The Revived 667er - Movie Special
Aug 22, 2016 15:56:32 GMT -5
Cafe SalMONAlla, ryantrimble457, and 6 more like this
Post by Isadora Is a Door on Aug 22, 2016 15:56:32 GMT -5
Original idea by Akbar Le Grey
Editor - Mister M
Co-Editor - Linda Rhaldeen
Designer - Lemona Snicket
Duck Editor - Anka Anwhistle M
Gawky Editor - Zortegus
Editor - Mister M
Co-Editor - Linda Rhaldeen
Designer - Lemona Snicket
Duck Editor - Anka Anwhistle M
Gawky Editor - Zortegus
Thanks This Issue to : Anka Anwhistle M, beatricetriptych, Comet, Terry Craig,
Dante, Akbar Le Grey, Linda Rhaldeen, Lemona Snicket, Zortegus
Dante, Akbar Le Grey, Linda Rhaldeen, Lemona Snicket, Zortegus
Hello, and welcome to this, the movie special of the 667er! Why are you doing a movie special, I hear you ask? Well, With the Netflix adpatation arriving (hopefully) soon on our doorstep, I thought this would be a good time to head back 12 years in time and look back at a film which has divided fan opinion for years. The division is not really between people who think its great and people who think it's bad, more people who think its okay and people who think its really bad.... but more on that later.
For This issue, the main feature is a massive interview, conducted by Anka, with the Movie as its centeral theme. Throughout the issue there are several other movie themed articles, as well as a few other regular features. This is a very different approach than normal, and so I'm very interested to see what the reaction will be, and wether you think this much tighter-themed issue works or not, so please let me know. This issue took a lot of time and work, and a big thank you must go to Anka and Linda, who have provided a lot of content for this issue.
Also, from this issue onwards, beatricetriptych takes over Netflix News. And she's really good at it. Hope you enjoy!
Lets get this underway then, with an interview special
- Mister M
667er: What did you think when you heard that an ASOUE film was being made?
beatricetriptych: I'm pretty sure I didn't actually know about it until I was watching it. I was seven, I think(?), when it came out, and I didn't really pay attention to anything going on around me back then. It's a wonder I even read the books in order tbh.
Comet: Nothing much, because I didn't know ASOUE at all back then. I think the first I heard of the movie was seeing an advert on the inside cover of Anders And-Bladet (The Donald Duck Magazine) when I was young. I was nine when the movie came out, so I must have been about the same age when I first saw the adverts. Eventually I started reading the books, but by then I'd already integrated the movie's existence into my perception of the world, so I never really got to have a 'first reaction'.
Dante: I don't actually remember when I learnt that there would be an ASoUE film, or how I felt about the news; at the time, I had only recently become an intense fan of ASoUE, and indeed only joined 667 Dark Avenue a couple of months before the film was released, so I suspect it was rather eclipsed in my interest by my passion for the books and by my newfound commitment to 667. I do, however, remember a lot about the prevailing attitude towards the movie on 667 around the time I joined, and that attitude was one of intense, caustic cynicism, an opposition on almost an ideological level. I believe I participated fully in that negative response.
Lemona: I wasn't aware of what a Daniel Handler was until 2005, so I didn't get to hear about the movie being made. Could have been interesting actually. But when I found out a movie existed and had been made by Nickelodeon of all companies, with Jim Carrey of all people, I was alarmed.
Linda Rhaldeen: I was super excited!
Mister M: I first found out about the film when I as at the cinema with the rest of my family. For the purpose of making this story slightly more interesting, you might like to know what film we were there to see. Sadly, I cannot remember what it was. But anyway, we were there, and I saw a poster advertising the film, and saying that it was OUT NOW. I didn't like the look (or idea) of an ASOUE Film, so therefore I had no urge to go and see it.
Terry Craig: I remember it vividly; I was at my school's library and I stumbled by accident on LS's website where I discovered the 'Movie' section. I wanted to shout "[expletive] YES" before I remembered I was in a library.
667er: When/how did you first see the film?
beatricetriptych: Family movie night, sometime after it came out on DVD. Sometime around my birthday? I think it might have been FOR my birthday because I remember we had an intermission for cake. We got pizza and rented it from Movie Gallery (remember Movie Gallery, guys?).
Comet: I don't recall, but it must have been while I was reading the books for the first time as a child. Maybe I'd seen some of it on TV before, but if I did, I wasn't very interested, since I didn't know the characters already. I've only seen the movie some four or five times in total, I believe, so each time I've done so has been with a little extra clarity, having grown a few years older and learned to take more things into consideration each time. Except that time when I was sick and watched the entire movie with commentary on; though that was hilarious apart from headaches and coughing fits, there was definitely very little clarity from me as an observer.
Dante: In theatres, I believe relatively shortly after its release. To be honest, I've never really been big on the movie-watching experience, but I made the effort, because I wanted to be able to discuss it with my fellow enthusiasts on 667. And, you know, because I had some curiosity as to how it had actually turned out, after all.
Lemona: A friend who had discovered Snicket via the movie (poor thing) owned the DVD and she sat me down with it. I guess that makes me sound more reluctant than I was; I was curious but not very optimistic. I think it was in 2008/9.
Linda Rhaldeen: Opening day.
Mister M: Despite my inital hesitance in wanting to see the film, my family nevertheless decided to buy it for me for my birthday. I don't recall exactly what age I was turning on this paticular birthday, but I know that at this paticular time in my life I was busy immersing myself in the UE books. I have said before - so I won't spend too much time saying again - that I read the books in a very weird order. I think at this point I had read the 1st book, and recently finished the 3rd, but had not read the 2nd. Not wanting to spoil the book for myself, I decided to wait until I had read Book 2 before watching the film. Thankfully I also recieved the 2nd book that very same birthday, so the wait wasn't long. I could have only watched the film a few days later.
Terry Craig: At the cinema. 2004, it must've been.
667er: Were you dissapointed by the film?
beatricetriptych: Mostly I just thought that it was a little anxiety-inducing and that Emily Browning was pretty. I think I was confused at the book order and that it cut off before TMM? I was primarily interested in the cake though.
Comet: Well, no. I think I've learned to be disappointed by it, but at no one point have I gone from 'not disappointed' to 'disappointed'. If that makes any sense at all.
Dante: If my feelings in 2004 were different from those I have in 2016, I'm not aware of it, though I suspect my perspective has become a bit more nuanced in the intervening twelve years. I was disappointed - mostly. I felt that, on the whole, neither the character nor the narrative of the books were represented particularly accurately. There were numerous deviations from the original storyline which did not feel justified, and what gestures were made towards the overarching V.F.D. plotline that would subsequently dominate the series were insubstantial; tonally, the movie skewed more towards a comic theme than the more interwoven darkness and humour of the books themselves - and in that respect, it must also be noted that the first two books are considerably less funny than those that followed. It didn't feel like a movie by people who particularly believed in what they were making or were especially interested in the source material.
Lemona:Very.
Linda Rhaldeen: Yes, very much. Though it was the impetus that led me to search for Snicket forums online and eventually find 667, so not a total disappointment.
Mister M: I guess not. I wasn't expecting greatness, and it was good, so I guess no.
Terry Craig: Hm, I'm not sure I remember, but I don't think I was too disappointed. But it was somewhat different than I imagined it to be.
667er: Do you think that there is anything that was better in the film than in the books?
beatricetriptych: It definitely won more Academy Awards than the books so there's that.
Comet: Tough question. There must be, because it's a big production, and whatever else you think about the film, there's got to be a few details that are really well done. The thing with the movie, though, is that the things about it that are good are good not so much in their own right as because they succeeds at emulating the feeling of the books. For instance, I like the movie's visual style, but it wouldn't make sense to say that the visual style was better in the movie than in the books. Unless you were referring to the illustrations of the books, in which case they still win out over the movie.
Dante: Better? That's a difficult question to answer. By simple dint of the medium, the movie, naturally, was far more visually interesting than the books themselves, because the books were, of course, simple text with one colour illustration on the cover and several non-colour ones scattered throughout the text - but there again one might argue that, being text, the book strictly speaking gives the reader license to imagine the series with whatever visual aspects they want, in which case no filmed adaptation could possibly compete. In broader terms of what the movie got right - which is not to say better than the books - then it's certainly hard to criticise the set design and visuals in general, though that doesn't quite extend to casting choices. I would say that, in terms of format, the idea to integrate the first three books into a more closely-unified story, toning down the episodic separation by moving the climax of TBB to the end of the film, made total sense with the medium they were given; people were not watching the movie to see three shorter movies in sequence. Related to this is the train tracks scene, which I regard as the movie's most successful innovation. Requiring a reason to separate the Baudelaires from Olaf without pre-empting the original climax of TBB, a new scene was concocted involving the classic film peril of being trapped upon train tracks, a situation completely appropriate to the tone of the original books; the escape from this situation created an opportunity for the Baudelaires to employ their talents and for Mr. Poe to demonstrate his comic stupidity, but equally notable was that it featured one of the few moments in the entire movie where Jim Carrey's Count Olaf became convincingly threatening and frightening. Such are the points which I would not change about the movie, though I might change much else.
Lemona: Not really. The only thing I liked at all about it was Meryl Streep. Not necessarily better, but at least she was something the movie did well.
Linda Rhaldeen: You know, I've been wracking my brain and really can't think of anything they did better. The books are hard to top.
Mister M: I thought the uncle monty scenes were equal, but not neccesarily better. The destruction of josiphenes house, however, I think was far better in the film than in the book.
Terry Craig: The railway tracks scene was really good to have, because it establishes early on that Olaf means business. In the first three books there was no actual attempt on the Baud's life as far as i remember.
667er: Have you seen the film since? If so, what did you think then?
beatricetriptych: It's bearable to watch when I remind myself that the freedom of death is inevitable and inching ever closer, plus I'm emotionally attached, so I watch it a handful of times a year. Most recently I watched it like last week with the commentary on. Actually I was working on some stuff in my notebook and looked at the screen maybe six times so I guess technically I listened to it? Anyway, nice song about leeches.
Comet: I'll have to refer back to my answer to question two. My relationship with this movie is complex and sporadic.
Dante: Once was quite enough for a film which was neither especially enjoyable nor especially significant. As noted above, I am not a great lover of the film form.
Lemona: Yes, but not many times. The same friend and I watched it subsequently with the Silberling/Snicket DVD commentary, which was a vastly better experience. We memorised the leeches song and sung along if I remember rightly. I think my opinion of the film only dropped over time tbh.
Linda Rhaldeen: No, actually. I didn't much like the film, and so never got around to seeing it again. I've been re-reading the books in preparation for the Netflix series, maybe when the release date gets closer I'll watch the movie.
Mister M: I've seen it occasionally - It tends to be shown on TV here a lot, somehow always sunday afternoons - and i enjoy it for what it is, but it does feel quite distant and detached from the essential ethos of the novels, so I'm not to fussed about seeking it out. I like to watch the handler commentary occasionally though.
Terry Craig: I have bought it on DVD when it came out and saw it maybe two more times that way. It wasn't that long after I saw it the first time (well, maybe one or two years), so I didn't really change my mind on it.
667er: Do you wish they had made a sequel to the film?
beatricetriptych: I think we suffered enough.
Comet: I used to, but knowing that a TV series is being made, I don't really care all that much. I'm confident that the TV series will top the movie in the eyes of long-time fans.
Dante: If for no other reason than it would have been very interesting to see how the story was handled on a structural level - yes. The suggestion that the second entry might have been conducted in an entirely different medium, such as claymation, sounds so fascinatingly bizarre as to be worth the price of admission alone. But, had there been a sequel, arrangements for the upcoming television series might have been in a very different position... For now, let us reserve judgement.
Lemona: On the one hand, no, because the less damage the better. On the other, if they had been able to improve upon the first - not a difficult thing to do - it might have been a nice redemption.
Linda Rhaldeen: It would have been cool, but ultimately I'm glad they didn't.
Mister M: Yes, but only if it was good. If it had turned out to be bad, then no.
Terry Craig: Of course! I wished there to be a different director next time, though, like in the Harry Potter movies, so maybe they could land somebody like Alfonso Cuarón (HP3) to really nail it.
667er: What did you think when you heard of the Netflix series?
beatricetriptych: I might've cried a little, maybe had palpitations for a second or two. I tried for like two days to assume that it would suck so I didn't get my hopes up but that didn't last long.
Comet: Ecstasy and disbelief. If Netflix had personally offered me the choice of which TV show to make next, I'm pretty sure this is what I would have asked them to do.
Dante: I was intrigued. Quite aside from the probable presence of an entirely different creative team and cast of actors, I felt that the different format would be the biggest driver in a TV series being a very different beast from the movie - and more than anything else, what I wanted to see was an entirely different realisation of the story than that represented by the movie. Not because the movie was shockingly bad, but because the movie's way of doing things had been done, and it will be interesting to see how different an alternative is possible.
Lemona: I was surprised that ASoUE was getting a second chance at screen-adaptation-ing. I've been impressed with some stuff Netflix has made, and while I'm not an expert, I considered them to be better hands than Nickelodeon. So I went phew somewhat.
Linda Rhaldeen: I was over the moon. Netflix is the best thing to ever happen to television, and I have yet to watch a Netflix original I didn't love.
Mister M: I thought... hmm, I actually don't remember my thoughts, it seems so long ago that the series was announced.... I expect I was probably quite pleased, as I've always felt that the series will be better suited to the TV format anyway. I see that there is a question about that coming up later, so I'll discuss it more there.
Terry Craig: At first I was a bit skeptical if it'd really come together, but once it seemed sure, I got super excited to see another audiovisual interpretation of the material and I still am.
667er: Do you think ASOUE will be better suited to the tv series formula than to films?
beatricetriptych: I think most long book series like that would be better as tv series? I'm still bitter that Percy Jackson was adapted into some garbage movies instead of a tv series (with actual kids, damnit). I feel like it's gonna work out for ASOUE really well. More room to wiggle around and grow in.
Comet: Yes. The series is so episodic, and so self-conscious about its episodicity, that we need the room between installments to get an adaption that's as close to the original as possible in spirit, even if not in plot. The framing of three separate books as 'Beginning, ending, middle and middle part II' doesn't really work particularly well for me. Of course, being a Netflix show, viewers aren't forced to wait at all between each installment; but then, neither did I when I discovered the books, and they still gave me a sense of individual containment.
Dante: In all honesty - yes, I do believe that ASoUE is better suited to a TV series. The books are episodic, sequential; numerous. Quite frankly, the odds were always against getting all thirteen books on film via the medium of a movie; only the most successful franchises could bankroll the number of films that would be required to adapt all the material, which could probably not be fewer than four at the most optimistic, with the books wholly massacred and crushed together to fit the running time; adapting the books doubly or even singly into films would require vastly more films. It simply wouldn't happen, and I question whether the format is flexible enough to even contain a satisfactory adaptation of all the books; we've seen what they had to do to the first three. A TV series, on the other hand, seems to run more easily to further series, and, being by its nature broken up into more digestible chunks, can more easily adapt multiple books without much awkwardness in the disconnect between volumes. ...I would add, although this doesn't appear to be a consideration for Netflix, that expectations in regards to budget are lower for TV series. Had ATWQ been written in the 80s or early 90s, I think it quite possible there might already have been a television adaptation of that series.
Lemona: I was also relieved ASoUE was going to be a series and not a movie or movie franchise. The story lends itself so much better to an episodic format, because the series itself is so episodic.
Linda Rhaldeen: Much better. Movies are good for one-shot epic stories, maybe a sequel or a trilogy, but the long-form storytelling of television is more suited to a 13-book series, especially one with child actors.
Mister M:Ah, here's that question then. Yes, I do, very much so. I mean, the series is very episodic in nature, and I think The TV show will be able to handle things like the naration and the tone of the books much better than a movie. I mean, a movie series could work, but only with 13 films, and that is never going to happen no matter how much we want it. I actually spent a good while a few years back working out a plan for how a TV adaptation could work in terms of story structure. I've believed for a while that an 8 episode first series covering books 1-4 will work, and thats whats happened. Lets see if we get a 7 episode second series covering books 5-7 or not.
Terry Craig: Considering the movie adaptation felt episodic in itself, then yes, I think so. Most of the books are just too short for whole movies.
667er: Do you normally prefer films or tv shows?
beatricetriptych: Movies are really hard for me to pay attention to because of their length (the last one I saw in theaters before Star Wars Episode VII was in 2013), so I watch more tv, but I prefer a good movie when I can watch one.
Comet: If I have to pick one, I'd say TV shows. It's really two different creatures, though - or maybe 'two sides of the same creature' is a more accurate way to put it. The limits between TV shows and films have always been blurry - it's really just the presentation that makes a difference - and the variety of presentation forms in media today is blurring the lines more than ever.
Dante: There's a question I've already answered... though in truth, I don't watch a huge amount of TV, either, and theatre can be a challenge. Well, cinema and theatre have the common problem of by and large demanding to be viewed in the company of a large crowd of strangers, busily exchanging noises and diseases - an experience I have no taste for. But I also have an issue with acting, which is that the moment an actor's performance is no longer believable to me, I find it literally embarrassing to watch. With false humans this can never be a problem.
Lemona: Films for some reason. I'm not a tv show person.
Linda Rhaldeen: Definitely a tv person.
Mister M: TV Shows. I find films a bit confusing - I've always been a very slow reader, and so in turn I am a slow watcher.
Terry Craig: Definitely movies, but that doesn't mean that I love a couple of TV shows as much as some of my favourite movies. But movies have a richer history and I like that a movie is the vision of just one director and usually written by one or two screenwriters (as opposed to a whole crew).
667er: What is the one thing that has you most excited for the series?
beatricetriptych: Oh God there's so much. Maybe the music, since we haven't had a sneak peek yet? I really want to hear the opening theme, and I'm eager to know how (or if?) they're going to weave different eras of music in with the time period ambiguity of the look of the show.
Comet: I'm so excited to see how they handle Lemony's narration, as well as the backstory of Lemony, Beatrice, Bertrand, Olaf and their peers, which is alluded to so often in ASOUE. I'm also a sucker for intertextualities and easter eggs, so I'll probably be rewatching each episode with my finger hovering over the 'pause' button
Dante: That it's not the movie. I want to see a different vision of the series - and, of course, with something that will exist in the future, there is always the hope that it will be the better product.
Lemona: The anachronistic aesthetics. They seem to be doing it right yay.
Linda Rhaldeen: I am quite excited for all the diversity in casting we've been seeing. I'm ashamed to admit that when I first read the books I imagined all the characters in my head as white, something I understand is a pretty common thing for people who grow up in homogenous areas, and the set photos I've seen are exciting in the way they both match and upend my previous conceptions of the characters.
Mister M: The fact that this seems (and only seems, mind you) like a much better adpatation than the film turned out to be. Also, I'm looking forward to a few of the things that we have planned herE at The 667er to relase around the time of the Netflix series, so that will be a bonus. But another thing which I'm very excited / pleased about is the fact that this series is brinGing more people and more attention to 667, which can only be a good thing.
Terry Craig: To see how they'll deviate from the source material, plus the overall style.
667er: What is the one thing that has you most apprehensive?
beatricetriptych: I'm pretty nervous about how they'll portray the person of indeterminate gender. I know people have attempted to reassure us about them but I won't be able to trust that until I see their portrayal for myself.
Comet: I'm worried that too much of the general style will carry over from the movie. Not because I dislike the movie (although in certain aspects, that is the reason), but because I'd like to see a different interpretation from the one we already have.
Dante: The fact that Mr. Handler has made a couple of strangely ambivalent statements in regards to the TV series recently...
Lemona: The fact that they somehow didn't go with my ideal casting: Tim Curry as everyone. (Or more seriously: dumbing down and NPH being rubbish. That was two things. Tough)
Linda Rhaldeen: I was a big defender of NPH as Olaf back when the news first broke and people who had seen his comedy work were worried, and I still think he'll do a great job, but there's a little part of me that is worried he'll be another Jim Carrey and ruin the Olaf character.
Mister M: The Comments from Daniel Handler have been... interesting. But we'll see.
Terry Craig: The depiction of Lemony Snicket, probably more so than Olaf.
Another Month, another 667er, and another 'The Month', this time by me, Mister M. That's a lot of M's. Might this be a good time to get going?
- Lets kick things off with a big one - The Member of the Month for June (even though it's august) was announced as Cafe SalMONAlla. This is very much deserved. Look at all these banners she makes!
- Our new regular Netflix News-er @beatrcietriptych was crowned winner of VFD Big Brother!Congratulations!
- The Collaborative Calamity , 667's (very much) ongoing collabrative effort has been taken over by Dante. The latest two chapters and have now appeared, and there is a poll question for you all to go and answer.
- Kit's tits kick ticks finally showed us around her bedoom. Okay, I know other people did that too, but i'm biased.
- Harry Potter and the Cursed Child has been realeased. I haven't read the book... I found the discussion interesting, but I still can't see it as being anything but bad fanfiction.
- This pretty cool cover for Goldfish Ghost has emerged.
- Violent BUN Fortuna continued to amaze us with her artwork.
- Reba unleashed
his clothing line, to mild interest.
- lemonyy, our newest emmebr, made an introductory thread. Everybody go and say hi if you haven't already.
- The eternal battle of guys against girls continues to rage on.
- You should also check out the Netflix megapost, which has now wrapped up for this series. And hey, don't forget about the Penthouse. Also, as a little bonus, its always worth checking out the Snicket Sleuth, run by the brilliant thedoctororwell, for some pretty fun fan theories.
~-//-~
History of 667
A column by Linda Rhaldeen
Welcome back to History of 667. Today's topic of interest: The 2004 Movie.
Filming has wrapped for the Netflix adaptation's first season, and as the release date draws nearer, the anticipation grows more and more unbearable. It is hard to believe it has been nearly 12 years since we last had a filmed adaptation released, but it's true; the movie Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events was released on December 17th, 2004. Our beloved forum, having been founded nearly 2 1/2 years prior, was there to witness the whole thing, from the first rumors to the theatrical and home releases and the endless sequel rumors that popped up for several more years.
A brief timeline of the film (or a summary, at least; check Wikipedia for more details). The rights to the film were bought by Nickelodeon in May 2000, when only the first four books had been released. Barry Sonnenfield was hired in June 2002 as director, and Jim Carrey was cast in September 2002. The project ran into a few snarls, with the original director eventually leaving, as well as Scott Rudin (one of the original funders), and Daniel Handler was famously fired as scriptwriter after writing 8 drafts. Brad Silberling took over as director, the final script was written by Robert Gordon, and filming, originally slated to begin in April 2003, took place from November 10th, 2003 to May 29th, 2004 (for comparison, the Netflix series filmed for a little over 4 months, and will end up being eight 1-hour episodes). The movie was filmed entirely on sound stages and back lots, in Hollywood and Downey, California. As already mentioned, the film was released on December 17th, 2004, and on DVD and VHS (wow, they were still making VHS then!) on April 26th, 2005.
The film had a budget of $140 million and ended up grossing $213 million; while not a breathtaking success, it still more than made up its money and therefore talks of a sequel or even a multiple-film franchise abounded through the year 2005. As time went on and the child actors (Emily Browning and Liam Aiken) aged, a sequel became less and less likely, but even as late as June 2009 there was talk of a sequel, done in stop-motion animation to work around the aging of the children. It all eventually came to naught, at least until November 2014 when Netflix announced their plans.
Our forum seems to have had knowledge of the movie for years before it was released; I was not a member at the time but from what I am able to see using Wayback Archive, there was a section titled Audio/Visual reserved for the audio tapes and movie as early as October 9th, 2002. The board was renamed Malignant Media in April of 2003, but surprisingly continued to be a discussion of all things media until October 2004, only two months before the movie's release, when the title was changed to Malignant Movie. The name was changed again, this time to Miserable Movie, in August 2006, and has only recently (December 2015)changed to Atrocious Adaptations to more accurately reflect the discussions inside, which are nearly all about Netflix.
Since Atrocious Adaptations shares a board with the movie discussion, it is fairly easy to turn to page 38 of the board and see a lot of the old threads to this day, though any prior to 2004 seem to be missing. The main difference you will notice is the lack of organization; anyone and everyone seems to have made threads nilly-willy whenever they became aware of some piece of information, and there is a great deal of duplication and off-topic chatter making it difficult to get accurate information. This was well before Dante's ascent to power (though he is actually not even the moderator for this discussion, Invisible is), or the thoughtfulness of ryantrimble457 and his mega post. Going through 20 pages of posts in the year before the release, most seem to either be: I found a picture!, I watched the trailer!, this is why I will like/dislike the new movie!, why is Klaus not wearing glasses?, and speculations on sequels. Though even back then, it appears we ran into the problem of knowing more than the journalists.
Fast forward to today, and there seem to be very few people who unreservedly loved the movie. Some liked aspects of it, others like to watch it with the director's (and Daniel Handler's) commentary which is said to be quite good, and others have compared it to a train wreck or mocked Jim Carrey's dinosaur dance. Love it or hate it, though, the movie is what exposed the works of Lemony Snicket to the world. Yes, the book series is popular, but the movie made it much more so, not to mention brought in literally thousands of new members of 667 (myself included; I was a fan of the books well before the movie came out, but it's what prompted me to search for ASOUE forums online).
Bonus Content: Who was the moderator of Malignant Merchandise?
- Oct 2002-Apr 2003: Tragedy
- Apr-Jun 2003: RonWeasley
- Jul 2003-Jan 2004: VKSB
- Jan-May 2004: Rikku
- Jul-Dec 2004: Tyler Quagmire
- Nov 2004-May 2015: Gigi
- Jul 2012-present: LSWannaBe
Interested in seeing a specific topic covered? Send me a PM and I will do my best to cover it in a future issue.
Well, this just isn't fun. My last penthouse recap ended with a message to "attend. Do interesting things." Obviously no one listened, because the latest penthouse day was a grim reminder of... idk something negative about modern times or whatever.
In fact, when I arrived, there seemed to be a conversation going on about whether or not 667 is dead. Mister M was claiming he spends exactly 15 minutes a day on 667, which obviously isn't true but oh well maybe he was making a point. Bear linked to a thread of people discussing 667's quietness. I can't find it now, but I did find this extremely informative one that ends on a thought-provoking note. Anyway the thread bear showed us got fairly pointless and didn't provide an answer. I still don't know if 667 is dead, but the penthouse day certainly was.
After that conversation had come to jumbled halt, Mister M, bear and I had a conversation about statistics and what percentage of them are false. If I remember rightly, at some point bear was revealed to be imaginary but even that was cast in doubt. The conversation also touched on music when I told bear I didn't like a Bill Nelson album. He was appalled, which was fun to witness. M tried to get me to listen to Jack Garrett and I finally caved and did, but liked that even less.
Later on I think I missed a couple of 667ers who also missed each other. It was all very exciting.
Then I had a very dull conversation with M, who was more interested in "PALYING DARTS" then engaging in a conversation about the 667er, life in general, or what Jack Garrett songs I might actually like.
After that, I really don't think any further penthouse day conversations happened. Yes, it was that dead.
CONCLUSION: This essay recommends that penthouses be attended and made interesting. It also recommends that people make dart-playing time and talking-to-people time separate events.
I feel bad about this recap being boring, even though it was only because I have nothing to work with, so here's an original joke my dad made up today to keep you entertained:
What do you call a piece of middle-eastern bread covered in pieces of hair?
Hairy Pita
-----
Happy?
#8 - The Baudelaires...uh, no.
The Liam Aiken should play Violet instead thread:
asoue.proboards.com/thread/19483/baudelaires-uh
So, After all that movie talk, I thought it was only fitting that we end with a look forward to the next Snicket Adaptation coming our way.
As we discovered from Barry Sonnenfeld’s instagram post way back in April, filming for ASOUE was set to wrap in mid-August, and so (I regret to inform you) our usual steady stream of social media posts and questionable IMDb casting announcements has begun to slowly trickle out. Dwindling as it may be, however, there is still news to be had.
Several cast members were photographed at a get-together of some kind at Barry Sonnenfeld’s home, along with a handful of actors (including Cobie Smulders, Taran Killam, and Alfre Woodard) who are debatably uninvolved with ASOUE. Several members of 667 Dark Avenue speculated on the possibility of those actors appearing in the show, and what possibilities that possibility might possibly impose, though for official purposes, attending a party ranks even lower than an IMDb credit on a list of things likely to lead to one being added to the confirmed cast list. (Neither, it would seem, are at the very bottom of that list.)
Speaking of IMDb, director Mark Palansky is now listed as a director for two episodes, and a link to his demo reel can be found in the previous link. Bernadette Peters continues to be listed as a cast member, and still has not been officially confirmed nor denied. It should be stressed that IMDb listings are not official, and shouldn’t be trusted without outside confirmation (as is the case with Luke Camilleri, now confirmed to be playing Gustav).
On July 27th, we received reports that Patrick Warburton, in character as Lemony Snicket, hosted a viewing of a set reel at the Television Critics Association’s summer press tour. Warburton has been active as normal on social media since then, and seems happy and healthy, so it may be assumed that either he was not mistaken for Lemony Snicket by the author/fugitive’s enemies, or that they were unsuccessful in any attempts to abduct or injure him. There was no footage at the event, but the set reel was described as “charming.”
We got a peek at that set ourselves a few days later, when Paul Becker (a director, choreographer, writer, and producer, according to his Twitter bio) posted a photo on his Instagram account of the interior of Count Olaf’s house. The account (and by extension, photo) were later removed from Instagram, but the eyes on the internet are as numerous as those in Olaf’s decor, and the image is still viewable in full quality via 667 Dark Avenue’s Twitter account.
In other casting news, New Zealand’s Rhys Darby has joined the cast, though his role is unspecified. He had a few promising things to say about the show, which can be read in the post at the link (along with another hope-lending tweet from Usman Ally). Alfre Woodard was also confirmed to be shooting ASOUE in an article from The Hollywood Reporter, though no role was listed. Maybe we should all attend parties at Barry Sonnenfeld’s house, if it really does lead to being added to the cast list?
As the middle of August grew closer, the news dwindled down into closing celebrations-- Neil Patrick Harris treated his coworkers to sweets, Daniel Handler compared the show to a lizard, and finally, cast and crew began posting pictures from the wrap party. The mega post, labor of the ever diligent ryantrimble457 , was officially closed (though the thread is still open), and on August 19th, Netflix’s A Series of Unfortunate Events, Season the First, officially wrapped.
A thousand thanks to everyone who reported new information, particular those in charge of 667 Dark Avenue social media and those most active in the mega post thread. Everyone involved with the show seems to find a second season very likely, and hopefully promotional materials for the first season will be released soon. Thank you to everyone who has stayed with Netflix News through filming-- The 667er will continue to keep you posted in the months ahead.
Advertisements
~ If anybody wants to contribute something (whether positive or negative) then feel free to PM me or any other staff members with your ideas ~
~ Don't forget to come to the next penthouse, which is September 11th ~
~ If you want to be interviewed by Linda then PM her and let her know. ~
~ The Next group Interview will take place in Edition 23. If you are interested in taking part, then please PM me or anka ~
~ The Next Edition of the 667er will be released on September 19h. See you then! ~