Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Spielberg to do HARRY POTTER next'

Hey folks, Harry here with a message from dear Moriarty, who was checking in with his old stomping grounds' local paper when suddenly what should he find? Well... A story about Spielberg's alleged future. This story will be hitting Entertainment Tonight, tonight most likely... and they should... if they're on the ball at all have a response from Spielberg's camp... Alas... at this hour noone in the land of Spielberg was available for comment from the dear Professor, so... you'll just have to trust The London Times...

Hey, Head Geek...

"Moriarty" here.

I was just sitting at the keyboard in my study here in the Moriarty Labs, putting the final touches on my RUMBLINGS for tomorrow (a day early or a week late depending on how you look at it) when I came across a story on the website for the London Times.

They're reporting that Steven Spielberg has finally made his choice for what his next picture will be, and it looks like HARRY POTTER AND THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE is what he's going to plunge into. I say he's made the right choice, and it's a film that I'm going to be paying close attention to as it makes its way from page to screen. It's a great match of director and material. No matter what else he's achieved in his career, Spielberg remains one of the finest directors of children ever, a gift that will be essential in finding the right cast for the film and then capturing such beloved cultural icons onscreen.

This information coincides with something that one of our new spies, Peeping Tom, sent us at AICN this week. He's connected with all the major cinematographers in town, and he passed along word from inside Janusz Kaminski's camp that MINORITY REPORT was getting bumped. Since I'd been burned by that story once before, I decided to wait. Looks like this is the other shoe we've been waiting to hear drop.

Talk to you later tonight, Knowles. Until then...

"Moriarty" out.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:51 a.m. CST

    Williams?

    by stewart

    I don't know anything about this flick...I just hope Spielberg picks up John Williams to score it. A Williams' score is almost necessary for a succesful Spielberg picture. BTW...I think I'm first.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:51 a.m. CST

    Edward Norton as Harry Potter!

    by WalkerEasterling

    I was actually hoping that Fincher might do this. I think Fincher's version of a childern's movie would be interesting.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:52 a.m. CST

    Rumor has it that the film may be computer-animated.... Any comm

    by Alexandra DuPont

    Spielberg should have directed animation a long time ago. He should also have tried his hand at (1) a western, (2) a full-blown musical, and (3) an E! True Hollywood Special. I like imagining the life of, say, Tony Danza re-created with wind machines and dolly shots and a swelling John Williams score....

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:53 a.m. CST

    Harry

    by Renly

    This news couldn't be less interesting to me. I would so much rather see MR or Memoirs of a Geisha than another of SS's Whimsical Children's Adventures. I have seen Magnolia 3x this week, and compared to the beauty and emotion of that movie, nothing from Spielberg can elicit much of a response. Aimee Mann's soundtrack is so inspiring. And she's coming to town, with Michael Penn!! I know, no one cares... sigh. Renly

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:58 a.m. CST

    Other genres Spielberg should try his hand at...

    by Alexandra DuPont

    (4) Gladiator epic. (5) WWI flying ace film. (6) Socially responsible history lesson that forsakes fully formed characters and a complex plotline for bland PC platitudes and broad historical strokes. (7) James Bond film.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:03 a.m. CST

    The wait lengthens...

    by BDDres

    Seeing as how this is (mostly) a children's book I would find it in everyone's best interest to read the book first. I for one have not read it but I would rather read it before seeing Spielberg's rendition of it. It would be interesting if it were animated but this project still doesn't interest me. So either way it doesn't matter cuz I'm just upset I'll have to wait even longer for a Spielberg flick that is aimed for the older set. Nothing to get all excited about...

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:05 a.m. CST

    Ah, but Renly, someone DOES care about "Magnolia"?

    by Alexandra DuPont

    Sorry for posting so often and long of late, but I'm on a bit of a holiday and this has proven a sporting way to pass the time. Anyway, I just wanted to let Renly know he's/she's not alone in liking "Magnolia." On the whole, the film struck me as a more successful, more extreme version of Altman's "Short Cuts," where several desperate, beautifully acted stories are tied together after three hours by a climactic earthquake. In "Magnolia," the stories are better-crafted and more involving -- and the bind-it-all-together climax, of course, is utterly risk-taking and ridiculous. However, unlike Altman's film, in "Magnolia" the climax does serve the larger themes of the film. I keep peeling away layers of the film in my mind and there's real thematic meat behind it; aside from the rather juvenile worship of Amiee Mann's songwriting, I find it hard to believe that this was written by a 28-year-old. It's pretty humbling. (I thought Mann's songs were fine, but I'll stick by my assertion that their prominence on the soundtrack betrays Anderson's youthfulness. I felt like I was at the mercy of an exuberant college student who'd been given $40 million to share with us what other kids his age put on a mix tape.) Anderson falls on his ass a couple of times during the directing of this film, IMHO. But he also reaches some heights I didn't see anyone even TRY for during 1999.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:12 a.m. CST

    *Sigh*... I've got a bad feeling about this....

    by D12-Beowulf

    Speilberg on a kid's movie? I guess it's his right and all, but.... I dunno.... something about that doesn't feel correct to me. It's like seeing an apple pie just sit there, all warm and full of love and goodness, but with no pure vanilla bean Breyer's brand ice cream. I mean, his wonderful direction would be there, but would I be willing to partake of it, since it's missing something.... something, y'know? BTW, for those who care, I wrote up a little wanna-be AICN review of "Magnolia" on a gaming website. Here's the url if anyone's interested. Trust me, it's truly a wanna-be review, so bear (sp?) with me. http://www.gamersx.com/messages/overview.asp?board_id=20&page=1 //d12-beowulf

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:18 a.m. CST

    Lay off my fucking son!

    by Jay Knowles

    Dear AICNers, I am so fucking tired of these personal attacks that have been directed at Harry! All he wants to do is provide information about all of the great movies coming out of Hollywood, like A Simple Wish and Black Dog....also, Wishmaster (and sequels). Is it too much to ask for you all to treat him with the same dignity that you would show Bert Convey...or maybe Alan Thicke. Growing Pains my ass. Please, let's bring some decorum back to this site...much like the decorum shown in Quiz Show...I hate myself.... Jay Knowles, aka "Father Geek" P.S. Is it true they raised the price at Mr. Gatti's? Say it ain't so.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:22 a.m. CST

    Right On Jay

    by Jar Jar Gabor

    You tell'em Jay!

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:25 a.m. CST

    Breath of fresh air

    by SnifflesQ

    Well this is good news, I guess. I haven't read any of the HP books, but I've heard nothing but good things about them. And in my opinion, anything that can take Spielberg away from his "other movie" is fine with me. What I mean byy that is Steven Spielberg makes basically two movies: The slam bang fx sci-fi balls-out geekfest (Jurassic Park, etc.), and the Let Me Beat You About The Head And Shoulders With A Message Movie (Color Purple, Schindler, etc.). Now I certainly don't mind if filmmakers have a point to make (that is the idea after all), but to me Spielberg has all the subtlty of an baseball bat to the teeth. I prefer it when he just relaxes and has FUN with a film. It shows.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:25 a.m. CST

    I'm sorry, but...

    by Alexandra DuPont

    ... "Jar Jar Gabor" is one of the funniest Talk Back monikers I've ever seen at AICN. Brilliant! Toujours.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:35 a.m. CST

    More Spielberg Genres

    by WompRatt

    (7) a "POLICE ACADEMY" sequel. (8) a remake of "BATMAN & ROBIN" (9) a Porno. He could combine Harry Potter with a porno. Ron Jeremy would make an awesome Harry Potter (although he would have to shave his moustache and back to look younger). With the magical wand of Ron Jeremy and the musical score of John Williams, were talking the best Porno of all time. NEW TITLE: "HARRY POTTER and the SORCEROR'S BONE".

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 5:04 a.m. CST

    &$%$#@!*&^! HARRY POTTER!! I want JAWS 5 !!!

    by Darth Siskel

    Spielberg should do a sequel to his first big hit, JAWS!!! I want to see Jaws 5, with Roy Scheider & Richard Dreyfuss!!!! They said Roy died in Part 4, but the entire population of the earth will have no problem pretending that movie doesn't exist. With ILM doing effects this time, instead of a giant robot that doesn't work right.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 5:10 a.m. CST

    Peekaboo!

    by Harry's Tongue

    Look at my little red tounge pop out at ya! Woohoo!! I've been eating some cherry popsicles! Oh yeah!

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 5:16 a.m. CST

    Have any of you actually read the books?

    by Luke

    I've got to say, I've read all of the Harry Potter books so far and I have to say, yes - they are children's books, but they are wonderfully crafted stories and would be perfect material for Spielberg! Stop moaning until you've read the books.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 5:20 a.m. CST

    these posts are out of order!

    by Lazarus Long

    Gee, three new topics that I can bash Stevie Wonder on...how perfect. I'm glad that Spielberg is getting this over Fincher so Mr. Fight Club can concentrate on more important material. My question is, can Spielberg find someone as self-righteous as Tom Hanks, Robin Williams, or himself, that's young enough to play Harry Potter? I don't think it's fair, however, to judge Spielberg on the basis of Hook. The guy has done quality work with young protagonists to not assume this will resemble his worst film. Hook was a disaster in every aspect except the concept itself. But I think this one might have a good chance to be quality entertainment. Let's just hope it's escapist fantasy, and that there isn't a message attatched that is deep enough to trivialize.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 8:01 a.m. CST

    lay off my directors

    by 00spool

    Whats up with the Savini campaign? Sounds like there are motives greater than information providing at work here. Harry is focusing imaginary influence to satisfy a wash up effects whiner.

  • He's a great director, but I haven't seen a director so unsure what he's gonna do next since Cameron! Really, SS was going to make Memoirs of a Geisha, Minority Report, and then AI, and now its Harry Potter? Forgive me if I believe it when I see it. The bitch of it is, those other projects sounded very interesting! Tom Cruise, Matt Damon, and Cate Blanchett all in one movie together, and directed by Steven Spielberg? That sounded wonderful, even if it was mostly conjecture, rumor, and unconfirmed (minor) reports. He'd have to have the Hook bug to make a bad movie again with such a cast. And I really think Hook was a result of his loss of confidence after his great "Empire of the Sun" was bashed by stupid critics. Or is stupid critics a redundant phrase? At least SS's next movie is looking to be a fantasy film, something he's stayed away from for far too long. Lost World doesn't count, he only made that to sever all ties to Universal before going into Dreamworks.

  • Naysaying, naysaying, naysaying. Is there anything on God's green Earth that you folks find "cool" anymore? All I hear is griping, whining, bitching, second guessing, and complaining. At least Harry still shows optimism. I don't mind when fans criticize a film project based on a bad trailer they've seen (even though a trailer doesn't necessarily a movie make), but to start trashtalking a film without any evidence is beyond comprehension. If, for example, the Harry Potter series isn't for you, then nobody's putting a gun to your heads forcing you to go see it. Likewise with another Trek series, or Batman flick, or (insert any other genre project here). Do you Naysayers of Doom get a rush from trying to predict doom and gloom? Such negativity is only bound to make you ill. Stop and smell the roses and smile once in a while. Peace out.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 9:46 a.m. CST

    kids my ass@

    by ben murphy

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 10:10 a.m. CST

    In the UK it's "Philosopher's Stone"...

    by acamp

    ...it was changed for us Yanks because the word "philosopher" has a more limited meaning here. Not to mention the fact that very few of us on this side of the pond know what the Philospher's Stone was (the "holy grail" of the alchemists). BTW, HP will be great material for SS - If he allows it to keep its edge. Some of you on this board might want to give the books a glance. It's Roald Dahl meets Stephen King - with a dash of Spielbergian wonder.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 10:20 a.m. CST

    M*A*S*H rehash?

    by Rolande

    Dudes, isn't this Colonel Potter from MASH? That's fucked up. It'll suck, just like in the Outsiders, when Dallas Winston yells at those kids, "Hey you kids, get off my grass!" What?

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 10:32 a.m. CST

    What about Burton?

    by PoxyVonSinister

    Not that I have a problem with Spielberg, I think he'll be great. I just wonder what Tim Burton could do with the material. It seems to play to a lot of his strengths. But if Spielberg is doing it, that leaves Burton free to do Sandman or Death! Oh well, I can dream, can't I....

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Far be it for me to crow but I told you so...

    by Kraven

    Wonderful news, and true. (The venerable London Times is NOT prone to distortion or falsehood). Let everyone go out and read the books before dissing what is on paper a perfectly marvellous combination of auteur and author; an irresistible brew. But let's not screw things up by having horrible American brats playing the leads (which screwed up Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory for anyone who read the original Roald Dahl).

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 11:38 a.m. CST

    Live Action vs. Animation/CGI

    by PTBozo

    These films will be live action. The author, J.K. Rowling worked that out with Warner Brothers when they bought the film rights. There will certainly be a lot of CGI and special effects involved, as its hard to imagine these books done well without them. And, though a Yank, I agree that the kids involved should be British. It was odd reading the American versions, knowing they were set in the UK, without getting any real sense of a British feel to them. Later I discovered that the books had been Americanized by substituting things considered too Brit with the correct Yank phrase. Ya know, like flashlight for torch, gas for petrol, etc. I've already pre-ordered book 4 from the UK so that we get the author's original voice rather than the sanitized version.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 11:39 a.m. CST

    casting

    by KAmnell

    Woo hoo. I hope this is true. These books rule. They are aimed at children, but are so clever and well written that they can charm and entertain adults as well. The issue of the actor they cast as Harry getting old too quickly might not be as big a problem as one might think. Each book represents approximately a year in the life of the boy and is scheduled to take him through the equivalent of US High School (about age 18). While a movie a year would be too much, the actor will age only slightly faster than the character, and if they shoot 2 back to back, break for a while and then shoot another 2 back to back, age will not be much of an issue. I like the idea of the pepsi girl as Herminie, how about the kid from 6th sense as Harry, and possibly Jake L. as Malfoy.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Leave Harry Potter Where He's At!

    by TheAtom

    Can we just leave him alone? Why is it necessary to make everything into a movie. Now, I love going to the movies ... almost as much as I love reading. And finally we have a series of books that have kids (including my youngest) actually wanting to read! However, make them into movies (and the resulting video games, happy meals, underwear, etc.) and we'll hear the following on the playground ... "Did you read the latest Harry Potter?". "No, I'll catch it at the movies. Do you wanna get high?". Why can't film makers go back to creating their own material. I mean there's a whole series of OZ books that kids never experience. Why can't we just leave well enough alone and let our kid's imaginations do the work?

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Yes, I am a Muggle :)

    by Kikstad

    Thanks for clearing up the "Philosopher's Stone/Sorceror's Stone" question. I was ticked off at the Naysayers, so I was temporary madness blinded me. My comments to the Naysayers, however, still stand. The Potter books are awesome (I've read all three), and I honestly believe a movie about Harry Potter would attract "all ages" just as STAR WARS did, just as E.T. did, just as THE WIZARD OF OZ did, etc. But on a personal note, I was hoping for a computer animated version, because I'd like to see a film adaptation of EACH BOOK (from what I've heard there will be seven, one for each year Harry spends at Hogwart's), so an animated version would give the film series a unified look, while as someone mentioned above, a live action film would face the problem of the kid actors outgrowing the parts. Whatever the case, I think Spielberg and Potter go very well together. Heed not the fears of the Naysayers of Doom.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 12:42 p.m. CST

    What's with "Harry Potter" all of the sudden?

    by sexualchocolate1

    It's like it came out of nowhere, and everytime I turn around, some one is either reading or talking about this new book series. It's like the Pokemon of book series now. And not only kids are reading it, but friggin grown men and women (yes i've seen it). Where did it come from!!!???

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Am I the only one who thinks these Harry Potter books suck?

    by Cineman

    I tried reading one of those things, and I gave it more of a chance than I give most books. It's shit! It sucks! It's not enjoyable or entertaining in any way. Why are so many people wasting their time reading them? Maybe if you all stopped reading them and sales dropped then Steve would get scared of it failing and lose interest in it and then we can forget about all this nonsense and get Minority Report made! If this movie ends up getting made and Minority Report, or even A.I. doesn't, I'll be so mad I'll have to vent my anger by recommending to everyone I know that they rent The Haunting because its a great movie! Payback is a bitch!

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 1:17 p.m. CST

    spielberg

    by The Pigster

    Stephen Spielberg is a gifted and talented director. That having been said, let us not forget that this man made "Hook" and "The Lost World."

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 1:31 p.m. CST

    Cineman, I respectfully disagree...

    by Kikstad

    I read the books because of "everyone was talking about them" and I was really surprised by how wonderful they really were. Great imaginative fun, and surprising "adult" twists and turns -- this isn't "Disney" kids' stuff. There's murder and betrayal and a bunch of neat things going on in the story -- and lot of groundwork being laid for even more revelations in future volumes. The Potter books, in my opinion, have succeeded because of the STORY. This isn't like GOOSEBUMPS or some of the other fads in recent memory -- this is really a mythic tale that kids fall in love with, and adults can appreciate.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 1:37 p.m. CST

    The Power of the Written Word

    by Kraven

    Well Amen to that, Artaud. You only have to look at all the dreck we have to endure at the multiplex to see that 90% of the stuff is produced by folks with NO IMAGINATION. Every writer or artist who gave us anything worth a damn had their sense of wonder honed by imaginative works, and the earlier they started reading the better they became. A book is a movie playing in your head, directed by yourself; you can slow it down, speed it up and have the greatest production designer in the world make the sets: your own imagination. I know at least six kids who never read a book in their lives who read Harry Potter and then followed on to Twain and C.S. Lewis and Tolkien. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Playstations and Nintendos, but their artificial worlds of wonder and awe pale in comparison to the power of the ability to dream your very own world.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 2:57 p.m. CST

    Do yourself a favor...@ Haley Osmet?

    by Booyotch

    READ THE BOOKS! I've read all three and all I can say is they are SO MUCH FUN!!!! When you read the books, they actually make you smile while you fight to put it down. It's hard to explain exactly, but remember the first 30 sec. of Episode 1? Bear with me here... You had heard what everyone had been saying, and you were excited, and could'nt wait to know more. The books are full of so many magical, fun, interesting and creative things, that when you take a break, you laugh to yourself because you can't believe you're having SUCH A GOOD TIME! Granted, SS did a DECENT job w/ HOOK, but how many years ago was that? 7-8?!? If you wanna have a good time,spend the $10 on the paperback, and read, and think of what a great movie it could be, then remember the awe of jurassic Park. Keep in mind that the books are a seven series, one for every year at Hogwarts. READ IT!!!

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Harry Potter...WILLIAM ZABKA!

    by Dirty Sanchez

    Picture the young wizard, bedecked in Jordache jeans, Members-Only jacket and black headband. BIG box-office!

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:11 p.m. CST

    This is Spielberg's "Lord of the Rings" movie

    by Bregalad_

    Maybe I'm cynical but it seems clear that Mr. Spielberg wants to challenge Peter Jackson. The pending Harry Potter movie, which will likely be deftly-crafted and wonderful in Steven's hands, is being deliberately positioned against Jackson's uber-trilogy. Anyone else smell that coming a mile off? Is Peter Jackson and New Line that much of a threat to Spielberg's title as the King of Fantasy/Adventure Cinema? If it comes down to a distribution face-off (let me be first to predict it will), the winner would clearly be LOTR. This is evident simply on the strength of the Tolkien property, which is leagues beyond the fad-like affection kids have for Potter. Hmmmm....

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Another Naysayer here

    by straycat195

    Read all the books, think they're wonderful, and I really don't believe that *anyone* could make them into a movie that would do them justice. On form, Spielberg might make a decent movie out of it. Off form, he could do another Jurassic Park. But no movie, however well made, could do the books justice - I'm convinced of that - there's too much that just wouldn't translate into a visual medium. Not to mention the problems of getting ahold of enough decent child actors... This is one movie I'll happily ignore - I'll be content just to reread the books again (and there'll be more of them by then - yaaay!!!) :-)

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 4:05 p.m. CST

    Artaud in Bottle

    by Cineman

    It's great that kids are reading these books. I'm not being sarcastic at all. But looking at this from a film lover's view and not a book lover's, Spielberg shouldn't waste his time. You obviously have a real hard on for these books and that's your choice, but is this the best choice for Spielberg? NO! Making a movie of these books would rob all you fans of using your imagination with the words on the page. With this movie, Spielberg would be telling you what to imagine. Look at why Salinger won't let Catcher In The Rye be filmed. So they should do the fans (you) and the non-fans (me) a favor and not make this. Indy 4, Minority Report, A.I., Memoirs Of A Geisha, so many choices, so little time.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 5:48 p.m. CST

    no wAy!

    by thingie

    No way that american ape is going to make a Harry Potter movie! That story is so ENGLISH is should be directed and written by a very BRITISH person. I liked the book, I really did, but PLeeeease don't put Spielberg on this.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 7:07 p.m. CST

    this is a match made in heaven

    by Germster

    To anyone who has read and loved the Harry Potter books as much as I have, this is a match made in heaven. These stories are pure Spielberg and with some talented actors and some kick ass CGI for the effects, im sure that this film could be a classic. The stories, while for children, are very involving and have influences in many thing, including some subtle references to Star Wars in book one. If you havent read the books, i HIGHLY recommend them and it shouldnt make a difference that I work at the company that publishes these fine books, Scholastic Inc. And just a side note, there are to be 7 books in the series as there are 7 years of school at the Hogwards School of Wizardry. I hope this comes true cause it will be inspired.

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 8:45 p.m. CST

    Enders/Potter

    by Duty

    Ive Read both book and I love them both. Both very well writen and fun. Feral Kid in talk Back is realy on to sompthing. David Fincher is the one who should do "Enders Game". Orson Scott Card shoud send him the script NOW!!....It's kinda funny that when I was reading Harry Potter And The Sorceror's Stone, I kept thinking How much it was like Ender's Game. So as mutch as Spielberg is perfect for Potter, Fincher is the right man for Ender. Go Read "Ender's Game" Now and Suport This Movie!!! WhooHoooo

  • Jan. 17, 2000, 10:20 p.m. CST

    Question: Terry Pratchett?

    by 6 of 24

    Has anyone here read both the Harry Potter books and a lot of Terry Pratchett? If so, tell me, how do they compare? Or to be more precise: Would having read all of the Discworld books several times ruin Harry Potter for you? I've heard the Rowling books highly recommended, but they sound similar enough to the work of My Idol Mr. Pratchett (Blessed be His Publishers) that they might seem, well, childish in comparison.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 12:45 a.m. CST

    trepanned

    by Efihp

    Odds are very good that moriarty got the link from drudge, but moriarty is too 'good' to admit that.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 5:53 a.m. CST

    Spielberg?

    by Greystoke

    I' really rather SS didn't go anywhere near this one, there's a whole big gothic element to the books and i don't want to see it being Americanised or swamped with Spielberg saccharine. Personally I'd rather see Danny Boyle do this one or at least someone with a bit of a nasty side to them. Possibly Burton but then it might just end up terrifying... Sorry.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 6:17 a.m. CST

    Enders Game

    by Atreides

    I think speilberg has made some of the best films ever... but he's awfull at Kids films... name one good one. Enders Game should be made by the director and star of the 6th sense - NOW!!! - just keep SS away

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter

    by Atreides

    ... as for Harry Potter -Tim Burton,no question

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 9:07 a.m. CST

    Potter and Prattchett

    by Cool Nickname

    I would say that Harry Potter's universe and Prattchett's Discworld differ more than enough in style and substance that reading the latter won't mess up your appreciation of the former. I like 'em both, at any rate...

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 10:08 a.m. CST

    NEWS UPDATE!!! Spielberg denies report...

    by Kikstad

    The Daily Buzz section of the online Mania Magazine reports this morning that today's issue of HOLLYWOOD REPORTER has an article quoting Steven Spielberg as saying that HARRY POTTER & THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE will not be his next picture.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 12:08 p.m. CST

    Wow

    by seelamia

    Speilberg would be perfect - one of the rare directors who can show the sweet, innocent, gee-whiz quality of the books.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 3:25 p.m. CST

    Awful at kids' films????????????????????????

    by acamp

    'nuff said.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 4:21 p.m. CST

    Harry Potter/Discworld/Ender's Game

    by cheap

    I would like to see SS make AI. I would like to see him make "Memoirs". I would like to see him make "Harry Potter". I don't care whether he makes MR - by all accounts the script is bad, and if Spielberg wants to make a sci-fi movie I'd prefer to see AI made instead. The Harry Potter books are excellent. They're fun, magical, and just a little bit twisted - Roald Dahl meets Diana Wynne Jones. I'm in my twenties. I read one to see what the fuss was about, and ended up recommending it to a friend, who liked it so much she bought the trilogy. There are a lot of people at my university reading these books, and most of them *aren't* in children's lit. This isn't Pokemon. Yes it's a fad, but it's a fad in the same way LOTR was a fad in the sixties. This is genuinely good material, and it's going to last. So those of you who haven't read the books -- read them before you criticize. Don't dismiss this project as a 'kid's movie'. Done well, it will be a kid's movie the way Star Wars was a kid's movie, the way The Princess Bride was a kid's movie. For those of you who have concerns about an American director americanizing a British children's story -- go rent "Empire of the Sun". SS is a marvellous director of children, and I think he can bring the wonder and fun of the HP books to the screen. Re: Ender's Game. This is another movie I'd like to see made (although I don't see the link to Harry Potter -- the books are as different as night and day to me). I agree with previous posters - this is the project Fincher should be looking at, not Harry Potter. His dark kinetic style would compliment the material. Likewise, Tim Burton would be better suited to one of Neil Gaiman's works: The Sandman or Death. Re: the Discworld poster. The Harry Potter books only bear a resemblence to Discworld insofar as they are fantasy. They're fun but they're not comedy. If you're looking for fantasy humour I suggest you try the Myth series by Robert Asprin, and experiment with some of Neil Gaiman's works. (If you haven't read Good Omens yet, what are you waiting for?) And read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Also, if you've ever read any TSR/Forgotten REalms/Dragonlance books, you MUST read "Villains by Necessity" by Eve Forward.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 6:49 p.m. CST

    Harry Potter - Spielberg not yet committed!

    by R.A.Iders

    Despite all the rumblings that the bearded genius has dropped Minority Report to concentrate on Harry Potter, The Hollywood Reporter states that Warner Bros have give him until February to decide what to do. He has not, as yet, made up his mind. All the sources that state he has committed, are all quoting the same source themselves, namely The Times (London).

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 10:19 p.m. CST

    I'd like to see Spielberg do this. I'm sure I'll get slammed, b

    by dennis

    I'm talking about having fun here, not social relevance. I think other directors do that better. I'm talking about Jurrassic Park, ET and the Indiana Jones series. Those are my favorites of his work and I think that there is no better choice to bring this character to film. I still want to see Geisha, though. Oh, and Speilberg is a producer on Gladiators.

  • Jan. 18, 2000, 11:58 p.m. CST

    A Step Backwards

    by Buzz Maverik

    I hope a great filmmaker does make the Harry Potter series, but I hope it's not Steven Spielberg. I thought he'd gotten all this kid stuff out of his system. Minority Report sounded soooo great!

  • Jan. 19, 2000, 12:42 a.m. CST

    Spielberg: Cinematic Pussy!

    by Bono

    This guy needs a reality check! He has been cranking out shitty movies and this development won't improve conditions! LOST WORLD...SAVING PRIVATE RYAN...and now this! It's fitting only in that he's continuing a downward spiral. Whatever happened to the guy who made JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, and RAIDERS? Geezis, 1941 is better than SAVING PRIVATE RYAN!! Thank God for Jim Cameron!

  • Jan. 19, 2000, 10:24 a.m. CST

    um...

    by Kikstad

    SAVING PRIVATE RYAN was awesome.

  • Jan. 19, 2000, 5:06 p.m. CST

    confirmation

    by seelamia

    According to today's Dallas Morning News, Speilberg does have till February to decide. But he is supposed to meet the author... Which sounds like interest doesn't it?

  • Jan. 19, 2000, 7:54 p.m. CST

    "a wide variety of ass"

    by whizkid

    just wanted a chance to use that phrase at least once (thanx d...333). Haven't read the potter books, not a big spielberg fan overall, so not much to add. whizkid's gotta go.