comment #1

D.Z. says ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_jwh4jb4ss

comment #2

MathewM says ...

They've been kicking around the concept for a Speed Racer movie as long as they have for Indy 4. I think the market for a Speed Racer movie has grown up, moved out and won't show up.

comment #3

Ju-osh says ...

Yeah, it's a stupid and unoriginal idea, but so was a Miami Vice movie -- and we all know how you reacted to that film's fumes.

comment #4

D.Z. says ...

Mathew: I'm assuming they're hoping the Fast and the
Furious crowd will go for it.

comment #5

Nicol D says ...

C'mon everyone...what we really want to know is; are they still going to be credited as The Wachowski 'Brothers'?

comment #6

Hepcat511 says ...

I dunno. A live action Mach5 would be something to see. And if they brought in the cursed car and the evil driving team and actually made a decent story of it, it could be faintly interesting. No way it's a "film", though, however you slice it. It's a movie.

comment #7

JD says ...

This dismissive attitude toward the Wachowski "siblings" is really unfair. The Matrix is arguably the most important movie of the last decade (but not necessarily the best), even if it was dismissed by many critics who lazily refused to see beyond its blockbuster surface. The sequels were enormously flawed as entertainment, but they had incredible depth -- if you are unable to find this yourself, listen to the very perceptive commentaries by Ken Wilbur and Cornell West -- making the Wachowskis a weird target for attacks of shallowness.

As far as blockbusters are concerned, they raised the bar in terms of special effects and the integration of big ideas (they also rushed the sequels, which had devastating effects, but that's another story). Complexity may not be their goal in Speed Racer, but give them some credit for the xomplexity of their past work (hell, the philosophical complexity of the Matrix Revolutions was so great that it rendered the movie basically unwatchable). At the very least, they are insanely talented filmmakers who will, in all likelihood, create a visually astonishing visceral experience out of Speed Racer.

In any case, I don't want to live in a movie landscape where every single movie has to be R-rated and adult-oriented. I don't see why Speed Racer is necessarily any less worthy than Superman Returns as a family-firendly idea and we all know how much Jeff flipped for Superman Returns...until the backlash, at which point he started backpedalling (note that every mention of Superman Returns on this site now comes with a disclaimer about how much less Jeff appreciated it the second time).

comment #8

D.Z. says ...

JD: Matrix Reloaded IS Superman Returns.

comment #9

Sean says ...

C'mon everyone, what we really want to know is: How long it will take Nicol D. to say something stupid in response to this thread?

Oh, wait, never mind.

comment #10

Sean says ...

JD - talking about ideas does not make a movie "complex". The Matrix movies *are* shallow, that's why the accusation exists. I grant you that they are less shallow than most blockbusters, in the same way that the kiddie pool gets less shallow around the middle, but it has all the depth of that kid in high school who read 'Ulysses' and is really proud of himself, even though he didn't actually understand a word of what he read.

comment #11

THX5334 says ...

I'm sorry Sean, we can't see or hear you from your high horse up there.

comment #12

JD says ...

Sean, you clearly have a far greater command of philosphy than Ken Wilbur and Cornell West, two of the most significant American philosophers of our time. My mistake.

I don't think the Wachowskis conveyed their ideas particularly clearly in the Matrix sequels, but the ideas are unquestionably there. The films are a failure of execution, not a failure of ideas.

comment #13

Larry says ...

Ken Wilber and Cornell West? Spare me. Wilber is a silly person whose new-age crackpot ideas on consciousness and the cosmos are not taken seriously by real scientists

Cornell West's "philosophy" is a mishmosh of Christianity and Marxism, taking the worst from both. Not that West has done any serious academic work in years. Lately he's been too busy making rap albums or appearing in dumb movies like The Matrix Reloaded.

comment #14

AH says ...

Are the Matrix sequels as good as the original movie? No. But I would take them over garbage like Van Helsing any day of the week.

Also, let's not forget the Wachowski's work on Bound and V for Vendetta. Both very good, relatively low tech, films.

comment #15

JD says ...

Like I said, they're dopes compared to Sean... and Larry, evidently. Is that the same Larry who was the neighbor on Three's Company? Let's meet for a beer at the Reagle Beagle and discuss this further.

comment #16

Nicol D says ...

"How long it will take Nicol D. to say something stupid in response to this thread?"

Oh Sean, you're just such a sensitive, New Age kinda guy.

comment #17

Craig Kennedy says ...

Let's face it: the studios are addicted to pre-established properties whatever they may be because the name recognition automatically solves half of their advertising problem. See look, you're already talking about it and not a single frame of film has been shot.

If they'd said they were making a movie about a guy with a scarf and a car and a monkey and a girlfriend and everyone's mouth got really big when the talked it wouldn't be a blip on the radar. But it's Speed Racer. Instant recognition.

And whether or not it's any good really has nothing to do with the original property. The concept is almost irrelevant. It's window dressing to get your attention.

Remember that dumb little idea Disney had about making a movie out of one of their lamest rides? Anyone over 12 had to know that was the stupidest idea for a movie ever right? I did...and I was wrong. Pirates made all the money.

I'm not saying Speed Racer will be any good, but it and things like it are here to stay so get over it. If you don't like it, well there are plenty of movies that come out every year that don't suck so talk about and go see those instead.

comment #18

Craig Kennedy says ...

...having said that, I watched The Godfather again just last night and I really miss the days when big, massively popular entertainments could also be smart, artistic and intellectually satisfying.

Of course that was based on a popular novel so there you go again with the name recognition thing.

comment #19

Alan Cerny says ...

Smart, sophisticated entertainment? That's not SPEED RACER. The cartoon had a kid with a monkey hiding in the trunk every week, for Christ's sake. It had a racing car that could jump. And people who never let breathing get in the way of talking straight for 10 minutes.

Look. I want a fun movie I can take my kid to. Is that too much to ask? We can be elitist all day, and praise smart, sophisticated entertainment like THE DEPARTED, and I'll be right there with you. But this is SPEED RACER. And in Ecclesiates as in Hollywood, there is room for everything under the sun. I think the Wachowskis make slick, enjoyable films, and they sneak in a message now and then. I loved V FOR VENDETTA, and I may be the only person who enjoyed the MATRIX sequels as much as the original. I look forward to this film.

Movies are for everyone. Some people need to lighten up.

comment #20

D.Z. says ...

The original Matrix is good, if you've never seen Ghost in the Shell, Megazone, or any pre-Hollywood John Woo and Jet Li films. (And from what I hear, Dark City.) If you have, it's more like, "Been there, done that." The sequels actually did more creative things with the effects and characters, but by then, people were more interested in action movies in which you can't actually see any action. (Kill Bill is a major example.) V for Vendetta is ok, if you've never read the book, but it's still a bastardization of the source material-much like A Clockwork Orange and The Shining. (I can't decide whether to blame it on Kubrick or Time Warner, since that company also ruined A History of Violence.)

Anyway, while Pirates made money, Disney's other ride-themed movies flopped or disappointed. So the arguments against Pirates were legitimate, especially since Depp was practically washed-up at the time he was cast as the lead.

comment #21

JD says ...

DZ, I don't understand why you're so offended by the idea of films referencing other sources or being derived from previously published material. I've seen at least 70 or 80% of the sources that inspired The Matrix and Kill Bill and I still enjoy both films. Most of the films referenced by Kill Bill aren't half as entertaining as Tarantino's re-working. It's very superficial to think of a movie as content and nothing else. A movie's real personality is defined by how its content is arranged. Otherwise, why is so much hard work put into adapting novels? If the content is all that matters, it should only take a couple days to write an adaptation. Tarantino is master of arranging scenes and ideas -- many of which are derived from other sources -- for maximum cinematic effect. But if it was just a matter of ripping off films, why haven't Tarantino's imitators achived anything half as good. At the very least, you have to acknowledge that, as a kind of pop cultural DJ, he's pretty talented.

comment #22

AH says ...

D.Z., "The original Matrix is good, if ...", "V for Vendetta is ok, if ..." Why qualify and not just enjoy?

comment #23

NYCBusybody says ...

Because D.Z. is the great protector of Asian schlock cinema from the imperialist, thieving hordes of white American filmmakers.

Good artists copy, great artists steal.

comment #24

LFF says ...

Uh DZ, if want people to take your film criticism seriously, you might not want to outwardly dismiss Kubrick and Cronenberg so easily. Films and novels are different mediums, and the quality of a film is not in any way determined by its "faithfulness" to the source material. (Just ask Chris Columbus)

comment #25

BenDavid says ...

JD, that's the most simple explanation I've ever read for why QT is great. The way he mixes and matches different elements from pop culture is instinctive and unparalleled. All artists steal from pop culture or life, anyway. It may be conscious, it may be subconscious, but that's what we do. The other thing about Tarantino is that the way he repackages his favorite genres and cliches conveys why he loved them in the first place, and his love becomes contagious. You could easily find someone who's favorite movie is Kill Bill, but is bored by all the films that inspired it. There's really no reason something like Kill Bill should be anything but an interesting failure or a self-indulgent piece of shit, but it's a brilliant and engaging movie.

comment #26

slothroplt says ...

How easy it is to judge others from afar.

Some of you may not enjoy the Matrix films but to use your personal tastes as reason enough to off-handedly dismiss both the talent and creativity of those involved as well as the beauty and spectacle of what they created is just plain ignorant.

comment #27

Rich S. says ...

Hey, Alan Cerny, I'm right there with you. It likely lands me in Jeff's purgatory of the half-human, but I'll admit when I saw that the Wachowskis were going to do this movie, it brought a big smile to my face. Especially when I saw that they intend to make this a family movie. It won't be Superman Returns, because (hopefully) it won't be pretentious and boring. And I hope they tap Vince Vaughn to live out his dream to play Racer X. Is this going to be the second coming of the Seventh Seal or Rashomon? Hell no. And thank God for that.

comment #28

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Nicol D.-- I think they were credited as The Wachowskis on Matrix 3.

The main problem with the godawful, incomprehensible Matrix sequels is that they forgot everything that was good about the original-- a tricksy, keep 'em guessing plot, clear logic for its universe (have to get to a phone), minimalist dialogue, a little sense of humor about itself (whoa), and grounding in the real world. That's why it made Armageddon look galumphing by comparison-- and the sequels, by contrast, set out to out-galumph Armageddon. An endless series of car chases and machine guns firing, laughable characters (the French dude) who jabber on and on about what the fuck? (even Hugo Weaving suddenly talks too much), and way too much of the incredibly tedious Zion, which is one of those caftan-wearing utopias out of Star Trek:The Next Generation. Never have filmmakers so completely lost sight of what made their first movie fun...

...except for George Lucas, who managed to make three Star Wars sequels without once mentioning the character who made the original movies likable and endurable, Han Solo.

comment #29

Cory says ...

And yet, Lucas would've got an ass rippin' for not doing anything "original" and riding the coattails(which he somewhat did anyway) of the Originals if he included Han Solo in the Prequels....

comment #30

Cory says ...

...Either way, I don't see what's wrong with the W. Bros doing Speed Racer. As someone said early, there's room for all types of films. The W. Bros have done their "serious" films with the Matrix Trilogy.

Let's just see what happens when they have a little fun. Nothing wrong with the family oriented films...

comment #31

Dan Revill says ...

Depp was washed up?! Okay...

As for Dark City vs The Matrix...I think that Dark City explored a lot of the same ideas with more depth than The Matrix, but the Wachowskis presented those ideas with more panache.

I like The Matrix, but Dark City is heads 'n' tales a step above for me. And it came out a year earlier to boot. I remember I missed Dark City in theaters (it came and went pretty quick around here), but it was spectacular when I finally saw it on video. As for The Matrix, I went in pretty blindly on that one...it didn't blow me away like it apparently did the rest of the world, but it's entertaining and fun to watch.

comment #32

D.Z. says ...

JD: "DZ, I don't understand why you're so offended by the idea of films referencing other sources or being derived from previously published material. I've seen at least 70 or 80% of the sources that inspired The Matrix and Kill Bill and I still enjoy both films."

My problem is when they're called "original". Or when people look down on the source material.

"Most of the films referenced by Kill Bill aren't half as entertaining as Tarantino's re-working."

I'm guessing you really haven't seen most of those films, or you just can't appreciate them when and how they were made, because they're not padded with stupid lengthy conversations.

"It's very superficial to think of a movie as content and nothing else."

And yet you just did that by downplaying the source material for Tarantino's remakes.

"A movie's real personality is defined by how its content is arranged."

A movie's personality is defined by it having a personality, not just by cashing in on someone else's work.

"Otherwise, why is so much hard work put into adapting novels?"

If hard work was actually put into adapting novels, people wouldn't say, "The book was better than movie."

"If the content is all that matters, it should only take a couple days to write an adaptation."

Of course, in Quentin's case, he can just steal dialogue from other movies and scripts.

"Tarantino is master of arranging scenes and ideas --"

Into a mess devoid of any context.

"But if it was just a matter of ripping off films, why haven't Tarantino's imitators achived anything half as good."

You can't call someone an imitator, if they're imitating an imitator. Anyway, I guess you forgot about Guy Ritchie when you were generalizing. Hell, Chris Nolan's Memento is way more original than Pulp Fiction, and it uses the same idea of haphbazardly arranging scenes to tell a story.

"At the very least, you have to acknowledge that, as a kind of pop cultural DJ, he's pretty talented."

Not if the DJ is P. Diddy.

NYC: "Because D.Z. is the great protector of Asian schlock cinema from the imperialist, thieving hordes of white American filmmakers."

I dare you to see Bullet in the Head and Battle Royale and call those schlock. I'm guessing you're one of those types who uses the phrase "chop-socky" to describe all martial arts films.

"Good artists copy, great artists steal."

Mediocre artists steal, great artists add something new.

LFF: "Uh DZ, if want people to take your film criticism seriously, you might not want to outwardly dismiss Kubrick and Cronenberg so easily."

Why? They're boring and full of themselves.

"Films and novels are different mediums, and the quality of a film is not in any way determined by its "faithfulness" to the source material. (Just ask Chris Columbus)"

Harry Potter is a derivative fantasy series which people only read because of some fundies who claimed it led to kids worshipping Satan. I guarantee it'd be forgotten, like the forthcoming Eragon, if it didn't get all that publicity. I can't blame Columbus for doing the best he could with something so ordinary.

BenDavid: "The way he mixes and matches different elements from pop culture is instinctive"

More like desperate.

"and unparalleled."

Except for, say, Star Wars.

"All artists steal from pop culture or life, anyway. It may be conscious, it may be subconscious, but that's what we do."

The decent artists don't take credit for other people's work.

"The other thing about Tarantino is that the way he repackages his favorite genres and cliches "

You mean by casting white people in remakes of Asian films? Scorcese's last movie just did that a few weeks ago.

"You could easily find someone who's favorite movie is Kill Bill, but is bored by all the films that inspired it."

That's because they have no taste or appreciation for originality.

Mgmax: "The main problem with the godawful, incomprehensible Matrix sequels is that they forgot everything that was good about the original-- a tricksy, keep 'em guessing plot,"

How the hell could you not know Neo was The One in the first film?

"clear logic for its universe,"

I don't see the logic in how he was able to come back to life.

"minimalist dialogue,"

So that conversation with Morpheus was brief?

"a little sense of humor about itself (whoa)"

That wasn't humour, just bad acting.

"and grounding in the real world."

Because in the real world, people are able to land on concrete streets without getting hurt, right?

"An endless series of car chases and machine guns firing,"

They had machine guns in the first film and a helicopter chase.

"laughable characters (the French dude)who jabber on and on about what the fuck?"

And that guy who waxed endlessly about wheat wasn't laughable?

"(even Hugo Weaving suddenly talks too much),"

Oh my gosh! The Wachowskis decided to expand his character. They're so evil.

"and way too much of the incredibly tedious Zion,"

That's where the struggle takes place.

comment #33

D.Z. says ...

Aladdin: "Depp was washed up?!"

The only hit he had at the time was Sleepy Hollow, and that was because of Burton, not him. Now the situation's reversed, but he definitely was the last guy anyone would consider bankable at the time the first Pirates was released.

comment #34

JD says ...

DZ is deeply confused and lost. He's also under the illusion that Asian films just appear out of the ether, perfectly formed, under the influenc of nobody. As you may or may not know DZ, I'm a big defender of Asian cinema. I used to be a programmer for a major Asian film festival. But anyone who claims Asian cinema is not influenced by Hollywood cinema is on crack. The fact that you cite John Woo -- a self-acknowledged disciple of Martin Scorsese -- as some kind of poster boy for originality, while criticizing Scorsese for ripping off Asian cinema is, frankly, idiotic.

comment #35

D.Z. says ...

JD: "But anyone who claims Asian cinema is not influenced by Hollywood cinema is on crack. The fact that you cite John Woo -- a self-acknowledged disciple of Martin Scorsese -- as some kind of poster boy for originality, while criticizing Scorsese for ripping off Asian cinema is, frankly, idiotic."

All Marty did was move Infernal Affairs to Boston.
The Killer at least updated Le Samourai for modern audiences.

comment #36

D.Z. says ...

Though unlike Quentin and his fans, at least Marty has the decency to give credit where it's due.

comment #37

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

"How the hell could you not know Neo was The One in the first film?"

Well, that's hardly the only thing that kept you guessing in Matrix I. But in fact, I pointed out Neo=One to a coworker of mine at the time, and his jaw dropped at the revelation...

"They had machine guns in the first film and a helicopter chase."

But they didn't go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on...

"That's where the struggle takes place."

It's certainly where I was struggling. Come on, of all the things you thought a Matrix sequel would turn out to be, wasn't Beneath the Planet of the Apes about the least desirable? Of all the things you hoped another Matrix would show you, isn't Anthony Zerbe wearing wall-to-wall carpet about the last one on the list?

comment #38

Doug Pratt says ...

No one seems to be pointing out the obvious. Speed Racer is not about the little boy and the monkey hiding in the trunk. It is about two brothers who have been unfairly separated by fate, one not realizing how close and protective his sibling is actually being to him. That, in the hands of the W Bros., plus some cool effects work, could make a viable 90-minute thrill ride.

comment #39

storymark says ...

Soooo...

DZ just simply dissagrees with everyone, about everyting, all the time.

Pleasant fella.

comment #40

BenDavid says ...

If were going to look at the other side of it, the recent J-horror films are all in debt to David Lynch. And The Returner is what happens when someone tries to pull a Tarantino and falls on their face. It's the opposite of Kill Bill, an attempt to repackage EXACT SCENES from American action films. The lead hero looks exactly like Tom Cruise in M:I-2 with Neo's trenchcoat, they do shot-for-shot action scenes like Gus Van Sant's Psycho. DZ is that guy that hates everything. Being bitter will get you nowhere. I'm sure he means well, but if Debbie Downer was a critic...

comment #41

D.Z. says ...

Ben: "If were going to look at the other side of it, the recent J-horror films are all in debt to David Lynch."

Except that Japanese ghost stories preceded David Lynch by a few centuries.

"And The Returner is what happens when someone tries to pull a Tarantino and falls on their face."

Wait, I thought that was Four Rooms.

"It's the opposite of Kill Bill, an attempt to repackage EXACT SCENES from American action films."

And that's bad, because it's only ok when Hollywood does it to Asian filmmakers?

"The lead hero looks exactly like Tom Cruise in M:I-2"

Except that Kaneshiro is talented, and not a pompous asshole.

"with Neo's trenchcoat,"

You mean the trenchcoat which showed up in A Better Tomorrow?

"they do shot-for-shot action scenes like Gus Van Sant's Psycho."

There were action scenes in the Psycho remake?

comment #42

MPNeeb says ...

If Speed Racer has cars going fast and loud noises, I'll see it ten times.
Depth is otional but not required. I want fast cars.

And the Matrix movies kicked ass. Otherwise, why are we still talking about them three years on?

comment #43

Thrudvangar says ...

"If hard work was actually put into adapting novels, people wouldn't say, "The book was better than movie."

You don't read much do you? I mean aside from these posts.

comment #44

storymark says ...

Don't you all see? Asians invented everything.

Ghost stories.
Trenchcoats.
EVERYTHING!

Hell, I think they even invented filmmaking.

And if an asian filmmaker steals something from a western film, it's okay, 'cause they're more talented, so it doesn't count. And whatever they're stealing, well, it was just stolen from an asian first anyway.

Americans can stop making movies now. It's all been done in Asian cinema.

DZ says so.

comment #45

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Fuckin' Shakespeare, stealing the plot of RAN.

comment #46

Rich S. says ...

You're wrong. The Russians invented everything.

- Ensign Pavel Chekov

comment #47

D.Z. says ...

storymark: I'm just trying to make a point that Asian filmmakers have contributed to cinema as much as Hollywood filmmakers. For example, the Matrix was just one of many action flicks which "borrowed" from John Woo during the 90s.

comment #48

aspiringcrackaddict says ...

You guys better be careful making fun of D.Z. You might be sitting on the toilet one day and a small Asian girl might appear to tell you that you owe her a small fortune due to the fact that she invented shitting and the toilet you were shitting in, both of which you are using without proper legal consent. It happened to me not 5 minutes ago.

FYI

Don't blink

Don't breath

AND DON’T YOU DARE MAKE FILMS

YOU WILL be in debt to this little dark haired Asian girl for the rest of your natural life.

NO MORE FILM FOR YOU.

comment #49

D.Z. says ...

Man, with "witty" comments like the kind from aspiringcrackaddict, it's no wonder minorities can't get real roles in Hollywood.

comment #50

storymark says ...

DZ: Fair enough, but you've made your point.
Then you beat it to death with a 2x4.
Then you jumped up and down on the corpse wearing lead shoes.

You're a big fan of Asian cinema. Got it. Thanks.

No one argued that asians had no influence over western filmmakers. We just aren't going to bow down at the alter like you seem to think we should.

Yes, Tarantino ripped of Ringo Lam and City on Fire to make Resovoir Dogs - but I still think Dogs is the better film (and I'm a much bigger fan of Yun Fat than anyone in Dogs). But Lam unapologeticly ripped off Peter Wier's Witness with Wild Search, so it's not like he's innocent.

Asian filmmakers have made great contributions to film. That does not automaticly mean that anyone who was influenced by those films should be disregarded.

Asian cinema did not evolve in a vacuum and more than western cinema did. Asians were influenced by western cinema just as much as the reverse.

comment #51

F.U. says ...

Fuckin' Kurosawa, stealin' shit from John Ford.

comment #52

christian says ...

i grew up on SPEED RACER, loving it like no other cartoon as it was clearly not american (therefore not a shitty hanna barbera thing). i loved even more tatsuo yoshida's amazing GATCHAMAN aka BATTLE OF THE PLANETS still one of the greatest anime ever.

but in regards to this, i find myself...

not giving a rat's ass.

comment #53

aspiringcrackaddict says ...

here is video of D.Z performing his favorite pastime

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TJOweEVMjz4

comment #54

Deli Heluna says ...

yeah, it'd have to be the Wachowski brothers to recreate Speed Racer and do it right. but seriously, another Car Racing movie?! and in PG. I don't think I'll bring my kids to watch it. I don't want them growing up thinking that Car Racing is cool. I want my children to think toward Alternative Planet-Saving modes of transportation. Non-pollutive vehicles, etc.. Okay, I sound like a hippy New Ager or something but seriously, Global Warming is caused by automobile pollutants and the Speed Racer movie perpetuates such a mentality.

Whatever happened to their other movie: "The Axis" or "DreamScapesAxis " I thought this was next ?
http://www.dreamscapesaxis.com

Deli Heluna

Oh hahaha. very funny. Chim Chim in leather. Speed Racer doing kung fu. LOL. Yeah, what a waste of talent.

comment #55

d manhattan says ...

D.Z. said, responding to MGMax and LFF:

>"clear logic for its universe,"
>
>I don't see the logic in how he was able to come >back to life.

And still, overall it's universe had a very clear logic to it that added a lot to the film's appeal.

>"and grounding in the real world."
>
>Because in the real world, people are able to >land on concrete streets without getting hurt, >right?

It was very much grounded in the real world, that is the best way to describe one of it's identifiable, definite qualities. Once again you're nitpicking. Yes, they stretched this a bit, sure, but in a short summary, I'd say "grounding in the real world" is very much an accurate approximation of this quality.

>"a little sense of humor about itself (whoa)"
>
>That wasn't humour, just bad acting.

>"Films and novels are different mediums, and the >quality of a film is not in any way determined by >its "faithfulness" to the source material. (Just >ask Chris Columbus)"

>Harry Potter is a derivative fantasy series which >people only read because of some fundies who >claimed it led to kids worshipping Satan.

Do you also think in these types of poorly based dismissive statements? When nitpicking and building your arguments; do you just instictively search through your poorly informed analyses, all based on a glance of things, and then find what in some way contradicts any small piece of someones statement and then throw it out there, satisfied that it's all perfectly logical..?

Sorry, but I'm just trying to respond to your way of reasoning. I just can't let it stand, I like to read this community of commenters too much to just let it slip. And I'm sure you won't take my perhaps harsh criticism to heart.

And yes, of course Harry Potter is very derivative, but regardless of their artfulness or perceived originality, the books have a distinct quality that lures readers to them all over the world. Not some kind of forgotten controversy.

comment #56

T-maker says ...

I think D.Z. should get his buck-fifty back for that community college level film education he has.