We need us some Chronicles of Prydain movies

[Norrin Radd]

Yeah, okay...you could claim they're derivative of LOTR or Narnia or whatever, but isn't all modern fantasy?

To me, all five books are written very "cinematically" except for Taran Wanderer, which probably would require some skill to adapt and rework.

And...btw...I have never seen the Disney abomination (i.e. The Black Cauldron) and I'm not going to...

 

[Temis the Vorta]

you could claim they're derivative of LOTR or Narnia or whatever, but isn't all modern fantasy?

Yes, which is why the entire genre is all such a huge bore.

I'd be more interested in the "Conan" style of fantasy - anything that isn't for the kiddies.

 

[jadcox@mindspring.com]

Here's another vote for a "real" Prydain series, animated or live action. That series has so such heart and depth, with characters that live and breathe and change. It's long over due.

 

[Twilight]

Those were some of my favorite books when I was a kid. I barely remember the plots, but I read all of them, and remember particularly loving The Book of Three, The Black Cauldron, and Taran Wanderer

 

[ManOnTheWave]

While I don't think they have the huge following of either LOTR or Narnia, They were enjoyable books for a young adult, and could make some cool movies.

The Disney version is something I see as a footnote on the career of John Byner, who himself, seems little more than a footnote to Superdave these days, who himself is largely forgotten. Still, I'd love to see Bizarre on DVD someday.

How the hell did I get from A to B on that one?

 

[Stevil2001]

Theoretically these would make excellent movies.

On a practical basis, however, you know they would just be a couple more of the thousands of kiddie fantasy movies that get thrown at us today, and they would be so generic, and so terrible.

 

[Brendan Moody]

Theoretically these would make excellent movies.

On a practical basis, however, you know they would just be a couple more of the thousands of kiddie fantasy movies that get thrown at us today, and they would be so generic, and so terrible.

That's what worries me. The Prydain books have a specific charm, and any movie version done during the modern fantasy-adaptation craze is likely to downplay that in favor of a generic LOTR-light action feel.

 

[Norrin Radd]

you could claim they're derivative of LOTR or Narnia or whatever, but isn't all modern fantasy?

Yes, which is why the entire genre is all such a huge bore.

I'd be more interested in the "Conan" style of fantasy - anything that isn't for the kiddies.

I know what you're saying, but there are some real adult-themed overtones to the Prydain series...themes of identity....redemption...responsibility...self-sacrifice...all that jazz. Parts of it are actually quite violent and morbid, with a lot of death...especially in the 2nd and 5th books.

 

[Smiley]

I don't think it's fair to call the Disney version an "abomination" without having seen it. If it doesn't interest you, fine. However, it may be better than what you think it is. I had low expectations before watching The Black Cauldron for the first time, and I was pleasantly surprised. I'd call it a four-star movie (out of five).

 

[Demiurge]

I don't think it's fair to call the Disney version an "abomination" without having seen it. If it doesn't interest you, fine. However, it may be better than what you think it is. I had low expectations before watching The Black Cauldron for the first time, and I was pleasantly surprised. I'd call it a four-star movie (out of five).

Well, it was most clearly NOT the book. I was very disappointed in it because of that. It was a darker version actually.

I'd love to see a series of movies that are based on the spirit of the books. They were among my favorite novels as a teenager and I think they still hold up fairly well.

There's nothing wrong with the Conan style fantasy, but the family style adventure like Prydain or the Belgariad definitely has it's charm, even if it isn't a realistic rendition of what it would be like to grow up in a world that actually has a Prince of Darkness as one of the major components.

I'm definitely going to read both series to my son when he's a little older.

 

[Norrin Radd]

I don't think it's fair to call the Disney version an "abomination" without having seen it. If it doesn't interest you, fine. However, it may be better than what you think it is. I had low expectations before watching The Black Cauldron for the first time, and I was pleasantly surprised. I'd call it a four-star movie (out of five).

I'm talking purely from a "faithfulness to the book" standpoint. I don't need to see it to judge it in this way. The wiki entry on Black Cauldron gives a list of deviations from the book. It's very long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Cauldron_(film)

• Quite a number of significant characters were omitted from the film, including Coll, an assistant to Dallben, an evil queen/witch named Achren, a war hero named Gwydion, and an evil lord Arawn who was actually the master to the Horned King. However, Arawn may be the "spirit" trapped within the Cauldron.
• Also missing is Ellidyr; a prince who sacrifices himself to the cauldron, Gwystyl; a Fair Folk who has a way post near Annuvin, Adaon; Son of Taliesin, Medwyn; an enchanter who helps the companions, Morgant; a king who tries to use the cauldron for himself, Smoit; a king who helps with Gwydion to find the cauldron, and Kaw; a crow who can talk.
• In the books Eilonwy is described as having red-gold hair, but in the film her hair is mainly blond.
• Dallben had a beard in the books, perhaps having an appearance closer to Gandalf, in The Lord of the Rings.
• Creeper, who served as the henchman to The Horned King was an added character in the movie, not found in the books.
• Fflewddur Fflam is described as having more yellowish hair in the books, as well as being lankier and much younger than he appeared in the film.
• In the book, Taran does indeed find Dyrnwyn (the magical sword) but is injured when he attempts to clear it from its scabbard. Dallben later tells him that had he drawn it completely, it would have likely killed him. (He is able to wield it in Book 5, The High King, since by that point he is able to draw it "for noble worth").
• The Horned King did not try to get his hands on the black cauldron. Unlike the movie where the cauldron is hidden, and being sought by the Horned King, in the books the Horned King was the servant to the evil lord, Arawn, who already owned the cauldron to release the cauldron-born. In the beginning of the second book, the good characters planned to steal it from Arawn, only to find it had already been stolen (by the Witches of Morva).
• In the book, Prince Gwydion defeats the Horned King by shouting his true name aloud; In the movie, the Horned King dies by being swallowed up by the Cauldron.
• In the movie Doli can clearly be able to disappear/become invisible. In the first book, The Book of Three, Doli's main wish is to be able to have the power to become invisible.
• In the movie, Taran meets Eilonwy in the dungeon of the Horned King's castle. In the first book, The Book of Three, Taran was trapped in the evil witch, Achren's castle, and was then rescued by Eilonwy.
• The characters met Fflewddur Fflam, in the movie, in the dungeon. However, in The Book of Three, Taran and the war hero, Gwydion are separated in different dungeons. Taran sends Eilonwy to rescue his war hero friend, but mistakenly takes Fflewddur Fflam for Gwydion.
• At the end of the film, The Horned King's castle collapses. In the middle of the first book, Achren's castle collapses.
• There were inconsistencies in character motivations. Doli is presented as a bit of an oaf in the movie, when in the book he is an ill-tempered but talented craftsman. Eilonwy is much more sarcastic in the book than in the movie. The witches of Morva, in the book, are more care-free about the Black Cauldron, opting to trade it to Taran for Adaon's Brooch. When the witches (who really aren't all that afraid of Arawn or the Horned King) meet the protagonists, they are much more motherly and much less sinister.
• In the movie, Gurgi puts his body into the cauldron to destroy its powers. However, in the book it was a character named Ellidyr. Ellidyr goes into the cauldron and dies. (In the movie Gurgi died, but was brought back to life by the Witches of Morva.) The cauldron is also destroyed when Ellidyr jumps into it, but he is not restored to life. The Cauldron is destroyed, but Arawn's Cauldron-Born warriors still serve him.
• In the movie Hen Wen is a piglet, in the book she is a full grown white sow.
• In The Book of Three Hen-Wen runs from Caer Dallben because she is frightened by the nearby presence of the Horned King. Taran is hooked into his adventure when he chases after her to return her to Caer Dallben. Dallben wants to keep her home so she can read a prophecy that might help them fight the Horned King. In the movie, however, Dallben is sending Hen-Wen away with Taran to keep the Horned King from getting her.
• Hen-Wen uses her oracular abilities by gazing into a dish of water, in the movie. In the book, Dallben has a set of ash-sticks with symbols carved on them. Hen-Wen then points to the symbols with her snout to dictate the prophecy.
• In the movie Eilonwy's bauble floats. In the book it doesn't and she carries it in her hand.
• In the movie, Eilonwy tells Taran that the Horned King kidnapped her so that her father (a king) would give information about the Black Cauldron. In the book, Eilonwy lives, more or less reluctantly, with her "aunt" Achren, who is keeping Taran prisoner.
• In the movie, Taran and the others are pulled into the Fair Folk realm by mistake. In the book, the lake is made to pull people in on purpose, as it is felt that if they reach the lake, they are already "too close" to Fair Folk territory to leave.
• Doli is a dwarf in the book.
• In the movie they call some people witches and they call some things magic, in the book they call them enchantresses and enchantments.

 

[Gaith]

I'd love to see some good Prydain also; it's something I've thought about over the years.

Trouble is, they're not all that cinematic. The Book of Three introduces the characters and then quits/Taran faints during the big fight; it's like A New Hope without the Death Star climax.

The Black Cauldron has a more movie-ready plot, but nothing that cinematic really happens - Taran and co. wait in the woods during the opening attack on Annuvin. The Castle of Llyr is pretty movie-ready, but that's book three.

As I see it, there are two options: start with Cauldron, alluding to the events of Book 1 when necessary, then do a trilogy (without Wanderer), or,

Perhaps the ideal option: make it a TV show, with a big enough budget to have it look nice, but don't spiffy up the books, thereby avoiding the need for big, expensive battles and fights. The end of Llyr would be a perfect end to a first season, and Wanderer and High King could make up the second. It'd still be pricey, what with all the scenery and Gurgi+Llyan, but that's all I got.

 

[DarKush]

Count me in. I've been wanting to see the Prydain Chronicles on film for a long time (and by that I don't include Disney's Black Cauldron). It would really be cool and I think Hollywood will need another fantasy franchise after Harry Potter and Narnia run their course.

I think there's only two LOTR films coming and I don't think the Golden Compass will get a sequel (which is fine for me because I couldn't stand that film).

So, the Prydain Chronicles have all the requisites to be a good film series if translated well.

 

[Norrin Radd]

I'd love to see some good Prydain also; it's something I've thought about over the years.

Trouble is, they're not all that cinematic. The Book of Three introduces the characters and then quits/Taran faints during the big fight; it's like A New Hope without the Death Star climax.

Well, that's one way of describing it, but I think it's more thrilling than what you describe, as Taran basically fights for his life, defending Eilonwy and himself against an unbeatable foe. I think this is what people mean when they're afraid Hollywood would "ruin" it. In the first book, Taran is supposed to be a young, wet-behind-the-ears wannabe, who's out of his depth; it's only later much later in the series when he becomes a genuine badass.

The Black Cauldron has a more movie-ready plot, but nothing that cinematic really happens - Taran and co. wait in the woods during the opening attack on Annuvin.

Which, again, is fitting. He's still developing as a hero so he's not allowed to participate in the big battles. But then they're soon attacked by huntsmen, so it's not like there's no action early on.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

It would really be cool and I think Hollywood will need another fantasy franchise after Harry Potter and Narnia run their course.

I think there's only two LOTR films coming and I don't think the Golden Compass will get a sequel (which is fine for me because I couldn't stand that film).

Yeah. Eragon & The Golden Compass both fell flat on their faces (and with very good reason). The Seeker didn't do too well either but it hardly had any marketing muscle behind it.

It seems like the only really viable fantasy franchises we've gotten in the last decade are The Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter, & The Lord of the Rings. Narnia still has many more books left in the series to adapt. And they seem pretty desperate to stretch out what remaining life there is to the other 2 franchises by stretching Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows into 2 movies and tacking on a new Lord of the Rings story in between The Hobbit & The Fellowship of the Ring.

All in all, I'd say it's time for some more fantasy adaptations to come onto the scene. I'm surprised no one has tried adapting any of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time books. According to IMDB (take that for what it's worth), Warner Bros. has picked up the distribution rights to Terry Brooks' The Elfstones of Shannara for a 2009 release with Mike Newell (Harry Potter & the Goblet of Fire) attached to direct.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Mike Newell has signed to direct The Prince of Persia for a summer 2009 release, so The Elfstones of Shannara will either need a new director pronto or be pushed back for Newell to work on later.

Universal has Michael Moorcock's Elric in development, while Warners has also optioned Angie Sage's Septimus Heap series. Lionsgate and Nu Image are developing a new Conan film, and Dark Horse has the film rights to Fritz Lieber's Swords of Lankhmar series, which they're trying to get off the ground (and one would think the huge success of 300 would give them an edge here). Peter Jackson has optioned Naomi Novik's Temeraire series, although if he directs them himself it'll obviously be a while before he gets around to them, and J.J. Abrams has the film rights to Stephen King's Dark Tower series.

There are also a couple of fantasy films already in the can: Solomon Kane (based on the Robert E. Howard character) stars James Purefoy (Mark Antony in Rome) and is the first of what is intended to be a trilogy. It should be released later this year. And the film adaptation of Cornelia Funke's Inkheart is slated for release in January.

 

[The Borgified Corpse]

And the film adaptation of Cornelia Funke's Inkheart is slated for release in January.

I knew that that was coming, although I didn't know that we had so long yet to wait for it. Still, between this, Journey to the Center of the Earth, & the 3rd Mummy movie, I guess it explains why we haven't seen Brendan Fraser in a while.

 

[Gaith]

Which, again, is fitting. He's still developing as a hero so he's not allowed to participate in the big battles. But then they're soon attacked by huntsmen, so it's not like there's no action early on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not finding fault with the books (which I love). I'm just not sure those unfamiliar with them would get hooked on straight-up adaptations. Having the main characters sit out major battles works fine in print, but might make the general public irritated.

 

[Steve Roby]

you could claim they're derivative of LOTR or Narnia or whatever, but isn't all modern fantasy?

Yes, which is why the entire genre is all such a huge bore.

You could more realistically claim the Prydain books are derivative of Welsh mythology. Alexander cited The Mabinogion explicitly as a major influence. I think there might also be a bit of an influence from T.H. White's Arthurian stories, though it's been a long time since I read either.

 

[M'Sharak]

you could claim they're derivative of LOTR or Narnia or whatever, but isn't all modern fantasy?

Yes, which is why the entire genre is all such a huge bore.

You could more realistically claim the Prydain books are derivative of Welsh mythology. Alexander cited The Mabinogion explicitly as a major influence. I think there might also be a bit of an influence from T.H. White's Arthurian stories, though it's been a long time since I read either.

I'm less certain about the Arthurian stories of White, but more than a few of the characters/character names and place names in the Prydain books -- Gwydion, Pryderi, Pwyll, Annuvin, Fflewddur Fflam, Mona, Llyr, the Horned King, Gwyn the Hunter and the Tylwth Teg, among others -- are either directly from the Mabinogion itself or from other Welsh myths and tales. The Tolkien stories draw more from other sources, such as Norse and Icelandic sagas.

These stories could be done cinematically, but I'd rather not see them done at all than see a half-assed or generic treatment.