Spierig Brothers to Direct The Power of the Dark Crystal 3-D

May 4, 2010

The Dark Crystal

Over a month ago we heard from Brian & Wendy Fround, the duo responsible for much of the intricate and spectacular work in the art department on the props, sets and creature design on the cult classic The Dark Crystal and they mentioned being involved with recent work on a few art designs for the long gestating sequel The Power of the Dark Crystal which will be presented in 3-D. At the time, there wasn't really any evidence of imminent production, but now there's an orgy of evidence as Omnilab Media and The Jim Henson Co. have announced today that Peter and Michael Spierig (Daybreakers) will direct the sequel.

The brothers will be directing from a screenplay written by Craig Pearce (Moulin RougeRomeo + Juliet) based on an original script by Annette Duffy and David Odell (who wrote The Dark Crystal). As expected, Brian Fround returns as conceptual designer on the film, which will use a mix of live action and traditional puppetry combined with visual & special effects (Iloura, who worked on the realistic CG effects in Where the Wild Things Are, will oversee the effects). Of course, making a sequel to a film that benefited so much from a lack of sophisticated special effects is quite a risk, and the Spierigs know they're taking on something big:

"We feel a tremendous amount of responsibility in telling this story with the same meticulous care that Jim Henson and Frank Oz gave the 1982 original. This is a chance to take the world of puppetry into the modern age by using modern techniques (like motion capture CGI) and the tried and true methods (like puppetry and animatronics) to create a one hundred percent real world that is unique to The Dark Crystal."

So where exactly will this brand new adventure take us? The press release says that The Power of the Dark Crystal is set hundreds of years after the events of the first movie when the world has once again fallen into darkness. The story follows the adventures of a mysterious girl made of fire who, together with a Gelfling outcast, steals a shard of the legendary Crystal in hopes of reigniting the dying sun that exists at the center of the planet. The only thing we're not certain about yet is whether the film will actually be shot in 3-D or merely converted to 3-D. We'll find out soon enough! Anyone out there excited about all this news?

Find more posts: 3D News, Movie News, Opinions



Why in 3-D though? What will it add to the film? Answer: Nothing.

Xerxex on May 4, 2010


Cause currently it's helping to sell tickets. Increasing the value in going to the theater instead of downloading it or waiting for it to come out on video. I have to admit that when they are shot in 3D it's pretty cool and I think can add to the experience. But the converted 3D is obvious, dull and blurry. And really only adds to the desire to take off those damn glasses! The converting process currently costs about a Million dollars a minute which is why they cut out 30mins out of Titans. 30 minutes? Thats a lot of story man. And enough to dramatically alter the entire film. Is it really worth it? Well they seem to think so. So it will take them spending that kind of money on a real stinker and lose their ass to make them think twice about it.

Bryanmakeup on May 4, 2010


The Spierigs? I'm sold.

Mark on May 4, 2010


Why cant we get a sequel for the cooler movie, The Labrynth?

Felicity on May 4, 2010


I know, right? I mean Bowie looks exactly the same. Well except for getting his teeth fixed, which only makes him look more perfect like a mannequin. I think now though he could play a much deeper character than before. Take it to a new level. And now they could get away with a more serious approach than the 80's camp that fluffed up the first one. I still love it though and own it in just about every format.

Bryanmakeup on May 4, 2010


@Bryanmakeup well I am completely against the use of 3-D in film altogether. There is really no need to alter the way we see movies today its fine the way it is.

Xerxex on May 4, 2010


Wasn't Gendi Tartovsky set to direct this?

dr-deciduous on May 4, 2010


Ugh... I was really excited when Genndy Tartakovsky was supposed to be directing and the term "3-D" wasn't attached. Now I'm very disappointed and scared. In fact, now I'd rather it doesn't happen at all.

Dark Fist on May 4, 2010


anyone see Daybreakers? Cause if ya did, you know this will be ruined!!!

chrisbo on May 4, 2010


Shoot stopmotion in it, will prob be converted to 3-D

David Banner on May 4, 2010


Day breakers was the worst movie of the year. And no excuse can be made for it having a small budget (22 mil awhile films like district 9 hd 30) what it lacked was story & strong direction. Of course illoura will be handling the effects (they are owned by omnilab) be interesting to see if they are up to it as i can't remember them doing all the effects shot in a movie (more small scenes here & there).

Pat on May 4, 2010


you have got to be kidding me! these guys know nothing of storytelling. they come from the Michael Bay school of shooting and fast cuts. Undead was shit stacked 20 feet tall. Daybreakers was shit stacked 10 feet tall. so i guess this will only be shit stacked 5 feet tall yeah. another classic film from my childhood to be f***ed in the ass. Jim Henson would turn in his grave. You clearly don't need much talent to make it these days...

billy on May 4, 2010


Classic film from your childhood... perhaps. However, I caution anyone from actually watching movies like Labrynth, Never Ending Story, or Dark Crystal as adults. If those movies were released today, the same fanboys defending their sanctity would butcher them with their critiques. I mean c'mon guys, some of those cheesy characters make Jar Jar Binks look good. Seriously. Jar Jar Fracking Binks. I personally hope they redo this well to wipe out my recent memories of that annoying gelfling.

Gonnarentit on May 4, 2010


Gonnarentit - I disagree. If only they made more movies like those from the 70's and 80's. Would something as original as Back to the Future or Gremlins get up today? Not unless it was a comic book first. Today everything is a franchise, comic book, sequel or prequel. If they can't find a ready made audience they won't bother. Originality is dead. I choose to remember how the movie made me feel when I saw it as a youngster. It wasn't intended for adults. Does your favourite sweater from the 80's hold up today or would you get beaten up for wearing it? My biggest problem here is getting unoriginal filmmakers to direct such a film, compared to the pioneering, inspiring visionaries who made the original.

billy on May 4, 2010


@ #10, David Banner, Coraline was stop motion and shot in 3-D. It's certainly not impossible.

Ethan Anderton on May 4, 2010


BUMMED that Gennedy's not attached..... Given what he did with Dexter's Lab & Clone Wars, he would have done this SO much justice. (heck he de-jar jar'd star wars to make IT cool again!). But............ If the new guys stay true to the soruce material and make it a fantasy epic that 'happens to feature puppets' instead of some CGI throw-together, "let's top the original with our technology" kids movie, then it's gonna suck balls and look like fraggle rock got curb stomped by Eureeka's Castle.... (yes, I said Eureeka's Castle). Hansen (& Oz) put his heart and soul into this project. DONT diesrespect that!!!!!

jomba joose on May 5, 2010


I have been waiting to see how they go after the concept of the original. It should be able to do some wonderful things without over doing it. I just hope it comes out soon

Jwizemt on Feb 15, 2011

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:

Follow Alex's main account on Twitter:

For only the latest posts - follow this:

Add our posts to your Feedlyclick here

Get all the news sent on Telegram Telegram