Not that we'll ever see the movie, as we never get the chance to see any movie, and reportedly
The Spiderwick Chronicles may be a bit too scary for the kids to go and see (we only go to kids flicks as we then don't need a babysitter for the tribe), and so...Anyway, thought that those that have seen it may want to discuss the comparison between it and LotR. To start off,
this review reads:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Machosky
Of all the pretenders to the fantasy-film throne vacated by "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" (2003), "The Spiderwick Chronicles" might have actually made the best movie.
Although Tony Diterlizzi and Holly Black probably didn't write the best-selling series of children's books with a movie in mind, its delicate balance of magic, monsters and all-out mayhem just happens to fit into the perfect shape for a film.
"Spiderwick" is a really fun, fast-paced adventure story that never gets bogged down by excessive backstory and insider-only minutiae. Imagine the whimsical wonderment of "Stuart Little" marinated in a little of the mystical magic of "Narnia," then mashed up with the scary-funny rambunctiousness of "Gremlins," and you're getting close. emphasis mine
|
"...excessive backstory and insider-only minutiae?" Just what is the reviewer saying?
