Film Theorist Question

[daughterofthedust]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <mhuber92211 at y...> wrote:

> I think that we all have our opinions and I would like to hear 
them.  
> The fancinating idea to me is the discussion of how a children's 
book 
> and film has underlying (sometimes overbearing) adult themes.
> 
 

 I'll address this, Matt (BTW, welcome :-)...I really despise when 
filmmakers (not just Columbus) talks down to his/her young audience, 
as if they must somehow simplify the material so their young minds 
can grasp it...

 I remember loving Dark Crystal as a young child, because it felt to 
me to be such a "cool" story precisely because of "the mature 
themes" (which btw, I didn't fully understand until some viewings 
and years later). I remember thinking wow, "It's cool that these 
characters are so masty and dark", etc...like I was privy to seeing 
something I almost shouldn't.

 A glaringly recent example, like the Columbus Potter films, are the 
awful sequels to Disney classic animated films that keep coming out 
on video, of late. One can just tell they were made without regard 
to the audience, but as a simple way to line corporate pockets. 
Oddly enough, this is the same studio that recently released the 
counter-example Spirited Away, another film which kids will love 
now, and grow to appreciate and fully understand later (I also loved 
the criminally under-seen The Iron Giant). 

 So, I guess to sum it up... A filmmaker should trust his or her 
audiences' intelligence, regardless of age... 

 It's better to make a film that's not completely understood at 
first, only to gain greater appreciation on subsequent viewings, 
than to make one that at first glance has a parade of "cool" 
recognizable elements, only to lose points for noticable 
storytelling shortcomings on later viewings.

--daughter @)--/----