# Stardust (Spoilers)



## GSHamster (Aug 12, 2007)

I went and saw this yesterday. I'm surprised there isn't a thread up already.

It's a good fantasy/fairytale, kind of in the _Princess Bride_ vein. I enjoyed it a lot, but can't help but feel like something was missing.  Just not sure what that something was.

Thoughts?


----------



## Truth Seeker (Aug 12, 2007)

Honestly...a great cast and it didn't let me down.


----------



## Klaus (Aug 12, 2007)

Saw the trailer prior to Transformers, and it totally turned me down.


----------



## GSHamster (Aug 12, 2007)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Saw the trailer prior to Transformers, and it totally turned me down.




It's not really like the trailer.  It's less actiony and more romantic.


----------



## frankthedm (Aug 12, 2007)

GSHamster said:
			
		

> It's less actiony and more romantic.



Ah, a chick flick. Thanks for the warning.


----------



## joshhg (Aug 12, 2007)

Yeah, Stardust is one of the few Neil Gaiman books I won't (or haven't yet) read, because it is targeted to teenage girls. I've been told it is a great book, and it would make a good movie, but it just isn't what I want.

Still thinking about going and seeing it, just to boost ticket sales so they will make more Neil Gaiman movies.


----------



## SteelDraco (Aug 12, 2007)

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm going to some time in the next week or so. But you have to remember - the story was written and intended to be a FAIRY TALE. That implies a certain target audience, and an expectation about the simplicity of the tale. Personally, I really like it. It's much simpler than most of Gaiman's books, but it's also quite enjoyable. It's light fare.


----------



## GSHamster (Aug 13, 2007)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Ah, a chick flick. Thanks for the warning.




In the same way as _The Princess Bride_ is a chick flick.  It's actually really hard to describe what it is.  It's ... a fairy tale, comes closest.

It's actually quite good, and worth seeing, imo.


----------



## Crothian (Aug 13, 2007)

It was a really good book.  I haven't seen the movie yet.


----------



## SteelDraco (Aug 13, 2007)

GSHamster said:
			
		

> In the same way as _The Princess Bride_ is a chick flick.



Is this a kissing book?


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Aug 13, 2007)

I am confused by the appelation "simple."  Realistic emotion, fairy tale rules and logic... this is really no "simpler" than most films, and actually far more complicated than the usual by-the-numbers action flick or what passes for political thriller nowadays.


----------



## Brogarn (Aug 13, 2007)

Both the girlfriend and I liked it. Her more than me and she typically dislikes "fantasy" type movies. Bummer about the box office numbers. Hope it does better over time on DVD rentals and sales.


----------



## Jaws (Aug 13, 2007)

Brogarn said:
			
		

> Bummer about the box office numbers. Hope it does better over time on DVD rentals and sales.



Only making $9 million on opening weekend for a $70 million picture isn't good.


j.


----------



## Hijinks (Aug 13, 2007)

But .. but .. Robert DeNiro in drag?!?

I hate Clare Danes so I won't be seeing it, probably.


----------



## GSHamster (Aug 13, 2007)

Jaws said:
			
		

> Only making $9 million on opening weekend for a $70 million picture isn't good.
> 
> 
> j.




Meh, look at the reaction on this thread. People on this board are the target audience, the people who will love this movie.  And yet half of us are unwilling to see it, while being perfectly willing to see the next big movie with explosions.

In the end, we get what we deserve: more blockbuster mindless action movies, and fewer movies like _Serenity_ and _Stardust_.


----------



## Einan (Aug 13, 2007)

joshhg said:
			
		

> Yeah, Stardust is one of the few Neil Gaiman books I won't (or haven't yet) read, because it is targeted to teenage girls.




Poppycock and sillitude!  Teen girls will like it, but only in the respect that it's an excellent story and teen girls might appreciate such things.  It's more written as a fairy tale, in the vein of Gaiman's excellent Shakespeare allusions in Sandman.  Think of as a spiritual sibling to The Princess Bride and you'll be closer than "targeted to teenage girls." Pfft.

Einan


----------



## Jaws (Aug 13, 2007)

GSHamster said:
			
		

> And yet half of us are unwilling to see it, while being perfectly willing to see the next big movie with explosions.
> 
> In the end, we get what we deserve: more blockbuster mindless action movies, and fewer movies like _Serenity_ and _Stardust_.



I saw it yesterday and enjoyed it.


j.


----------



## Mort (Aug 13, 2007)

Jaws said:
			
		

> I saw it yesterday and enjoyed it.
> 
> 
> j.




My wife and I saw the movie yesterday and enjoyed it as well.


----------



## GoodKingJayIII (Aug 13, 2007)

I think Princess Bride is an apt comparison.  Both are very similar in their humor and storytelling goals.

I would not quite call it a chick flick... more a family film.  But I saw it with the gf on Friday and we were both entertained.


----------



## Piratecat (Aug 13, 2007)

joshhg said:
			
		

> Yeah, Stardust is one of the few Neil Gaiman books I won't (or haven't yet) read, because it is targeted to teenage girls. I've been told it is a great book, and it would make a good movie, but it just isn't what I want.



I've read the book about four or five times -- first when it came out as a comic format, then several times as an illustrated hardback book, and finally in its non-illustrated form (much less satisfying to me.) I think you're quite mistaken. What Stardust (the story) is is a fairy tale. It may or may not be to your taste, but it's definitely not aimed towards teenage girls.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 14, 2007)

I enjoyed it. Didn't love it, but like it more than most of this summer's movies.


----------



## sniffles (Aug 14, 2007)

joshhg said:
			
		

> Yeah, Stardust is one of the few Neil Gaiman books I won't (or haven't yet) read, because it is targeted to teenage girls. I've been told it is a great book, and it would make a good movie, but it just isn't what I want.



Whatever gave you that idea? It isn't targeted at any specific audience and I think Gaiman would be disappointed to hear that anyone thought so. 

I've read it several times, and while I am female I'm a long, long way from being a teenager. It's quite mature and I would think equally appealing to males and females. It has the same qualities that make his other books worth reading.



			
				steeldraco said:
			
		

> I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm going to some time in the next week or so. But you have to remember - the story was written and intended to be a FAIRY TALE. That implies a certain target audience, and an expectation about the simplicity of the tale. Personally, I really like it. It's much simpler than most of Gaiman's books, but it's also quite enjoyable. It's light fare.



I think you're thinking of childrens' books, not fairy tales. Ever read any unabridged Grimm's tales? 

It wasn't simple, either. I found it quite complex in the ideas and emotions it presents.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Aug 14, 2007)

I enjoyed it - it was fun. I've not read the book.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Aug 15, 2007)

My wife and I saw it today and LOVED it. My wife thinks it's the best movie we've seen this summer, including Harry Potter, and I'm inclined to agree.

It's a shame that it seems to be missing its target audience. It's definitely worth a viewing. Then again, I don't think that "Princess Bride" did great in the box office either, and it's widely regarded as a classic.

I'll be buying this one on DVD as well.


----------



## Jaws (Aug 15, 2007)

Remus Lupin said:
			
		

> Then again, I don't think that "Princess Bride" did great in the box office either, and it's widely regarded as a classic.



"So how does Stardust compare to Princess Bride? You'll recall that Stardust made $9 million on 2,540 screens, or $3,548 a screen, last weekend. But when Princess Bride opened wide in October 1987, after two weeks in limited release, it made $4.48 million at just 622 screens, or $7,202 a screen, outperforming all its competition in the process. Again, remember that ticket prices were significantly lower in 1987, so Princess Bride was drawing huge crowds for that Columbus Day weekend—and since it had only cost about $16 million to make, the producers quickly recovered more than one-quarter of their budget. (Over the next ten weeks, the film would go on to gross $30.9 million.) And those were 1987 dollars; adjust for inflation, and the opening weekend comes in at just under $8 million... with roughly one-quarter the number of screenings of Stardust. Then factor in the fact that it only experienced a 19% dropoff the following weekend; anybody here think Stardust is going to have that kind of staying power?"

http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/

Scroll down to Have Fun Storming the Castle!


j.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Aug 15, 2007)

Well, we'll see. I still think that, quality-wise, it's well within Princess Bride territory.

Then there's this from the link you posted:



> For some moviegoers, though, it's not enough to say that Stardust is no Princess Bride. "As a veteran movie goer who loves fantasy films and who can almost always find some reason to appreciate almost any big-budget film," says novelist Deb Smith, "I gotta tell you that this one had me walking out. The plot had no focus, and the characters didn't make me care... LadyHawke, warts and all, was still a very cool, very romantic film that has a very sentimental following among us romance writers." And, yes, Smith counts Matthew Broderick's wretched miscasting among those warts.




Well, to each their own, but this movie was, for my money, very compelling, well characterized, and very witty. But hey, to each his own. I'd still recommend seeing it.


----------



## Arnwyn (Aug 15, 2007)

A fantastic movie. Both the wife and I thoroughly enjoyed it - probably one of the better movies this year by a long shot for us.

Sky pirates, witches, magic, swordfights, ghosts, and humor - I couldn't have asked for much more. Sure, there were hokey moments, and a couple of weird character decisions made to increase the dramatic impact at the time, but I'm okay with that in a fairy tale - and that's what this was. Even the ending was perfect in a fairy tale fashion.

It could be described as a "chick flick", but it's no more of one than The Princess Bride.

Excellent movie - more like this need to be made.


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 15, 2007)

Hee...I think I'm getting cranky in my old age. 

I liked it while I was watching it, but once I got out and really started to think about it, I started liking it a lot less.

The story was so...pedestrian. And so many of the gimmicks in it (I shan't spoil, I guess) seemed like desperate attempts to say, "Look! An unconventional element! That makes this ORIGINAL and ENTERTAINING!" But it was all just window-dressing that failed to conceal that the plot was still a paint-by-numbers, tired old "fairy tale" (which in my opinion excuses nothing) where the good guys suffer no consequences for their actions, and the bad guys die to the last man/woman...

And was anyone else creeped out by the fact that Tristan's mom -didn't age a day?- Eighteen years and she was still the hot young thang that had a one-nighter with his (much older now) dad! Obviously it's not a time differential thing, because a week there still equaled a week in England...the plot depended on it. But really! Heck, Septimus looked young enough to be Tristan's brother!

Anyway...I admit, it grabbed me at first, but it couldn't keep hold of me once I started to actually think it over. It's too bad, because the premise had promise, and I liked a lot of the things IN the plot...just not the plot itself.

[sblock=If you're not sick of me yet, here's what I would have done...]I was thinking it was too bad that Primus died so early. It would have been really cool if Primus and Tristan had been a pair for longer, even until the very end. Primus could have been a sort of 'action hero,' supercompetent because of a lifetime of dodging assassination attempts from six brothers...yet not driven to evil himself because the crown was already his, really...all he had to do was survive. He could take Tristan under his wing...not knowing that all the while, he was nurturing a person that might threaten his claim to the crown! Then at the end, we have this delightful uncertainty... Will Primus and Tristan fight? Who will win? There could have been romantic uncertainty with Evayne. A sort of Han/Luke/Leia thing, before Luke turned out to be her brother. Then I think Tristan's journey to manhood is complete when he voluntarily turns his back on power...leaving the kingship to Primus. Evayne perhaps loves them both, but can't go back with Tristan...so stays to be queen. Tristan, now much changed, goes back to England, and we have that scene where he scares off his rival and disses his old lady love...which was a great scene and I wouldn't change a thing. We leave off with Tristan perhaps owning a shop...yet not being a 'shopboy' even so.

I dunno. You could even make it more complicated... Maybe Tristan's mom was the daughter of the FIRST queen...who was that star that fell 400 years ago! Shortly after marrying and having Una, the witches nabbed her (you'd have to re-do some of dialogue about how long ago that happened) and the king remarried and had the seven sons by the new queen. That way Tristan has 'star-blood' which might explain why he can hear the stars whispering...which I think was neat and they should have done more with...and Una's weird immortality is explained...argh! I could go on forever. See? Great premise. Just needed more...work put into it. [/sblock]


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Aug 15, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> And was anyone else creeped out by the fact that Tristan's mom -didn't age a day?- Eighteen years and she was still the hot young thang that had a one-nighter with his (much older now) dad!



Since in the book, his mom was of the fairy realm, I would consider it weirder if she did age noticably.... 

though that does answer the question I was going to ask about whether the prologue with the fling was in the movie, so thank you.


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 15, 2007)

Hah! Okay, see...that's the kind of detail that needed to be in the movie. 

She was just a princess in the movie, to my understanding...so her unaging quality was extremely bizarre and seemed totally out of place.


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Aug 15, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> Hah! Okay, see...that's the kind of detail that needed to be in the movie.
> 
> She was just a princess in the movie, to my understanding...so her unaging quality was extremely bizarre and seemed totally out of place.



In the book, iirc, she was kinda exotic and cat like - it's been a while, so I could be misremembering, but she wasn't just another human who happened to live on the other side of the Wall.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 15, 2007)

Some Article said:
			
		

> And, yes, Smith counts Matthew Broderick's wretched miscasting among those warts.



Good lord, Broderick was the only think that kept that from being the worst fantasy film of all time. Different strokes, indeed.


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Aug 16, 2007)

Shayuri said:
			
		

> Hah! Okay, see...that's the kind of detail that needed to be in the movie.
> 
> She was just a princess in the movie, to my understanding...so her unaging quality was extremely bizarre and seemed totally out of place.



She was also from Faerie, was bound in servitude to a witch until cryptic prophecy was fulfilled, and was regularly changed into a bird.... any one of these things would be sufficient, in a fairytale, to be almost completely unaging.  Or to at least be so long-lived that 20 years is a drop in the bucket.  I assume that if she had pointy ears we wouldn't be having this discussion?


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 17, 2007)

Er...I thought she was from Stormhold, and was the daughter of a very human (and old) king, and was therefore human (and capable of growing old). Seems reasonable to me. 

As for the changing into a bird thing...that couldn't keep you young, or the witches would be taking turns changing each other into birds and staying young forever.

And yes, if she had pointy ears, that would have been evidence of a nonhuman nature, which I'd take as a visual cue that she's of a species that ages differently or not at all...therefore I wouldn't have brought it up. But she has round ears...a human father and brothers...a human son...all evidence points to her being human in the movie.

So I think it's fair to observe that she doesn't age properly.


----------



## pallandrome (Aug 18, 2007)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Ah, a chick flick. Thanks for the warning.




*snort*

It's a chick flick like Coraline was a children's book. That's one of the things I like about Gaiman, is that he can take a fairly conventional story and make it INTERESTING. I remember reading about when he pitched Coraline to his publisher.

Gaiman: "It's a fairy tale in the Brothers Grimm tradition."

Publisher: "So it's a childrens book!"

Gaiman: "... I take it you've never read the original Grimm?"

And sure enough, the publisher insisted on marketing it as a kids book, and were shocked when parents complained that the main character's mother was trying to eat her eyes.


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 18, 2007)

...the book sounds way better than the movie. No big surprise. I'll have to check it out.


----------



## Agamon (Aug 19, 2007)

Great movie.  Ricky Gervais' character was worth the price of admission.  Robert De Niro's character is worth twice the price of admission (especially if you didn't see it coming).  Michelle Pfeiffer has aged very well, still a hottie (without the old witch makeup), Sienna Miller, not so much (she used to be smokin'!).  And Claire Danes doesn't make a very good blonde.

Lotsa fun.  This and Superbad made a good double feature for me.


----------



## Hammerhead (Aug 19, 2007)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> Good lord, Broderick was the only think that kept that from being the worst fantasy film of all time. Different strokes, indeed.




That, and the awesome soundtrack.


----------



## Hammerhead (Aug 19, 2007)

Saw it tonight, and it was a great movie; very entertaining to watch. I was a little disappointed in the ending though, as well as the fact that Tristan's mom wasn't nearly as manipulative.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Aug 19, 2007)

Brogarn said:
			
		

> Both the girlfriend and I liked it. Her more than me and she typically dislikes "fantasy" type movies. Bummer about the box office numbers. Hope it does better over time on DVD rentals and sales.



 Exactly the same story over here.


----------



## freyar (Aug 19, 2007)

Just saw it yesterday; wife and I both liked it.  Not quite as good as The Princess Bride, but definitely good.  Honestly, I wasn't that thrilled with the one Gaiman book I'd read and just figured he was too grim and gritty for me, but maybe I'll go find Stardust somewhere.

BTW, the theater was pretty full yesterday afternoon.


----------



## Particle_Man (Aug 19, 2007)

*There is a teenage girl inside me, fighting to get out?*

For the record, I am a 35 year old male and I liked the movie (and the graphic novel it is based on).  Haven't read the print novel that came between the graphic novel and the movie.

I was a little sad that the prophecy angle wasn't nearly as prominent as in the book, but you can't have everything.


----------



## Archetype (Aug 19, 2007)

*LOVED IT....best D&D movie....EVAR!*

Heh, don't know what all the Romance Kooties reaction is all about.

_Stardust_ had more genuine Dungeons & Dragons elements than most movies *intended* to be a D&D/fantasy action movie:

* an awesome Eberron-style Pirate Air Galleon, using some House Cannith apparatis as "lightning bolt collectors."
* village Commoner levels up, takes Swashbuckler Prestige class.
* _Baleful Polymorph_ used often and correctly.
* a spellcaster who knows how to phrase a limiting _geas_ spell.
* duel-wielding pirate swordplay (and a TWF dagger witch).
* everyone and his brother (literally) using some form of Runic _Divination_ to navigate around the world like a magical GPS system.
* multiple _Burning Hands_ spells used to good effect, with "saves for half damage" even...LOL
* a unique Undead Voodoo swordfight unlike any other I've seen...
* and so on...

I also think that this was the best movie of Summer 2007, and am glad I jumped in to see it on impulse.  (And you *have* to see it just for De Niro's character...priceless.)


----------



## Pyrex (Aug 20, 2007)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Sky pirates, witches, magic, swordfights, ghosts, and humor - I couldn't have asked for much more.




I'm with you there, I thoroughly enjoyed it.    

Is it going to go down as an instant classic of modern cinema?  Probably not.

Is it as good as The Princess Bride, which it's constantly compared to?  Probably not, but time will tell.

Is it going to end up on my 'frequently watched when home on rainy days' DVD shelf next to The Princess Bride?  Absolutely.


----------



## WayneLigon (Aug 20, 2007)

Loved it. I liked it a lot better than Princess Bride, actually. Seeing Robert de Niro do a flaming airship pirate is worth the price of admission.

Interesting trivia: the guy who plays Tristan's dad at 18 during the first scene is the guy who will be playing Prince Caspian.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Aug 21, 2007)

I also am putting it in the best movie of the year category. I am also normally not inclined to see movies and have really high standards. The last movie I would rate as a 10 was RotK. This one I give a 9 to and I think offhand that there are only about a half dozen movies in the last 5-10 years that rate that high with me (with the LotR movies being 3 of them).

I agree that there was some spark missing which would have made it a 10 but still overall has just about everything.

Not sure what all the hate for Claire Daines is about. I thought she was extremely atractive (more so than normal) and the perfect casting for her role. I do agree that Michelle Pfeiffer has also definitely maintained her looks.


----------



## Kahuna Burger (Aug 21, 2007)

*Random question*

Since I may not get a chance to see it till DVD... does the star turn into a chunk of rock when she passes the Wall?


----------



## Klaus (Aug 21, 2007)

For those of you who read the novel, what changed/got removed?


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 21, 2007)

Kahuna Burger said:
			
		

> Since I may not get a chance to see it till DVD... does the star turn into a chunk of rock when she passes the Wall?




[sblock]Sort of. A lock of her hair turns into mineral dust. "Stardust," it's called by whatsherface the evil superficial girl. Hence the title, I guess.   But the star never actually goes over the wall in the movie.[/sblock]

On reading all the reviews, I dunno. I guess I just don't know how to pick 'em. First Transformers, now this. My ego is shattered. I...I'd better sit down.


----------



## WayneLigon (Aug 22, 2007)

Kahuna Burger said:
			
		

> Since I may not get a chance to see it till DVD... does the star turn into a chunk of rock when she passes the Wall?




She doesn't. Tristan cuts off a lock of her hair while she's sleeping to show his former would-be ex-girlfriend that at least he did indeed do what he said he'd do, and goes over the wall. Some byplay, then she says his handkerchief is just full of stardust. He opens it, letting this grey glitter cascade out. He realizes what this means and _runs like the wind _ back to the Wall. She's just about to cross over the wall when she's stopped by Tristan's mom.


----------



## cattoy (Aug 22, 2007)

I enjoyed it!

BONUS: One of my local DM's favorite actors is Robert DeNiro and all I have to do to make him totally lose it is to start humming the cancan theme... ^_^


----------



## Prince Atom (Aug 22, 2007)

My wife and I went to see it recently. Our opinion was that DeNiro stole the show.

My family went to see it for my parents' 35th anniversary. They were raving about it all that weekend.

That swordfight between Tristan and Septimus had to be physically hard for Septimus.

It was full of tropes, and they played around with them. Tristan tries to drop the chandelier on Septimus, and has trouble getting the right one ....

I'm sorry it won't be as successful over the short term as the Simpsons or Transformers, but I hope it will have a longer life as a classic.

TWK
I was feeling so good, man ... And then they go and announce 4th Edition.


----------



## Mistwell (Aug 26, 2007)

My wife and I just saw it, and loved it.  I would rank it below Once, and above Harry Potter.  Which is pretty good company for this summer's share of movies.

By the way, in two weeks it's made $32,708,871, which is close to half the cost of making the movie.  Seems to be doing fine.  Not a box office smash or anything, but fine overall.


----------



## yangnome (Aug 27, 2007)

Just got back from seeing it and I absolutely loved it.  I wasn't sure if it would live up to the Pricess Bride comparisons I've seen, but upon viewing I think it did--I guess time will tell whether it has that classic quality or not though.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Aug 27, 2007)

The only recent fantasy movie that I have liked better was Pan's Labyrinth. Pan's Labyrinth was incredible. Stardust was 'only' very, very good.  Best movie of the summer by far.

The Auld Grump


----------



## Tetsubo (Aug 27, 2007)

I've come to the conclusion that I found DeNiro's character offensive. Why can't a gay man be masculine? Or a fierce Capt.? Why did he have to be a cross-dressing sissy? With a lisp no less... It's so nice to see that we are planted so firmly in the 1950's...


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 27, 2007)

excellent movie and worth seeing.


----------



## Klaus (Aug 27, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I've come to the conclusion that I found DeNiro's character offensive. Why can't a gay man be masculine? Or a fierce Capt.? Why did he have to be a cross-dressing sissy? With a lisp no less... It's so nice to see that we are planted so firmly in the 1950's...



 The difference between the captain in the book and DeNiro's character (from what I read... the movie hasn't opened here yet) is one of my major disappointments in the movie (alongside the Lion & the Unicorn, the Witch-Queen's and Septimus' ultimate fate and the true giver of the candle).


----------



## Wrahn (Aug 27, 2007)

I don't get the Princess Bride comparison.  I liked the Princess Bride, but it was a comedy with fantasy elements in it.  Far, far, far sillier than Stardust.

Stardust was a fantasy with comedic elements (along with action, romance and several others) that apart from a slightly long beginning I enjoyed a lot more than I did the Princess Bride. (I have a dislike for the Princess Bride's brand of humor, that I liked the movie is a testament to it's makers).

It is a shame Stardust is doing so poorly in the box office.  I blame marketing since I barely even knew it existed before it came out, and then only went to see it on a lark.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 27, 2007)

I agree about the comparisons to Princess Bride: I just don't see it. Both fantasy, though Stardust is a lot more fairytale-like. Otherwise, though, they don't strike any of the same chords.

Princess Bride is hilarious throughout, and is incredibly quotable. What were the quotable lines in Stardust? How often was it hilarious? Even the romance was better in Princess Bride, and it had much less.

I enjoyed Stardust, but for what it was, a very different film than Princess Bride.


----------



## Mort (Aug 28, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> I've come to the conclusion that I found DeNiro's character offensive. Why can't a gay man be masculine? Or a fierce Capt.? Why did he have to be a cross-dressing sissy? With a lisp no less... It's so nice to see that we are planted so firmly in the 1950's...




Overall I really liked the movie, but this part didn't sit well with me either; not the crossdressing part, but the fact that he suddenly became a sissy (when confronting Septimus) - despite his obvious earlier competence. What should have happened was septimus busting in on him, looking startled, and then having to run for his life when Shakespeare whups him with the handheld fan - now that would have been satisfying.


----------



## Fast Learner (Aug 29, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Overall I really liked the movie, but this part didn't sit well with me either; not the crossdressing part, but the fact that he suddenly became a sissy (when confronting Septimus) - despite his obvious earlier competence.



A feminine/flamboyant mannerism doesn't make someone incompetent.


----------



## Hammerhead (Aug 29, 2007)

Fast Learner said:
			
		

> A feminine/flamboyant mannerism doesn't make someone incompetent.




No, but he did get his ass kicked by Septimus. On the other hand, in the book, Primus described his youngest brother as the "most dangerous man you will ever meet." And he's stuck in a closet without any weapons or armor. I think losing is a pretty reasonable expectation in that situation, with that opponent.


----------



## Shayuri (Aug 29, 2007)

I have to ask...is there anyone else who felt that whole DeNiro/air pirate thing was just awfully contrived? I felt like the screenplay author was jumping up and down, waving his arms, screaming, "Hey! Hey! Pay no attention to the lackluster story! This is CLEVER and WITTY and FUNNY. It flies in the face of convention to have a gay effeminate pirate! That makes it ironic and amusing!"

I also felt it was a copout to say that the crew knew all along.

 :\


----------



## GSHamster (Aug 30, 2007)

Mort said:
			
		

> Overall I really liked the movie, but this part didn't sit well with me either; not the crossdressing part, but the fact that he suddenly became a sissy (when confronting Septimus) - despite his obvious earlier competence. What should have happened was septimus busting in on him, looking startled, and then having to run for his life when Shakespeare whups him with the handheld fan - now that would have been satisfying.




I read it more that he had been flustered by being discovered.  He wasn't paralyzed by Septimus, he was paralyzed by the thought of his reputation being destroyed.  After all, he went to a great deal of trouble to keep it a secret and maintain a fearsome reputation, and the vision of being "outed" was what broke him, rather than anything Septimus did.

Seems reasonable enough to me.


----------



## Tetsubo (Aug 30, 2007)

GSHamster said:
			
		

> I read it more that he had been flustered by being discovered.  He wasn't paralyzed by Septimus, he was paralyzed by the thought of his reputation being destroyed.  After all, he went to a great deal of trouble to keep it a secret and maintain a fearsome reputation, and the vision of being "outed" was what broke him, rather than anything Septimus did.
> 
> Seems reasonable enough to me.




Which is such a lovely message to send to any child viewing this film. Deny who you really are, or the world will hate you... healthy attitude there...


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Aug 30, 2007)

Tetsubo said:
			
		

> Which is such a lovely message to send to any child viewing this film. Deny who you really are, or the world will hate you... healthy attitude there...




But the message at the end with was even if you deny it your friends will still know and they won't care when you do admit who you are.


----------



## Tetsubo (Aug 30, 2007)

Brown Jenkin said:
			
		

> But the message at the end with was even if you deny it your friends will still know and they won't care when you do admit who you are.




They couldn't just, you know, *tell* you? You still ended up living a lie...

I had a female acquaintance come out to me once. It was really hard for her. I looked at her and said, "I knew you were a lesbian twenty seconds after I met you." This stunned her. If we had been friends I would have broached the topic sooner...

I would love to see a major studio release with a gay character that is just perfectly normal and well adjusted. Not a walking stereotype. But expecting a major studio to do that is sort of futile on my part...

One positive note for Stardust though. It gave me two sketch ideas...


----------

