Sasquatch Sunset will be a hard sell for most, but it’s weird and kind of charming in its own peculiar way.

Last Updated on April 22, 2024

PLOT: A year in the life of a family of Sasquatch, as they forage for food, hook up, and narrowly avoid civilization.

REVIEW: Sasquatch Sunset is unique; I’ll give it that. David and Nathan Zellner’s film has two big stars in the leads – Jesse Eisenberg and Riley Keough – but covers them in enough prosthetics to make them completely unrecognizable. The film doesn’t contain a single line of dialogue. Indeed, the whole movie is in grunts and yells because…well… they’re Sasquatch! 

While some may find the very idea of this movie tedious, I was surprised by how much I enjoyed Sasquatch Sunset. The Zellner Brothers have a unique voice, as depicted in Damsel and Kumiko the Treasure Hunter. It’s weird to say that a movie with no dialogue or humans could actually be considered their most accessible movie to date – but it’s true. This movie is surprisingly cute and ends before the premise wears out its welcome.

In it, we follow a Sasquatch family consisting of two males (Nathan Zellner and Jesse Eisenberg), a female (Riley Keough) and a child (Christoph Zajek-Denek). Zellner plays the older, more dominant male, albeit the one that’s less favoured by the female both male Sasquatch want to be with. It’s never really clear who the father of Zajek-Denek’s character is. It takes place over a year, as the family roams the Pacific Northwest and narrowly avoids civilization. As the film goes on, nature and the unpredictable hand of fate prove to be their greatest adversary, as the power dynamics constantly shift as tragedy strikes.

The entire cast is heavily buried under prosthetics, which are so good that I honestly couldn’t tell apart Zellner and Eisenberg’s characters until about twenty minutes into the film. It’s a lot funnier than the premise suggests, with the mating rituals, random aggression and near-misses with civilization being quite amusing. But the film also gets downright tragic at times, with a standout scene involving a log in a dam that’s highly reminiscent of a classic sequence from the Paul Newman movie Sometimes a Great Notion. 

The film also has a surreal, evocative score by The Octopus Project, which pays homage to one of the Zellner Bros chief inspirations, the old Leonard Nimoy “In Search of” conspiracy theory show – where Bigfoot was a favorite topic.

It’s hard to rate the movie’s performances, but I’ll say this – both Keough and Eisenberg are fearless. Keough especially has a scene where she takes a dump in the middle of the road which eschews any sense of vanity she might have as an actress. Physically, everyone involved delivers excellent performances, although for many viewers this might come off as a one-joke premise stretched too far. 

It’ll be interesting to see how Sasquatch Sunset is received when it comes out via Bleeker Street this April. It’s certainly too odd of a movie to ever connect with a mainstream audience, but if you have a tolerance for things that are “out there” you might actually find that you have a good time with this tale of the Bigfoot. 

Zack Snyder is again explaining why he decided to include the infamous “Martha” moment in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

Last Updated on April 22, 2024

Save Martha or scrap her? The “Save Martha” moment in Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice was divisive to say the least, with Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent having a connection that somehow changed the entire mood and gave them some common ground, ultimately snubbing what should have been one of the all-time great fights in superhero movie history. To some, it was a deep moment of confrontation over their mutual losses, a necessary inclusion that built on the mythology of each man. But to most of us, it was just about the hokiest thing imaginable.

Zack Snyder has been open in his understanding that the Martha scene in Batman v Superman may not work for everybody, but now he is again explaining why he decided to move forward with it. During the writing process, Snyder was told by co-writer Chris Terrio, “‘You know that [their] mothers have the same name’…And he goes, ‘Yeah, like imagine that Batman sees Superman as an alien, as a monster, but realizes that his dead mother has the same name as this thing that he considers nonhuman. Like, that’s gonna get him.’ And I’m like, ‘That is gonna get him, that’s amazing.’”

Snyder built on his stance on the Martha scene, saying, “What else could he say to Batman, holding the Kryptonite spear about to plunge it into his heart? Like, what is he gonna say to convince him that his love of humanity is as high as Batman’s? I mean, really, Superman could kill him in a second, like literally in a second, so that was why I was like, ‘Ok well, he’s gotta play every possible trick.’”

That trick would essentially rob viewers of the full-blown showdown – with a determined victor – that the title Batman v Superman promises (hell, even Freddy vs. Jason got closer!). On top of that, Snyder’s explanation kind of sounds like he and Terrio weren’t all that confident in how to get themselves out of the jam of taking a side and so threw the Martha moment in to force a redirection.

What did you think of the Martha scene in Batman v Superman? Did it work on any level or is it a silly moment? Give us your take in the comments section below!

Back in 2000, director Ridley Scott (and screenwriters David Franzoni, John Logan, and William Nicholson) took us back to 180 AD for Gladiator, which told the story of Roman general Maximus Decimus Meridius (played by Russell Crowe), who is favored by Emperor Marcus Aurelius to be his successor because his own son, Commodus, is unfit to rule. Commodus disagrees, so he murders his father, has Maximus arrested, and has Maximus’s wife and son killed. While Commodus establishes himself as the new emperor, Maximus escapes from captivity – only to be captured again, this time by slavers who sell him off to become a gladiator. Soon he’s fighting in front of Commodus in Rome’s Colosseum… and it all builds up to Commodus challenging Maximus to a duel. Gladiator was a major box office success and racked up multiple Academy Award wins, including Best Picture. So there was already talk of a sequel in 2001, but it ended up taking more than twenty years to get a sequel into production. Gladiator II is now ready to reach theatres on November 22nd – so we have put together a list of everything we know about this sequel.

DIRECTOR AND SCRIPT

Ridley Scott always planned to return to the helm for Gladiator II. The hold-up was the script. Since Maximus died at the end of Gladiator, screenwriters found it very difficult to figure out how to continue the story, especially since the initial idea was that Russell Crowe would return as Maximus in some capacity. The first writers to be involved were David Franzoni and John Logan, who crafted a story that would pick up fifteen years after the events of the first movie and center on the Lucius character, who was a child played by Spencer Treat Clark in Gladiator. While the Praetorian Guards rule Rome, Lucius would be trying to find out the truth of his parentage because the idea was always that, even though his mother (Commodus’s sister Lucilla, played by Connie Nielsen) would say that his father was the late Lucius Verus, it was actually Maximus. This story would have allowed for some prequel elements, but would have also seen Maximus being resurrected… somehow. According to Crowe, there was a time when they were just going to have Maximus rise from the dead like Jesus Christ.

Musician Nick Cave was hired to write his own version of the script, and this one has gotten a lot of attention because how over-the-top and insane it was. Cave’s title of choice was Christ Killer, and would have (as Cave explained on Marc Maron’s podcast) “found Maximus in purgatory as he’s sent down by the gods, who are dying in Heaven because there’s this one god, there’s this Christ character, down on Earth who is gaining popularity and so the many gods are dying so they send Gladiator back to kill Christ and his followers. Maximus was tricked by the gods, as the Christ character that they’ve sent him to kill was his own son, the one who died in the first movie. The end of the film would have found Maximus living forever, fighting battles throughout history, such as the Crusades, World War II, and Vietnam, before ending up as a General in the modern-day Pentagon.”

Things got quiet for a decade after Cave turned in his script, but in 2017 Scott started pushing the sequel forward again while swearing that he had found a way to bring Maximus back that would make sense. The Town and Top Gun: Maverick writer Peter Craig was hired to write a new script that would again center on Lucius, this time 25 to 30 years after the events of Gladiator. Craig found the idea tough to crack, so then Scott brought on his Napoleon writer David Scarpa. And it’s Scarpa who wrote the script that finally went into production in 2023.

CAST

Paul Mescal (Normal People) leads the long-awaited sequel, playing the adult Lucius. One report let us know, “Before he died, Maximus rescued Lucius and his mother from the clutches of the young man’s uncle, Commodus. The event left an impression on Lucius, who aspires to be as formidable as Maximus as he braves a harsh world.” Mescal is joined in the cast by Fred Hechinger (The White Lotus) as Emperor Geta, Joseph Quinn (Stranger Things) as Emperor Caracalla, and – in roles that weren’t specified when their involvement was announced – Pedro Pascal (The Last of Us), Lior Raz (The Crowded Room), Peter Mensah (Spartacus), and Matt Lucas (Wonka).

May Calamawy (Moon Knight) is in there as well, and while we don’t know who she’s playing, it was said that her character is quite important to the story, so Scott did a “thorough search” before Calamawy earned the role over the course of multiple auditions.

Gladiator cast member Derek Jacobi is reprising the role of Senator Gracchus and Connie Nielsen is back as Lucius’s mother Lucilla. Scott made sure to involve Nielsen as much as possible during the development of the story.

Denzel Washington (American Gangster) is playing someone Scott described to Deadline as being a character who is parallel to Lucius. “The owner of a business that supplied weapons for the Romans, who supplied the oil when they traveled, who supplied the wine they drink. They wouldn’t drink water, they drank wine. When they traveled, who would supply wagons and horses and tack? There had to be the arms dealers of the period; here is a man who already rich from supplying the weapons, the catapults. His hobby is like a racing stable except it’s gladiators. He’s got a stable of 30 or 40 gladiators. He likes to actually see them fight and it evolves that that’s where he came from. He was captured in North Africa, and evolved into a free man because he was a good gladiator. But he hides that because also he’s now realizing the potential of his actual power. He’s wealthier than most senators, so already has thoughts and designs of the possible idea of taking power from these two crazy princes.”

Absent from the cast is Russell Crowe, as Maximus remains in his grave after all. Crowe doesn’t seem pleased that people keep asking him about the sequel – during an appearance at the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival, he said, “They should be f*cking paying me for the amount of questions I get asked about the f*cking film that I am not even in.” – but he has also said that he thinks it will be “absolutely spectacular” and he’s jealous of the experiences Mescal got to have on set.

PRODUCTION

Gladiator II started filming in May of 2023 – and the production wasn’t an easy ride. A month into filming, six crew members were left with non-life-threatening burn injuries when they were accidentally caught in a large explosion that went off during the filming of a stunt sequence. A studio spokesperson assured The Sun that “The safety and full medical services teams on-site were able to act quickly so that those who were impacted immediately received necessary care. They are all in stable condition and continue to receive treatment.”

Two months into filming, production had to shut down due to the Screen Actors Guild strike. The strike went on from July into November, with Scott using that time to edit together 90 minutes of footage (and possibly film some more footage with non-SAG extras). Before filming could resume in December, the deteriorating sets had to be repaired. A massive recreation of ancient Rome, including a life-size Colosseum, had been built for the production, and these open-air sets had to be left sitting there for four months while the strike played out. So it took some time to fix them up before the cast and crew could get back to work.

The strike helped the budget get out of hand. The movie was supposed to cost $165 million, but The Hollywood Reporter revealed that costs had ballooned to somewhere in the $250 million to $310 million range. For this project alone, the studio lost $600,000 a week during the strike.

There were also rumblings from PETA about the mistreatment of horses and monkeys on the set, but crew members refuted those claims, saying the Humane Society was always on set to oversee the treatment of the animals.

Filming wrapped in January after taking place in England, Morocco, and Malta. By filming in Malta (which was also a filming location for the first movie), the production earned a €46.7 million rebate, which is over $50 million in USD. So that brings some relief, despite the budget being out of control.

CINEMACON TRAILER

A five-minute trailer, which was preceded by a video introduction in which Scott said Gladiator II is “more spectacular than the original,” was screened at the CinemaCon event in early April. JoBlo’s own Chris Bumbray was in attendance and reported that the trailer was incredible. He wrote in, “Paul Mescal looks a lot like Russell Crowe, with the same beard. Lucius is a gladiator trained by Denzel Washington’s character. Meanwhile, Pedro Pascal is a Roman general trying to lead a revolt against the sadistic emperor (Joseph Quinn). At some point, Quinn and Mescal meet in the gladiator ring for a battle. The games are more sadistic this time, with the gladiators fighting wild baboons unarmed and a rhino. You also see lots of Connie Nielsen, who seems to be in cahoots with Denzel and opposes the emperor. Gladiator II has a ton of action and intrigue. Mescal and Pascal look like they handle the action side, with no shots of Denzel fighting.”

Not mentioned in that write-up was the fact that the trailer features “a scene where they flood the Colosseum and have the gladiators fight sharks.” Which might sound over-the-top and ridiculous to some, but in the early days of the Colosseum, the place would occasionally be flooded so it could be used to host staged ship battles called naumachia… and yes, apparently they would release sharks and other sea creatures into the flooded structure as well. So there is a reflection of reality in this insanity.

That’s everything we know about Gladiator II right now, but with the release date just seven months away, we should be learning more about the film very soon.

Last Updated on April 22, 2024

Guy Ritchie’s The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is now playing in theaters throughout the United States. However, the ensemble action romp, starring Henry Cavill, Alex Pettyfer, Eiza González, Alan Ritchson, Babs Olusanmokun, and Cary Elwes, is currently absent from UK and Canadian theaters. Lionsgate distributes The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare domestically. At the same time, Prime Video inked an eight-figure deal for international rights across Europe, Latin America, ANZ, Canada, South Africa, India, and pan-Asian PayTV. So, what’s the deal with The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare’s international availability? Why won’t The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare get a theatrical release in these territories?

According to Yahoo!, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare won’t screen in UK cinemas. Instead, the film will stream on Prime Video in territories like the United Kingdom and Canada, robbing certain areas of the big screen experience. It’s safe to assume that Amazon plans to attract more subscribers to its streaming service by debuting The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare on Prime Video, but at what cost? Judging by the trailer, Ministry looks like the type of explosive action film made for the silver screen. Will a streaming release sour potential viewers altogether?

Here’s the official synopsis for The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare:

“Based upon recently declassified files of the British War Department and inspired by true events, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is an action-comedy that tells the story of the first-ever special forces organization formed during WWII by UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill and a small group of military officials including author Ian Fleming. The top-secret combat unit, composed of a motley crew of rogues and mavericks, goes on a daring mission against the Nazis using entirely unconventional and utterly “ungentlemanly” fighting techniques. Ultimately, their audacious approach changed the course of the war and laid the foundation for the British SAS and modern Black Ops warfare.”

Luckily, I have a Prime Video subscription. However, I planned to see The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare in theaters before hearing this news. This situation is a bummer, and I wonder what cinephiles overseas think about being denied the theatrical experience. Considering the film’s franchise potential, it’s an odd decision. Then again, streaming services must find a way to draw people to their service.

What do you think about this trend? If you live outside the United States, are you upset about watching Ritchie’s new film at home instead of in a theater? Let us know in the comments section below.

About the Author

Born and raised in New York, then immigrated to Canada, Steve Seigh has been a JoBlo.com editor, columnist, and critic since 2012. He started with Ink & Pixel, a column celebrating the magic and evolution of animation, before launching the companion YouTube series Animation Movies Revisited. He’s also the host of the Talking Comics Podcast, a personality-driven audio show focusing on comic books, film, music, and more. You’ll rarely catch him without headphones on his head and pancakes on his breath.

Saturday Night Live alum doesn’t think her Debbie Downer character could sustain a 90-minute feature film.

Last Updated on April 22, 2024

Saturday Night Live skits have given us some of the funniest and most enjoyable movies of their eras. OK, there aren’t many – we’re really mostly talking about The Blues Brothers, the Wayne’s World double feature and MacGruber – but what’s there is choice comedy. On the other side, we have crap like It’s Pat, The Ladies Man and Stuart Saves His Family, all proving that just because something works for five minutes doesn’t mean it can sustain 90. Take another recurring skit, Debbie Downer, for another example, who Rachel Dratch turned into a signature character in more than a half-dozen appearances. Thankfully such a movie never happened – something that Dratch is perfectly fine with.

Speaking with ComicBook.com, Rachel Dratch recognized that while the character stands as one of her greatest contributions to SNL, she just wouldn’t have the legs to make it on the big screen. “I used to get asked that a lot about the Debbie Downer movie, but the thing about Debbie Downer is she’s best in small doses, I think. I think with a whole movie – even a sketch, like the first couple were great and then people are on to you after, you know, they know what to expect – So I think a whole movie might not work. I think some things are best in teeny tiny little snippets…We never did because she barely could make it the seven minutes sometimes…So 90 minutes would probably be a snooze fest.” While she’s absolutely correct – then again, imagine how much of Debbie Downer’s life there is to explore… – we’d also like to imagine Dratch went full-on Debbie Downer when saying so, complete with sad sack sound effects.

We haven’t gotten a new Saturday Night Live adaptation in well over a decade. Not that we’re overdue or clamoring for one, but there might be some interest in, say, The Californians or Stefon getting their own movies. Going back to the ‘90s, two were actually in at least minor discussion: one centering on Chris Farley’s motivational speaker Matt Foley, as well as another for Dana Carvey and Kevin Nealon’s bodybuilders Hans and Franz, with the pair close to recruiting Arnold Schwarzenegger for the movie. The latter was more or less axed due to some of the aforementioned SNL movies tanking and Arnold stepping aside.

What is your favorite Saturday Night Live adaptation? Which skit do you think would make a great movie?

David Fincher unveiled the 8K version of Seven over the weekend, although it had to be screened in 4K because technology hasn’t caught up.

There may be seven deadly sins but David Fincher is maxing his Ks at eight — well, four, as there is really no set distributor that can handle 8K. As such, it was a 4K restoration of Seven that was screened at this year’s TCM Classic Film Festival, although Fincher is still proud of the work presented to viewers.

Appearing at the annual festival, David Fincher pointed out that those who catch this quasi-8K transfer of Seven may be caught off guard by the “imperfections”, which he is well aware of. “It is what it is, warts and all…And some of it is spectacular and some of it is stuff that I would change or fix today, but I didn’t want to mess with that. There’s a lot of imperfections, there’s a lot of things that you just don’t see on film. When people say they love the look of film, what they’re talking about is chaos, entropy, and softness. Now, of course, we live in an HDR world where you get those kinds of very deep, rich, velvety blacks for free.”

As with any high-definition transfer, that of Seven presented the issues of “how much”, something that can easily limit the authenticity and filmic quality — too much and the transfer looks overproduced, ruining the experience and discrediting so much of the filmmakers’ work. For this, Fincher had plenty of meticulous details (no surprise there) on how this was approached for Seven. “And we had to negotiate that fine between what to fix or not…So we attempted to go back in and fix to make it match. And kind of repaint stuff and just take out water spots and little edge flashes. And some of it is impossible to get it to match, certainly by today’s standards. So there was a lot of excavation.”

It took around six months alone for David Fincher and his team just to compile their notes to get moving on the Seven transfer. It will be pretty incredible once distributors can catch up with 8K, which will allow all of Fincher and company’s work to be seen the way they intended three decades later. Even so, a 4K downscale is nothing to lose your head over, so fans should be on the lookout for the Blu-ray release early next month.

Will you be checking out Fincher’s Seven on 4K? Which other film of his would best benefit from an 8K treatment?

We look at the plot, casting, rumors, and release date for Marvel Studios’ revival series Daredevil: Born Again

What Do We Know About the upcoming Marvel Cinematic Universe series Daredevil: Born Again? More in recent weeks than ever before. The sequel to the Netflix street-level superhero series has been one of the most anticipated MCU projects since it was announced. With Vincent D’Onofrio and Charlie Cox already having appeared in Hawkeye, Echo, She-Hulk: Attorney At Law, and Spider-Man: No Way Home, fans have a tease of what they can expect from this new dive into Matt Murdock and Wilson Fisk. So, let’s dive in and take a look at what we know about Daredevil: Born Again.

This will be a two-season limited series

Development on Daredevil: Born Again began back in March of 2022. At the time, Matt Corman and Chris Ord were hired as head writers with the aim to create a lighter tone and episodic structure compared to the Netflix series. When filming began in March 2023, it was suspended months later because of the SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes. Marvel Studios decided in September to release Matt Corman, Chris Ord, and the directors brought aboard and replaced them with new showrunner Dario Scardapane with Justin Benson and Aaron Moorehead, the helmers behind episodes of Moon Knight and the second season of Loki, aboard as primary directors. Scardapane shifted the series to a more serialized structure with direct connections to the Netflix series. Originally announced as an eighteen-episode series, Daredevil: Born Again is now being structured as two nine-episode runs connected as an overall story.

What is it about?

The exact plot of the series is unknown, but the numerous returning cast members from the Netflix series will likely mean a direct continuation of that storyline. Based on Matt Murdock’s appearance in She-Hulk: Attorney at Law and Echo, he is still out fighting crime at a street level. The conclusion of Echo saw Wilson Fisk returning to New York watching a news broadcast about a need for new leadership in the Big Apple. This could potentially mean the series is adapting the comic book arc that found Kingpin running for Mayor of NYC. The title itself, Born Again, could be a reference to the religious faith of Matt Murdock or it could be an homage to the Frank Miller comic of the same name which saw Kingpin manipulating Matt’s feelings for Karen Page to destroy Daredevil. With Karen and Matt not an item on the show, this could be changed.

Netflix characters will make appearances

Fan favorites Elden Henson and Deborah Ann Woll will be appearing in the series, reprising their roles as Foggy Nelson and Karen Page. Jon Bernthal was spotted in character as Frank Castle, but it remains to be seen how significantly The Punisher will factor into the plot. We also know Ayelet Zurer will be back as Vanessa Fisk and Wilson Bethel returns as Benjamin Poindexter who turns into the MCU version of Bullseye. New additions to the cast include Margarita Levieva as Heather Glenn, Matt’s new love interest, with Michael Gandolfini as Daniel Blade. Lou Taylor Pucci has joined in an undisclosed role with Clark Johnson, Nikki M. James, Zabryna Guevara, Harris Yulin, and Michael Gaston in additional roles.

Wait, is this a sequel series or a reboot?

The original vision for Born Again was to make it stand apart from the Netflix series, but when Marvel Studios scrapped the completed episodes that had been filmed, the new direction follows directly from the original Daredevil. With a new tone and the 18 episode series being split into two sections, this series is being envisioned as a standalone arc for the characters. Once we know more of the plot we will have a more definitive answer about where this show fits into the MCU as a whole and whether this means that Jessica Jones, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, and The Defenders are officially canon.

Are we sure?

Truthfully, no. Charlie Cox’s comments back in 2022 stated that this series is not the fourth season of Daredevil but rather a whole new thing, a true reboot. But. With casting changes, showrunner updates, and trashed footage, we won’t know for certain until Kevin Feige takes the stage this year to tell us what is going on.

This will likely be another Marvel Spotlight

The opening of Echo showcased Marvel’s new standalone projects in the MCU which are labeled as Spotlights. All signs point to this series being among them rather than an ongoing new series focused on Daredevil. Marvel Studios’ Brad Winderbaum indicated how X-Men 97 honored where it came from while forging a new direction and made that comparison with the upcoming Daredevil Born Again.

When will we see it?

Production recently wrapped on Daredevil: Born Again but that does not mean it will be premiering any time soon. Because of the SAG-AFTRA and Writer’s Guild strikes in 2023, everything got pushed back. Because of the delays on Daredevil, the series will premiere sometime in 2025. I would imagine it would be early in the year, so Disney and Marvel Studios could premiere it early as a late 2024 surprise, but don’t hold your breath.

Stay tuned to JoBlo.com as we learn more about Daredevil: Born Again and all of your other favorite shows. What do you expect to see in the upcoming Daredevil series? Let us know in the comments and click the like and subscribe to follow all of our latest original videos.

INTRO: Director Matthew Vaughn is known for making gangster movies and comic book adaptations. Producing Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and making his directorial debut with Layer Cake paved the way for bigger projects: Kick-Ass, X-Men: First Class, the Kingsman franchise, Argylle. But in between the gangsters and the over-the-top heroics, he decided to make a fairy tale. Based on the writing of popular author Neil Gaiman, the film tells of witches, unicorns, flying ships, lightning catchers, and a falling star… that’s actually a person. Released in 2007, the movie we’re talking about is called Stardust. And it’s time for it to be Revisited.

SET-UP: The story of Stardust goes back to the early 1990s. While out driving one day, Neil Gaiman saw a wall running along one side of the road and was struck by the idea that a magical land called Faerie might exist on the other side of that wall. So he started plotting a book that he intended to call Wall. Which would have been about a writer from America moving to England. Where he discovers this wall that separates the world we see around us from the land of Faerie. This idea was set aside when Gaiman saw a shooting star cross the sky one night. In that moment, he was inspired to write a whole different story about Faerie and the wall.

With illustrator Charles Vess, Gaiman crafted a text-heavy four-issue comic book mini-series called Stardust. The story begins in 1839, in the English town of Wall. Every nine years, on May Day, the magical beings that inhabit Faerie hold a market event in the meadow outside the town. The rest of the time, the gap in the wall between the two lands is under twenty-four hour guard. When a Wall resident named Dunstan Thorn crosses over into Faerie, he ends up being enchanted by a young woman named Una. She is kept as a slave by a witch-woman called Ditchwater Sal, who makes Una spend most of her time as a bird. But she’s in her proper form when she meets Dunstan. They have sex and Dunstan returns to Wall… where, nine months later, a baby is delivered to his door. Turns out he and Una have had a son. Dunstan raises this son, named Tristran. Eighteen years later, Tristran has become infatuated with fellow Wall resident Victoria Forester. He gets her to go out with him one night, but she won’t give him a kiss. When they see a falling star, Victoria tells Tristran she’ll give him anything he desires if he retrieves the fallen star for her. So Tristran sets out to find the star, crossing over into the land of Faerie. And going on a much bigger adventure than he anticipated.

Turns out, the star that has fallen to the ground is a person. Or at least she has a humanoid appearance. Her name is Yvaine, and she was knocked out of the sky when she was hit by a topaz pendant. Which was tossed into the sky by the dying Lord of a land called Stormhold. The Lord once had seven sons, but they’ve been killing each other off to get closer to the throne. The dead ones are still hanging around as ghosts. A few sons are left alive, and whoever finds the topaz pendant – now in the possession of Yvaine – will replace their father on the throne. Meanwhile, a trio of decrepit witches have also seen the star fall from the sky. One of them goes to find where it has landed… because if they cut out Yvaine’s heart and consume it, their youth and beauty will be restored. The witch uses magic to cover up her true appearance, but every time she uses other spells on her journey, her real looks start to come through.

Tristran is the first to reach Yvaine. Even though he’s surprised to see that the star is a woman rather than a rock, he still goes through with taking her back to Wall. And thus has to deal with witches and the sons of Stormhold coming after her. Along the way, there are encounters with a unicorn. Goats that have been transformed into people. And the crew of a ship that flies above the clouds, on a lightning-hunting expedition.

A couple years after the Stardust comic book was published, Gaiman also released the story as a novel without Vess’s illustrations. But even before that, Miramax had picked up the film rights to Stardust. They had Gaiman write a treatment for the adaptation. But they didn’t like what he wrote. So they had Ehren Kruger write another treatment. Which they didn’t like, either. So they lost interest and Gaiman got the rights back. Disappointed with the Miramax experience, he spent the next few years rejecting people and companies that wanted to make a Stardust movie. Then, in 2003, he made a short film called A Short Film About John Bolton. Which was produced by Matthew Vaughn. They had a good time working together – and around this time, Vaughn’s wife Claudia Schiffer read and fell in love with Stardust. So Gaiman felt comfortable moving forward with a Stardust adaptation that would have Vaughn involved. At first, Vaughn was going to produce the film. Terry Gilliam was going to direct it. But then Gilliam made the 2005 fantasy film The Brothers Grimm. Which centers on the legendary fairy tale tellers and sends them on their own fairy tale adventure. After making that movie, Gilliam said there was no way he could go right back into the world of fairy tales. So he dropped out of Stardust. In the meantime, Vaughn had gotten into directing when Guy Ritchie decided not to make Layer Cake. On the strength of that film, 20th Century Fox hired him to direct X-Men: The Last Stand. Two weeks before that movie was going to start filming, he stepped away due to creative disagreements with the studio. That’s when Vaughn decided he was going to direct Stardust himself.

At Gaiman’s suggestion, Vaughn brought Jane Goldman in to write the screenplay with him. Establishing a partnership that would continue through several more of Vaughn’s films. Whittling Gaiman’s story down into a two hour film presented multiple challenges. They had to simplify portions of the story. Which included having to remove a really fun character known as “the little hairy man” so they could get Tristran to Yvaine quicker. They also changed Tristran’s name to Tristan and called the magical land Stormhold instead of Faerie. They expanded some elements of the story. For example, Gaiman didn’t write much about Tristan and Yvaine’s time on the flying ship. Vaughn and Goldman put a lot more focus on that, turning Captain Alberic into Captain Shakespeare. A gay man who puts on drag shows in private. Then puts on a macho act in front of his crew. The screenwriters also had to figure out how rough-edged the film should be. Gaiman’s story has been described as a fairy tale for grown-ups. Most of the text is quite family friendly. But then there’s the sex scene between Dunstan and Una in the first chapter. Another sex scene involving a prostitute later. An F-bomb. A throat slitting. A unicorn’s head being hacked off with a meat cleaver. Vaughn and Goldman chose to soften the edges. Keeping things family-friendly throughout. And while Gaiman’s story has a rather low-key resolution, for a movie they had to keep things action-packed.

Seeking an unknown to play Tristan, Vaughn chose Charlie Cox. Who, these days, is best known for being Marvel’s Daredevil. Bigger names were cast around Cox. Claire Danes plays Yvaine (although Bryce Dallas Howard was Vaughn’s original choice). Michelle Pfeiffer is the witch Lamia. Some of the sons of Stormhold are played by Mark Strong, Jason Flemyng, and Rupert Everett. Their father is played by the great Peter O’Toole. Robert De Niro took on the role of Captain Shakespeare. Ricky Gervais plays Ferdy the Fence, a character who was created for the film. Sienna Miller is Tristan’s crush Victoria, while Henry Cavill has a small role as a rival for her affections. Ian McKellen provides the narration. Tristan’s parents Dunstan and Una are played by Ben Barnes and Kate Magowan, with Nathaniel Parker as the older Dunstan.

REVIEW: Vaughn and Goldman changed a lot about Stardust on the way from the page to the screen. Reading the book and watching the movie are very different experiences. This could cause some disappointment for those who decide to check out both. If you watch the movie first, you may be let down when you find that Captain Shakespeare is nowhere to be found. Or that the climactic action isn’t there. If you read the book first, the way things are presented in the movie may not live up to the magical world you imagined. Where’s the little hairy man? The vampire trees? The talking badger in a dressing gown? The fight between the lion and the unicorn? Some of the changes were budgetary. It was going to be way too expensive for Vaughn to put a lion and unicorn battle on screen. Some were creative. He wanted to spend more time on the flying ship. Build in a lesson that you shouldn’t pretend to be something you’re not just to impress others. Work in some entertaining action. And present this fairy tale in a more down-to-earth way. Even with the witch’s magic, he didn’t want it to be too outlandish. His approach was to make something that would feel like a blend of The Princess Bride and Midnight Run.

Gaiman acknowledges that the movie is different from what he wrote. And he wasn’t sure about some of the changes that were being made. But in the end, he seemed pleased with and accepting of the film. As he told USA Today, it’s better that Vaughn didn’t try to exactly replicate what was on the page, because, “I would hate for people to go and see a version of Stardust that is Stardust the book, only not as good.” He went on to tell Empire, “I sort of feel like my grounding in comics was actually very useful because in my head, that’s just the Earth-Two version of Stardust. It’s a parallel Earth version of Stardust, which has Robert De Niro and stuff.”

So taking Stardust the movie on its own terms, it’s an entertaining fantasy film. Vaughn was admittedly better at shooting action and keeping things moving along quickly than he was with the human relationship stuff. Stardust may still be over two hours long, but it moves through those two hours at a fast pace. Some of this is due to the way the script condensed the original story. But it’s also due to the fact that Vaughn is always bouncing back and forth between the various characters. Never giving any of them scenes that are too drawn out. There’s so much bouncing around, the witch Lamia and Septimus of Stormhold almost start to overshadow Tristan and Yvaine in a story that’s meant to revolve around them. But that’s where Goldman steps in. Gaiman suggested having her co-write the script with Vaughn because she could help him with the relationship side of things. And there are some sweet moments with Tristan and Yvaine as we watch them gradually fall in love.

Sure, the livelier and occasionally over-the-top performances from the supporting cast do steal the show. But Charlie Cox and Claire Danes are able to keep their section of the story grounded.

The climactic action sequence Vaughn and Goldman came up with feels absolutely right for their telling of the story. It wraps things up in a fun way. And even if you’re hung up on the fact that it’s so different from the book… how could you ever complain about a sequence that lets you watch a swordfight where one of the participants is a corpse that a witch is using like a puppet?

LEGACY/NOW: Test audiences were so pleased with Stardust, producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura was even surprised at how highly they scored it. He told Rotten Tomatoes, “It’s a weird thing to say. I don’t think everybody’s going to love the movie because it’s not a movie that’s designed to be that. And yet, when we went and tested it, they really flipped for it. It just caught me off guard. It was a movie where I expected to have a larger portion of the audience sort of go, ‘Well, that’s sort of out there. Not sure it’s for us.’ And what happened was that we delivered a romance so spectacularly well, Matthew Vaughn did such a good job with it, that it caught a segment of the audience that I wasn’t expecting.” The test audiences did bring up an issue on how the movie should be marketed, because they strongly disagreed that it should be described as a fairy tale. So di Bonaventura wasn’t sure what they should call it. As he said, “It is an adventure movie, it is a romance, it is fantasy, it is Neil Gaiman’s bizarre world view.”

Whatever it is, it had a budget somewhere in the range of seventy to ninety million dollars. So it needed to do well. Paramount Pictures gave it a wide release in the United States in the summer of 2007… and it opened at number four. Its opening weekend was described as a crash-landing and Stardust was compared to the fantasy films that flopped in the 1980s. Still, the U.S. ended up being the film’s largest market, as it made a total of thirty-eight million there. The U.K. release followed a few months later and added thirty-one million to Stardust’s haul. It ended up with a total of one hundred and thirty-seven million at the global box office. Not a big success, but not a bomb, either. The film was well-received by critics and the audiences that did show up to see it. It gathered a cult following… and that following grew when it reached home video, where it was more successful than it was in theatres.

That wasn’t enough to get a sequel greenlit, though. Seven years after the movie was released, Vaughn revealed to Den of Geek that he had really been hoping to get the chance to make a follow-up. He said, “I had a really crazy fun idea for a Stardust 2. The opening scene was Charlie Cox’s character, being the King and throwing out the necklace. This time the necklace goes over the wall and bounces off Big Ben, and you’re suddenly in London in the early 1960s, with these mad kings and princes and princesses running around London. All on the quest for the stone. That was my idea for the sequel, but sadly the film didn’t make enough money for anyone to want to make it.”

It’s a shame that Vaughn didn’t get to make his return to the world of Stardust. But at least he got to make one trip to that world. And delivered a film that has been loved by many of its viewers. If you haven’t seen it yet, it’s worth checking out, as it still holds up all these years later. And where else are you going to see a swordfighting corpse being puppeteered by a witch?