Comments | saeriellyn: Brain go plooey.

saeriellyn

Brain go plooey.

Mar 23, 2007 15:40

'Kay, I know you're supposed to take everything on wikipedia with a grain of salt, but I just read the entry for Prydain and it ends with this statement:

The Black Cauldron, an animated film loosely based on the first two books, was released by the Walt Disney Company in 1985.[3] Concerning further adaptation of the Prydain novels, Alexander ( Read more... )

lloyd alexander, prydain

Comments 8

firebyrd March 23 2007, 19:54:14 UTC

Don't hyperventilate yet. The quote was taken out of context. I just pulled up the inteview at http://tinyurl.com/ynw2qg .

Here's the relevent paragraph:

What do you think about the Disney movie version of The Black Cauldron? Will any of your other books be made into movies?
First, I have to say, there is no resemblance between the movie and the book. Having said that, the movie in itself, purely as a movie, I found to be very enjoyable. I had fun watching it. What I would hope is that anyone who sees the movie would certainly enjoy it, but I'd also hope that they'd actually read the book. The book is quite different. It's a very powerful, very moving story, and I think people would find a lot more depth in the book. There is a very good possibility of other movies. Disney, again, is interested in an animated movie of Time Cat. This could happen in the next several years. Time Cat should be a lot of fun as an animated movie - I just hope I'm around to see it.Clearly, when ( ... )

saeriellyn March 23 2007, 19:56:06 UTC

Oh. Mph. I don't know whether to be dissapointed or relieved!

firebyrd March 23 2007, 20:02:20 UTC

I know what you mean! Shame on whoever put that out of context.

saeriellyn March 24 2007, 02:40:41 UTC

Well, honestly. It's not only one line out of context, it's actually falsely stated (rather than simply implied) to be speaking about "further adaptations" of Prydain.

*sigh* This was a mean, evil thing to do to me, wikipedia.

Thread 5

seyrah March 23 2007, 23:04:10 UTC

Gah, why Time Cat and not the Prydain books????? C'mon, folks, there have to be a few last gasps we can squeeze out of the post-LotR fantasy surge...

Dawn, maybe you need to just take this in hand. Write a screenplay, and use your insider Disney connections (even if tenuous!) to get it in front of the right eyes. :-D

saeriellyn March 24 2007, 02:46:31 UTC

If only it worked that way.

Disney (or any other production company, for that matter) does not accept unsolicited creative content. We heard all about it in our contractual agreements when we started working there. This is, of course, the "official company position" - while everyone knows they steal unsolicited creative content all the time; i.e. Wide World of Sports.

So you can send them a screenplay and they'll chuck it in the trash without even looking at it. Supposedly. To cover their arse in case they ever DO make the film and it somehow suspiciously resembles the screenplay you sent them. "Screenplay? What screenplay?"

I have considered finding out to whom I should write simply to remind them of the property and suggest a partnership with Walden Media since that company has proven itself eager to make faithful book adaptations. The fact that they're looking at Time Cat is hopeful in that they haven't forgotten Alexander's existence. So perhaps we shouldn't give up.

firebyrd March 24 2007, 04:18:01 UTC

Unfortunately, speaking with Eric, he said that the interview in question was /not/ from 2006. He actually read it three or four years ago, and in the interview L.A. said he was about to turn 75. /If/ Wikipedia is correct that he was born in 1924...well, at any rate, the interview is old. I'm not even going to hold out hope for Time Cat.