I’m labeling this “retro” even though this is one of the few times I won’t give you a long, drawn-out “when I watched this as a wee lass” sort of story to go along with an old show. Oh, sure—I grew up on Sesame Street and Superfriends and I’m only too happy to bore you with the tales of how important those shows were to me in my tender youth, but this time it’s different.

Because Fraggle Rock didn’t come out until I was already in junior high, see. So all I can tell you about it from my personal experience is that I babysat for some kids who loved it, and every time I let them watch it I found myself humming the theme song for days on end. I would be walking to the bus stop in the morning—”Down at Fraggle Rock!”—or working on a math problem—”Down at Fraggle Rock!”—or looking for a snack after school—”Down at Fraggle Rock!”—and often I wondered why I could only remember that single line. And then I would go listen to some Van Halen to try to get it out of my brain.

What? No, that doesn’t have anything to do with anything. Just sharing my Fraggle Rock experience, is all.

Regardless of the earworm properties of their theme song, Fraggle Rock enjoyed a huge following and great success; so it should come as no surprise at all to learn that it’ll soon be coming to the big screen as a feature film:

Cory Edwards, who directed the animated “Hoodwinked!” for TWC, will helm the picture and write the screenplay. The Jim Henson Co. will produce and TWC will distribute.

Just like the series, the film will be populated by a mix of human characters and Fraggle Rock puppets. TWC co-chair Harvey Weinstein, who has been steering his company more aggressively into the family film arena, made the marriage with Lisa Henson, who runs JHC with her co-CEO brother, Brian Henson.

Ahmet Zappa will be exec producer with Brian Inerfeld.

It would be wrong for me to hope that they come up with a new theme song, right? Probably it is. But I can hope.

As I’ve mentioned before, Speed Racer has been a hotly-anticipated movie in my household. I’d be hard-pressed to tell you who’s more excited about it, actually—the kids or my husband. Now it’s finally almost here and I have some good news and some bad news.

Good news first? Okay! Check out this Go Speed Weekend! contest, where a bit of creativity could land you a weekend trip to Los Angeles or other cool prizes. Entries are being accepted through Tuesday, May 13th, 2008, so you still have time to enter if you have a need for speed swag.

The bad news, I’m afraid, is that the critics aren’t exactly embracing Speed Racer with enthusiasm. The Tomatometer is running towards “rotten,” with reviewer quotes indicating that this movie is best handled with a few analgesics:

Maybe every generation gets its own “Tron.” Not to whine, but: my eyeballs were on fire.

Kyle Smith
KyleSmithOnline.com

Oh. Dear. Um… ouch?

The lure of seeing this in Imax is certainly… ummm… waning in the face of the reviews, I have to say. But after all of this anticipation… I just don’t know. We may see it anyway.

I’ll bring my sunglasses.

There’s always just a little bit of apprehension inherent in a favorite character from childhood being turned into a star of the big screen. Will they get the story right? Will they get the casting right? Will it be the way it should be or will they blow it?

Oh, is it just me who thinks all of those things? C’mon. You can admit it. I won’t tell anyone. It’ll just be between you and me, Internet.

Anyway, this weekend’s opening of Iron Man gave me that all-too-familiar feeling of… worry. It’s such a meaty story with great characters. Have they pulled it off? Dare I check the reviews?

I dared, and then I heaved a big sigh of relief. The Tomatometer is registering unexpectedly high—94% Fresh, in fact, the last time I checked—and it appears that the hype surrounding this project may well be warranted. So far, the critics love it.

And if you’re the sort of person who loves a little backstory, be sure to check out Newsarama’s Inside the Iron Man piece by Joe Tirella, too. It’s a nice little peek into title actor Robert Downey Jr.’s journey in this project. I, for one, feel better already to know that he read decades-worth of Iron Man comics to prepare.

I guess I know what we’ll be doing this weekend….

Marvel fans will be thrilled to hear that Iron Man is coming to a cartoon near you—first on a pre-release DVD, and then as a television series later this month. But despite being as American as apple pie and, well, Marvel Comics, Iron Man is being developed for television in the United Kingdom:

Marvel has commissioned Gaul’s Method Animation to make 26 half-hour “Iron Man” shows. Marvel and Method are co-producing with U.K. animation shingle Cinnamon Entertainment.

Maybe you’re not familiar with Cinnamon, but the rest of the world isn’t:

Cinnamon managing director Anthony Bouchier said his company’s role in producing the series “is a tribute to the quality of animation talent working in the British Isles.”

Cinnamon, which has contributed early design and modelling work, specializes in children’s animation and is best known for BBC1’s CG toon hit “Freefonix.”

“Freefonix” follows the adventures of a pop group 50 years in the future in the city of Los Bosmos.

This is all coming just in time for the excitement over the soon-to-open Iron Man feature film, of course:

The latest “Iron Man” TV series will follow the release of the live-action “Iron Man” feature.

Pic, which stars Robert Downey Jr. in the lead role and Samuel L. Jackson as Marvel superhero Nick Fury, opens May 2 Stateside and in the U.K.

I have to admit, Iron Man has always been one of my favorites. I think it’ll be a great addition to any Saturday morning line-up. But maybe I just have a weakness for large robots; hard to tell.

Ahhhh, Speed Racer. I remember Speed Racer! In fact—being a girl, and all, when it was popular—I was never a huge fan. So my memories of it aren’t all that nostalgic, or anything. It was… well, it was Speed Racer.

(Want your blast from the past? Here ya go!)

So when I heard that they were making a Speed Racer movie, I was unmoved. Oh, look; another movie based on a retro cartoon. How novel.

And then we saw a trailer for the upcoming film. And my interest was… interested, a bit. And then I read that the movie will be shown in IMAX, and I became a bit more interested.

Yesterday, I came across two new trailers for the movie, and I watched them. And then I watched them again. You know, I’m not usually someone who gets all excited about special effects, but… well, take a look for yourself.

Tell me you watched that and don’t want to go see that movie in all of its IMAX, CGI glory. Go on. Try to tell me that with a straight face.

Go, Speed Racer, go indeed.

The ‘net was buzzing, yesterday. The hotly anticipated Where the Wild Things Are movie isn’t slated to be released until 2009, and the studio has been very tight-lipped with any information that might give us an idea of what we’re in for once the big day arrives. But somehow… a video of a scene from the movie was leaked to the internet a few days ago.

Maybe.

Speculation has run from “complete fake” to “absolutely real” and everywhere inbetween. No one seems to know where or how it made its debut, but the clip was posted, then removed, then surfaced in other locations, and still—no one seemed to know whether it was the real deal or not. Check it out:

Let me just remind you (before we go any further) how I feel about the impending movie. Trepidation doesn’t really even begin to cover it. After watching that clip? I think I upgraded to actual dread.

So I clicked around to read some more about it. Ain’t It Cool News suggests that the clip is indeed real, but should be considered unlikely to appear in the final product:

Now, I’ve seen this film. Or rather, I saw a version of it. And I can tell you that there’s a reason this film isn’t coming out in 2008 anymore. There’s a lot of work left to do on it, and I wouldn’t be surprised to hear about some fairly massive reshoots in the months ahead.

So… ummmm… that and a buck will get you a cup of coffee. And a nightmare or two (more) about the movie….

[Hat tip: Pop Candy]

Get ready to pay homage to Jim Henson on the big screen, because his story is coming soon:

Empire Film Group, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: EFGU) (”Empire Film”) (http://www.empirefilmgroup.com) has acquired the motion picture production and distribution rights to “Henson,” an original screenplay by Robert D. Slane that chronicles the life and achievements of Muppets creator, Jim Henson. Empire has pegged the film for production in late summer with a $30 million budget to be funded through a consortium of international presales and co-production partners.

“This is a major project about an entertainer of legendary stature and worldwide acclaim,” said Dean Hamilton-Bornstein, CEO of Empire Film Group. “The script is superb and should provide a terrific roadmap for a completed film that will satisfy both mainstream audiences and critics. We’re very excited about this acquisition and the commercial caliber of this project.”

“Henson” covers the life of puppeteer, filmmaker and entertainment mogul Jim Henson, from his early fascination with television as a teenager, through his spectacular career and life achievements. Empire anticipates hiring a major director, such as Penny Marshall, and hopes to attract notable star cast in key roles. Bornstein will act as Executive Producer, with Empire Home Entertainment President Eric Parkinson producing the film along with Xavier Mitchell.

“Jim Henson is one of the best known and most beloved entertainers of all time,” said Parkinson. “His story is inspiring, tragic, heartwarming and epic, and will make for an important and entertaining motion picture. This is the sort of movie that Empire will be pursuing as we build the company into a leading independent studio.”

On the one hand, I’m thrilled, because Jim Henson is one of my idols. If you don’t love the man who brought us Sesame Street—not to mention Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog—you are dead to me. On the other hand, “his story is inspiring, tragic, heartwarming and epic?” That… sort of sounds like a soap opera. That sounds less like the backstory on the muppets and more like Gone With the Wind.

I sort of think Henson would’ve appreciated a biopic with a hearty dose of comedy, but I guess I could be wrong. (Really, I think Henson would’ve appreciated an all-muppet cast, too, but I don’t see that happening.) (It’s possible there’s a reason I wasn’t hired to produce this thing.)

I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

So, I already knew that plans for new Smurf movies were in the works, of course. That’s not a surprise. Though I suppose I may still be recovering from the news, a teeny bit. What I didn’t know was that—along with a resurgence of popularity and plans for their movie debut—the Smurfs will finally be getting some girls.

That’s right. For 50 years, Smurfette has been the only… well… smurfette in town. (How exactly did that… oh, nevermind.) But not any more!

Envisaged as secondary characters for a single cartoon album, the blue gnomes widely known as the Smurfs will celebrate their 50th anniversary this year with a movie deal and an invasion of new female characters.

[…]

“There have been dramatic changes in socio-cultural values in the past 20 to 25 years,” Hendrik Coysman, head of Smurf rights holder IMPS told a news conference on Monday. “One of these is girl empowerment.”

“So, there will be a greater female presence in the Smurf village and this will, of course, be a basis for new stories and this will probably turn upside down certain traditional situations within the village.”

I find this fascinating, actually. I mean, why now? After 50 years? Isn’t that part of what makes them… smurfy? How are they going to explain this sudden influx of womenfolk? Or will they just pretend that all those women had been there all along?

So many questions, and yet, so little real interest. I mean, these are smurfs were talking about. And this is the most thought I’ve given them since I was young enough to still be scared of Gargamel. Which is a little scary.

I just love the stuff they come up with over at RetroCrush, because—even though it makes me feel old, to read over there and laugh my butt off at the memories—I just mind being old less when I’m laughing about it. And there’s some very funny stuff over there.

So yesterday when I saw the RetroCrush Box of Glory Inaugural Inductees title, I was eager to read on, even though I wasn’t sure what I would find. But it turns out to just be a great compilation of greatest childhood toys (phew!) along with some hilarious commentary.

At first glance I thought the list contained all of the usual suspects—the Etch-a-Sketch, the Slinky, cap guns, Barbies, Legos, the Magic 8 Ball… it’s a long list, and most of the entries caused me to nod along in agreement. Some of them reminded me of things I hadn’t thought of in years; for example, I used to own the cloth Holly Hobby doll they show. (I wonder what happened to her.)

The list’s author, Robert Berry, claims at the end that you can write in with anything he’s missed, though it’s not clear whether he’ll add them to the list. And this, of course, got me thinking about what I, personally, would’ve added that I didn’t see there. (Several of the toys he did list either predate my childhood or I was just raised in a bubble. That milking cow looked like something I would’ve begged for as a kid, so I’m pretty sure I’ve never seen it before.)

Berry’s list tops over 60 entries; nevertheless, I submit that he overlooked the following:

• Barbie Fashion Head. These come in about a million varieties, nowadays, and I’ve even seen one with hands (which, frankly, frighten me) so that you can do their nails. But back in my day, there was but one Barbie Fashion Head. You could do her hair and make-up. And then when you got a little older, you and your brother could give her a mohawk.
• Jacks. Dude. You include jump ropes and the lemon twist but leave out jacks? Clearly you were never a girl at summer camp on a rainy day. Which I suppose is a good thing, seeing as how you’re a guy. Still. Jacks! They’re a classic.
• Sea monkeys. No room in the box of glory for brine shrimp? C’mon. Every kid I know had a coming-of-age moment when they realized that those little buggers did not, in fact, wear little pink crowns the way the ad in the back of the comic books always depicted them. It’s a sad right of passage, that.
• Walkie-talkies. I have a set of two-way radios that my kids sometimes play with, but they get bored with them easily… possibly because they work. The set that I grew up with sometimes worked, and sometimes just made a lot of static. That was part of the challenge. It made our Secret Agent games more exciting.
• Topps baseball cards. I didn’t even like baseball, and I collected these along with everyone else. Because that’s just what you did.
• Merlin. Yeah, I know he’s got Simon on there. Merlin was different, and equally (or more) popular. I always wanted a Merlin. I never got one, and had to keep using the one my best friend (who got everything she ever wanted) had. I’m still bitter.

What would go into your toy box of glory?

I had to go back and look to see how long ago I’d first read about Where the Wild Things Are being made into a movie. It turned out that it was last February, and my feelings haven’t changed since then: I feel a deep sense of trepidation about the whole project. Sometimes a movie ruins a great book, and I worry about that, here.

So today when I saw that Lauren Ambrose has been cast as a voice talent for the project, I did not find myself feeling warm and fuzzy. Ambrose is a great actress; that’s not the issue. It’s that apparently the Wild Things will be talking. I’m already twitching. Though, people are apparently thinking really hard about this stuff:

Ambrose is replacing the previously cast Michelle Williams. According to a production source, the filmmakers enjoyed working with Williams, but her voice didn’t match their original vision of how the Wild Thing should sound.

You know how a Wild Thing should sound? I’m just guessing, here, but given a broad array of possibilities, I don’t think of Michelle Williams or Lauren Ambrose. Or, in fact, any perky young actress. Go figure. I could be picturing it wrong, I guess, but again, it all just seems a little weird to me.

So after reading about that and getting worked up all over again (”My preeeeeshus! You mustn’t wreck my preshus!”), I was delighted to run across this piece in Slate about the evolution of illustration in children’s literature:

Books were for schooling or for teaching religious and moral lessons—with properly serious illustrations chaperoning the text.

This somber mode continued through the Civil War. And then it went poof, dispelled by artists who became children’s illustrators by happenstance.

The piece is accompanied by a slideshow which is not to be missed. Where the Wild Things Are figures prominently in the history, of course, but so do Gellett Burgess’ turn-of-the-century Goops, who are an old family favorite of ours. (The article compares the Goops to the South Park gang, which made me laugh out loud.) Whether the movie meets expectations or not, there’s no question that Sendak’s Wild Things are an important piece of history. (But, uh, if the movie folks are reading? Here’s a special message from me to you: Please don’t screw it up.)