by Ross Michael Frasier
One film focuses on the main character of the single-most popular book franchise of the decade. The other is the first entry in perhaps one of the most celebrated book series of all time. Both films contain fantastical elements of goblins, dragons, wizards and magic spells. And both films rely on a hero of miniature stature.
While it is rare for such gems of storytelling to come along, it is even rarer for Hollywood to attempt to visualize them on-screen. This holiday season, broken staffs and stomped-on wizard hats will cover the floors of theatres across the country as “Harry Potter and the Sorceror’s Stone” and “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring” come crashing to the screen in a big-budget face-off of mystical proportions.
Not surprisingly, the realization of these immense projects from mental imagery to live-action reality has not been easy or cheap. Already, more than $300 million has been invested in what could be considered the biggest gamble in cinema history. Past box-office profits have shown that novels can be a lucrative source for mega movie-dollars — such as “Jurassic Park,” “The Firm” and “The Hunt for Red October.” However, films such as “Sphere,” “The Chamber” and “The Horse Whisperer” prove that there have been just as many failures as successes.
The danger of messing with material that is respected by legions of fans is that there exists a powerful potential for mass failure. Warner Brothers and New Line Cinema, the studios behind ‘Harry Potter” and “Lord of the Rings,” respectively, are hoping that all filmgoer expectations and hesitations will be blown away when the movies premiere in November. Perhaps Harry will discover that he was destined for much more than a cupboard under the stairs.
In September 1998, J.K. Rowlings took the literary world by storm. A few months earlier, the graduate of Exeter University and former teacher had found herself an unemployed, divorced mother living off public assistance and raising her infant daughter in a flat. She was desperate and needed help. She would go to a local cafe and, while her daughter napped, she would write.
She produced pages upon pages of material involving an orphaned boy named Harry Potter who was forced to live a horrible life with his cruel aunt and uncle. Since he was forced to sleep in a cupboard under the stairs and was fed only his family’s leftover scraps, Harry Potter’s life seemed doomed forever. This all changed one day, when he received a letter that shared the marvelous news that magic is real.
“The Sorcerer’s Stone” and all other books bearing the Harry Potter moniker, have dominated the bestseller’s lists and racked up numerous awards in the field of children’s literature. J.K. Rowlings is practically a household name and one of the most dominant writers in today’s fiction market — not a bad set of circumstances for someone who was essentially a first-time writer.
When Warner Brothers had the film rights to the Harry Potter franchise secured, it began the search for a director. Much to its joy, Steven Spielberg — the man behind the shark, the alien, the Nazi, the dinosaur and the soldier — was the first to express interest. Although he was also the first to pass on the job, the mere mention of Spielberg’s name on a project instantly turned up the already fevered excitement. With an even hotter item on the table, Warner Brothers finally decided to entrust it to Chris Columbus, a man who made America laugh years ago when he directed a film about a little boy who got left “Home Alone.”
The movie began shooting late last year. But with a November 2001 release date and a megafranchise at stake, production had to move quickly. Filmed on location in England and on various soundstages, principle photography went smoothly and without problems. The film, now in the can and ready for release, has more than high hopes for success — especially considering that work on the sequel has already begun.
Separately, “The Fellowship of the Ring,” “The Two Towers” and “The Return of the King” are mere novels written by a talented old man, J.R.R. Tolkien. Together, they represent “The Lord of the Rings” — one of the single most masterfully concocted trilogies of all time. Since the first publication of “The Fellowship of the Ring,”
While “The Lord of the Rings” has been around for a while and has an amazingly huge community of fans behind it, the stories were never considered film material. The characters were great. But there were too many of them, and there was no way a feature-length film could do it justice.
In 1987, a film titled “Bad Taste” was released. It was a quirky little New Zealand film directed by Peter Jackson. The film’s gross-out comedy and over-the-top violence made it an instant cult classic.
One day, this director of violent orgies showed up on the doorsteps of New Line Cinema. He told them that he had adapted the parts of “The Lord of the Rings” into three screenplays, which he was more than willing to film. He had the entire island of New Zealand at his disposal and all he wanted was $190 million dollars to do it.
Oh … and he wanted to film all three films simultaneously with newly developed special effects that would make a six-foot tall man look like a hobbit. Whether or not New Line Cinema had seen his previous work is unknown, but its answer to the man has gone down in the unofficial Tolkien history book. They said, “Yes.”
Undertaking this huge task — the single most daunting filmmaking challenge in the history of cinema — seemed no problem to the man who had once said “action!” before having a zombie-baby shoved into a blender. After all, by shooting the movies simultaneously, he has accepted the risk that if the first one fails, he still has two completed films to release.
Jackson must now face the most difficult part of filmmaking: actually showing the film to someone else. In this case, millions of people who have been waiting years — and in some cases, decades — will see one of the most strikingly vibrant universes ever created come to life right before their eyes.
The future of two gigantic franchises will either be written in stone or scribbled in pudding. Regardless, the film-going public will be in for a treat as two celebrated literary sources battle it out.
|
