back in time naturally everything would look better. Instead of the ruined Gelfling temple covered with vines, we would see a bright, clean temple in the middle of a bustling city.

    I'm still holding out hope that it will be a prequel. There hasn't been much news about this movie, so I think there's still time for that shift to be made.
  19. AndyWan Kenobi

    AndyWan Kenobi Well-Known Member

    Slightly off topic, but I think things were supposed to look nicer in the Star Wars prequels. It was "before the dark times, before the Empire." After that, everything went downhill and turned to junk.
  20. brianwindsor

    brianwindsor New Member

    You can use a mix of puppetry with computer graphics to get the performance characteristics of puppetry with the versatility of CG. It's the type of stuff I've been doing for a while through motion capture. I thought animation didn't fit certain characters and that motion capture of humans is definitely not right for anything that isn't distinctly human. I've been doing mocap for over a decade and realized I thought it was a better match to puppets than people...I have to thank OSU for giving me the flexibility to play around with this approach...oh yeah, it's also unbelievably quick if set up properly.

    The talking puppet section is probably the most relevant.

    One of the things you can see is that a lot of my stuff isn't what I'd call "production quality" because of the time it takes to make the CG version look really good unless you're going for a CG look. Also, that's not my strong point, so I stick with the mocap and rigging and ideas part of things.

    I do think that only having a one and a half year production cycle is extremely small for something to match to the level of the original Dark Crystal. There would have to be a lot of cut corners.


Share This Page