Disney´s "Artemis Fowl"

DaddyfromNaboo

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I never read the books but found the premise interesting. The trailer for the movie looks IMO way too slick and I despise the use of pseudo-Rap/HipHop music for this genre movie. The teaser poster reads "Time to believe" but then they serve us the unbelievable like it´s day-to-day business. Except for the father-son angle and that Kenneth Brannagh directed the movie I do not find anything to attach to.

 
Having read the books, let me tell you this.

This movie will be another Eragon situation.

They’ve destroyed the concept so badly that there is no possible way that this movie will be any good. Artemis’ father is supposed to have been kidnapped by the Russian mob, not the fairies. They don’t deal directly with his rescue until the second book. Artemis is the one that discovers the fairy world, because he is “the only one young enough to still believe in magic, but old enough to put that belief to use”. And he is the villain of the first book. He kidnaps one of the fairies (Holly Short in the trailer). The first trailer for this had me interested, despite some egregious changes (Butler is supposed to be Eurasian, Judi Dench’s character was a man), but now I’ve lost all and any hope that this will retain any of the charm and wit of the books. Why do they do this? They take successful books and then strip them of all their character and twist their basic premise beyond recognition, and then they get surprised when no one likes it.
 
"Why do they do this?"

Because 'everyone is special'... and instead of staying canon or sticking with original concepts.. they need to be 'inclusive' for the sake of 'feelings'.
But Hollywood has been doing since before this need for all inclusiveness became prevalent. Starship Troopers is a good example of a book that was butchered when made into a movie and that was before inclusiveness and everyone is special really became a thing.
 
Was not aware of that.. (or that ST was even a book for that matter).. LOL

Oh.. and to be clear.. I dont think it -started- with this movie... just continues. :)

Although I do think there is a difference of making changes for film/achievability /reality... then just gender bending, race swapping, etc..etc for the only purpose of 'feelings'..

Disclaimer: (because I'm sure there are some -waiting- to run with this).. this is NOT a jab or any race or gender. I have no deep rooted 'hate or anger' toward a female character.. or a character played by ANY specific race/gender.

I do think it s DUMB to repurpose an existing character for the sake of the emotions and feelings. **(Make a new, great and powerful female character all you want...but dont re-brand an exisiting one and change characteristics for sales, or specific vocal groups to be happy.)

Comics have been doing it for a while now as well... so not just movies.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, I’m more upset with changing hugely important pieces of the book than I am over casting decisions. I’d have seen it if the extent of the changes were Butler being black and Root played by Judi Dench. But the whole point of the series—of Artemis literally being the villain—and changing over the course of the books to the point that he is close friends with people he’d KIDNAPPED, can’t really work if he doesn’t start out as a smarmy, overly intelligent 12 year old bent on a life of crime. What a train wreck.
 
Watched about thirty minutes of this trash last night. Unsurprisingly, it absolutely butchers everything good, unique, or charming about the books. Also unsurprising, but very unwelcome, it is a terrible film. Characters are constantly talking (probably mostly through ADR), Josh Gad is narrating 85% of the time, the dialogue is cringey and exposition-laden, the editing is choppy and mechanical, leaving no space for anything to breathe. Most of the cast is miscast, every single character has been dramatically reworked to be dull, generic, and unlikeable. The VFX are lackluster and over-relied upon, the props are bland and sometimes downright embarrassing, the music does nothing the help the film, and the stereotypical addition of a “doomsday weapon” robs the story of the restraint and the small-scale that it once had. I gave up at the first real action scene of the movie (which showed up about thirty to forty minutes in) because it was so poorly filmed and choreographed and edited that it was literally hurting my eyes. So many bizarre and confusing choices on the part of everyone involved. I didn’t think Hollywood could produce a worse book adaptation than Eragon, but at least Eragon felt like a movie, albeit a lackluster one. Artemis Fowl is a total dud, and I’m sure Disney is thanking their lucky stars for coronavirus, because had this gone to theaters it would have tanked very hard.
 
Having read the books, let me tell you this.

This movie will be another Eragon situation.

They’ve destroyed the concept so badly that there is no possible way that this movie will be any good. Artemis’ father is supposed to have been kidnapped by the Russian mob, not the fairies. They don’t deal directly with his rescue until the second book. Artemis is the one that discovers the fairy world, because he is “the only one young enough to still believe in magic, but old enough to put that belief to use”. And he is the villain of the first book. He kidnaps one of the fairies (Holly Short in the trailer). The first trailer for this had me interested, despite some egregious changes (Butler is supposed to be Eurasian, Judi Dench’s character was a man), but now I’ve lost all and any hope that this will retain any of the charm and wit of the books. Why do they do this? They take successful books and then strip them of all their character and twist their basic premise beyond recognition, and then they get surprised when no one likes it.
They do it, because some pencil pushing marketers in a room at corporate did "tests" and decided that these changes would make the film the most profitable. For example, changing everything about Artemis so that he's the star and the fairies aren't. Some hack in marketing told Disney dept. execs that making the kid the star would make the movie more marketable, and so the execs decided that was the direction they were going to go. In the end, it's all about money, not about soul or story. I was a fan of the books as a kid, and turned the movie off at about the time the fairies first contacts Artemis with the ransom call. I was disgusted. This wasn't Artemis Fowl, this was a corporate controlled marketing piece with the name Artemis Fowl slapped on it. What an absolute waste of potential and time.
 
They do it, because some pencil pushing marketers in a room at corporate did "tests" and decided that these changes would make the film the most profitable. For example, changing everything about Artemis so that he's the star and the fairies aren't. Some hack in marketing told Disney dept. execs that making the kid the star would make the movie more marketable, and so the execs decided that was the direction they were going to go. In the end, it's all about money, not about soul or story. I was a fan of the books as a kid, and turned the movie off at about the time the fairies first contacts Artemis with the ransom call. I was disgusted. This wasn't Artemis Fowl, this was a corporate controlled marketing piece with the name Artemis Fowl slapped on it. What an absolute waste of potential and time.
It was really bad
 
Looks like it´s going on the list of "movies that I let run in the background while I have to work on a project." Sad, really, really sad. I mean, everyone is looking for the next big franchise, the next Harry Potter. Artemis Fowl is nowhere near as popular, but as a movie series it could have been something really big due to the world that it plays in. Something for a broader audience, action, fantasy, crime, probably some humour, generation spanning. What a waste. I am so very surprised that there are not more Jon Favreaus or Dave Filonis out there.
 
Unfortunate the fanbases are let down time and time again with projects like this.
And it's not even the fan bases being let down this time. I see many people who claim to have never read the books finding the movie just poorly made with little entertainment value. This one is a real stinker. Disney definitely dodged a bullet sending it straight to VOD.
 
And it's not even the fan bases being let down this time. I see many people who claim to have never read the books finding the movie just poorly made with little entertainment value. This one is a real stinker. Disney definitely dodged a bullet sending it straight to VOD.
Yeah, as a personal fan of the books, not having them be like the books alone would have been disappointing. But it would have been fine if it could even be called a movie. It’s just awful.
 
Serious question here...

Did anyone, based on the trailers, think that this was going to be anything other than a disaster?

I mean, I know nothing of the source material...didn’t even know it existed...but within like 15 seconds of the first trailer for this I was like “Well, that looks awful.”
 
I have no hope or optimism for this film based on previously-mentioned butchering of story execution and unfortunate choice of tone. And thus no intention of ever seeing it. But missed this earlier:
Was not aware of that.. (or that ST was even a book for that matter).. LOL
I honestly think Starship Troopers is the most egregious offender I've ever run across in this sort of matter. The book is a dated, but well-thought-out libertarian (small 'L') thinkpiece, wrapped in the setting of the late preamble and onset of interstellar war. The movie I have just referred to as "Johnny and the Bug-Men" since it came out, as it has zero to do with the book except characters' names. Casper van Dien is not my first casting pick for a Filipino. Johnny did not go to school with Ace or Dizzy. Dizzy was a guy. Carmen shaved her head, as most star pilots did -- for convenience, and she and Johnny were only ever affectionate acquaintences, though Johnny would have liked more. He wasn't from Buenos Aires, had never been to Buenos Aires. The only significance was that his family was there on business when the Bugs destroyed it. Carl was killed during the war. His high school History & Moral Philosophy teacher did not come out of retirement to lead his platoon. The bugs were tool users with technological weapons. An entire other alien race was in and relevant to the story in the book, but omitted from the film. They didn't have the budget to do both the bugs and the power armor justice, so opted for the bugs (the Mobile Infantry are supposed to look more like a cross between the Terran Marines in StarCraft and Space Marine Assault Marines from Warhammer 40K). And that was a bad cover of David Bowie's "I Have Not Been to Oxford Town".
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top