Status
Not open for further replies.
Creatureworks Releases '85-'86
The Creatureworks Movies that Traded Places (1985/6)
Nostalgia was Way Better when I was a Kid Netsite, May 14th, 1999


In the years 1985 and 1986 Disney released four movies that combined practical creature effects with live action performances: Labyrinth, Little Shop of Horrors, The NeverEnding Story: The Next Chapter, and Return to Oz. All four of these movies received high acclaim for their special effects, but they had vastly different receptions with audiences at the time, and with audiences today. At the time of release, one would be a breakout success, one would perform poorly with audiences and prove a loss, one would perform OK with audiences and become a classic after-the-fact, and one would become a modest success with an average audience reception.

What’s interesting about these movies in hindsight is that today one is a hit with audiences, one performs well with audiences, one performs poorly with audiences, and one has an average audience reception, only in this case the four have traded places. What do I mean? Let me explain:

Disney’s Creatureworks, which evolved in part out of Jim Henson’s Creature Shop, provided some of the effects for all four of these movies, and was (and is) justifiably praised for the effects’ lifelike quality and originality in all four films. Three, Labyrinth, Little Shop, and NeverEnding Story 2, were greenlit by Henson while the fourth, Return to Oz, precedes his involvement and languished in production hell.

And yes, all four retain that great 1980s distinction of being PG films that are utterly and completely terrifying to the very children that they were aimed at, and the source for the unlimited growth curves in the anxiety drug industry of the 1990s and 2000s, but I digress.

Returntoozposter.jpg


So, let’s start at the low point: Return to Oz. This film had some pants-shittingly scary-awesome effects, and the acting was good if the direction and editing pretty damned slow at times, but it utterly failed to connect with audiences. Simply put, folks went in expecting Judy Garland and family-friendly singalongs, but instead got head stealing queens, the creepy mechanical Tik-Tok, the nightmare-juice-made-manifest Wheelers, the creepy Gnome King, and Dorothy getting fucking electroshock therapy! Other than the ruby slippers and basic setting, there was nothing to connect the film to its supposed precursor. Fans of the actual books loved it, of course. It stayed true to the source material in a way that the “original” movie did not, but too few people were reading the century-old books in 1985. At $15 million in box office receipts, the film barely made half of its $28 million budget back[1].

Hindsight, however, has been kinder. Many recognize it for the dark vision it brought to the Saccharine Land of (movie) Oz. VHS and later VCD sales eventually proved profitable and the film retains a dedicated cult following. While it’s never going to supplant the original MGM picture in the public mind, it none the less has turned around in the public eye to become a rather beloved film in its own right.

Little_shop_of_horrors.jpg


A similar thing happened to a lesser extend with Little Shop of Horrors, which did OK in the theaters, $42 million against a $25 million budget, but had a much better reception on VHS and cable TV and is fondly remembered today. As a fun fact, this film had a bit of a problem in development. The original movie, like the play it was based upon, ended with Seymour and Audrey getting eaten and Audrey 2 and A2’s babies devouring New York. Test audiences hated it and they almost had to scrap all of the awesome Plants Eating New York effects after they went to the happy ending. Jim Henson instead suggested that the effects become an Imagine Sequence after Seymour discovers Audrey 2’s plans, so at least the awesome scenes stayed in[2]. Anyway, like Return to Oz this film has received far more praise after the fact and is recognized as a beloved classic film today.

Neverending_story_two_poster.jpg

This, but earlier and with the Original Cast

Next, let’s aim for the middle: The NeverEnding Story 2: The Next Chapter. The original broke $100 million back in ’84, but this one only managed $64 million against its $28 million budget[3]. That’s a good successful feature, but hardly a massive blockbuster. Audiences and critics were unenthused, saying it “fail[ed] to recapture the spirit and whimsey of the original” (Ebert), among other mediocre reactions. Like a lot of sequels, it just doesn’t measure up, even though it is based upon the second half of the original book, just as the original film covered the first half. VHS/VCD has not been much kinder. Some like it as well as the original and a strange handful like it better, but most agree that Sequel Suck Syndrome has struck. In fact, it’s almost a crowning achievement in “Eh” and always has been.

Labyrinth_ver2.jpg

Essentially this, but with MJ, not Bowie…

And finally, let’s soar high like Icarus…and then plummet back down in spectacular flames with Labyrinth. Oh, what was and what might have been! This movie made a fortune in the summer and fall of ’86, a good $102 million against a $25 million budget. Why? Michael Fucking Jackson. Not only was the film released at the height of his fame, but the film was released shortly before his tragic death, leading to a massive posthumous bump in attendance.

Now, let’s focus on the positive for a moment. The effects are superb even in this day of computer-generated magic. Brian Froud’s design is, as always, the stuff of fortified Nightmare Juice, but in a good way. Hackle remains a special achievement in animatronics and acute psychological trauma onset alike. The “Helping Hands” are fantastically creative. Blurg is adorable. The goblins are super creepy-cute. The set design is amazing with all of its fantastical Escher-inspired sets. The camera effects are amazing and even the primitive CG owl in the credits is pretty stunning for its time.

But even as audiences flocked to the theaters, the critics were less kind. They disliked the acting of both Connelly and Jackson and lamented the complete lack of chemistry between the two. They spoke well of Terry Jones’s writing, direction and editing and celebrated the set design, but the end results were, they felt, less than the sum of the parts. Still, even the most jaded of critics at the time appreciated the sheer popcornality of it all. The original Jackson songs and fantastic choreography are to this day a joy to watch. The scenes, though occasionally disjointed, where full of colorful eye candy. All the stuff of a fun if forgettable summer blockbuster.

But posterity has been less kind. Once the rose glasses faded away, audiences realized that the critics were right. The film is kind of disjointed. Michael’s choreography, full of hip thrusts in an utterly inappropriate outfit[4] and other adult themes, have made parents reticent to show it to their younger kids. The music is dated and breaks you out of the fantasy. And, let’s face it, Jackson and Connelly have zero chemistry. Jackson’s motivations as the Goblin King are obscure and not really justified in the text. It all feels like an extended Michael Jackson music video featuring Henson creations rather than a Henson movie with a big guest star.

Essentially, it's Pan 4D, but longer.

Today only Jackson fans and those who are totally nostalgic for the ’80s watch this movie. Henson fans prefer The Dark Crystal or other Creatureworks films. Jackson fans prefer Pan. It’s incredible to imagine this titanically “Eh” film being a massive hit for anyone.

And yet it could have been different. Jim Henson’s younger son John really wanted him to hire David Bowie as Jerraith. Yes, Ziggy Stardust himself could have been the Goblin King. However, the studio had a working relationship with Jackson and sometimes money talks so loudly that even Jim Henson has to listen. What idiot wouldn’t have jumped at a chance to star the King of Pop at the peak of his popularity? It was like printing money.

Would Bowie have been better? It’s hard to say and opinions, like sphincters, are as omnipresent as they are stinky to everyone but their owners.



[1] Did better than in our timeline since here Disney actually marketed it whereas Eisner largely let it die on the vine, as often happens to in-production stuff when a new head takes over.

[2] Cut and lost for a long time in our timeline. They are available on YouTube and they are epic.


[3] The general rule of thumb is that a sequel will make about 60-75% what the original made. The actual sequel in our timeline was a flop, however, since it had less-well-done effects, new actors, and the curse of taking too long between sequels and thereby lost the target audience to age and apathy. Here they had effects on par with the original and the same actors, plus it appeared only 2 years later, meaning that it avoids the failure.

[4] Let’s just say that Jackson will not become the, um, puberty-defining moment for audiences of a certain age and demographic that Bowie and the Little Goblin King were. MJ’s dance moves will still be the source of some inappropriate jokes, though. The creature effects will be celebrated, as will the set and costume design, but alas, almost nobody loves Labyrinth in this timeline, though a lot of people like it.
 
Thank you @Geekhis Khan for using the Awesome Ending from Little Shop of Horrors in the movie itself, I am suprised this was not done OTL. Guess it must have been editing time.

Jackson vs Bowie? I think I prefer our version, but I’d watch this timelines one just to compare.

ITTL version of teen me probably watched Neverending 2 as a fan of the first, but probably not Oz 2- as an Adult however I’m sure I did an enjoyed it.

Disney and it’s sub studios are insanely busy through 85/86 I am really looking forward to the stuff they make in the next few years at this pace!
 
Turning the original ending of Little Shop into a nightmare sequence is quite the genius move. Bu tell me, is this gold going to stay intact here?

I don't care much for Return of Oz and Never-ending Story, so I'll skip.

Shame Labyrinth isn't quite the beloved classic; knew David Bowie would always be the one that could make it all work together. But hey, that's alternate history for you.
This still precludes the chance of him working with the Hensons and Disney on another project in the future, right?
 
alas, almost nobody loves Labyrinth in this timeline, though a lot of people like it.
I'm fine with this. The Great Khan never promised a 'fix fic', so they can't all be improvements over OTL.

As always, looking forward to the next post, the end of the decade looms and the butterflies are flapping!
 
Considering that we are squarely in the mid-80's, do you mind telling us how many fresh and new animated shows Disney has produced up until now? And personally, I do consider puppetry as a form of animation, especially if we're talking about Jim Henson himself.
 
Okay, so, I want to float an idea here: since Captain EO has been butterflied, and Bowie missed out on Labyrinth, would it be out of the realm of possibility for Bowie and Disney to collaborate together on some space thing ITTL? (Maybe something based off of Ziggy Stardust?)

Also, while I'm part of the (I believe small) camp that the ending Little Shop of Horrors got is better than the original, cut ending, I admit salvaging it by retooling it into an imaginary sequence within the film is a brilliant idea.
 
Okay, so, I want to float an idea here: since Captain EO has been butterflied, and Bowie missed out on Labyrinth, would it be out of the realm of possibility for Bowie and Disney to collaborate together on some space thing ITTL? (Maybe something based off of Ziggy Stardust?)

Also, while I'm part of the (I believe small) camp that the ending Little Shop of Horrors got is better than the original, cut ending, I admit salvaging it by retooling it into an imaginary sequence within the film is a brilliant idea.

Captain Ziggy EO Stardust, the Man Who Sold The World...

But this is definitely turning out quite intriguing.
 
Could Disney get the rights to the Discworld books sometime in the '90s when the series really started getting steam? While the books have seen some decent adaptations it'd be interesting to see a more polished adaptation make it to silver screens.
 
Could Disney get the rights to the Discworld books sometime in the '90s when the series really started getting steam? While the books have seen some decent adaptations it'd be interesting to see a more polished adaptation make it to silver screens.
please keep hollywood away from them. i mean Good Omens was a fairly good adaption, but still things were left out and changed, to cope with american sensibilities & tastes.
and not even talking about the current abomination that is in the making, Pterry probably is spinning in his grave at 1000Rpm
 
Any chance of saving this ITTL?
Stay tuned in that arena.
Turning the original ending of Little Shop into a nightmare sequence is quite the genius move. Bu tell me, is this gold going to stay intact here?

Shame Labyrinth isn't quite the beloved classic; knew David Bowie would always be the one that could make it all work together. But hey, that's alternate history for you.
This still precludes the chance of him working with the Hensons and Disney on another project in the future, right?
Stay tuned on LSoH animation. As to Labyrinth, my idea was to flip the script completely. IOTL it was a box office bomb that built up a cult audience and is seen as a beloved classic today. ITTL it's a blockbuster success that becomes a rather "meh" thing after the fact.
Considering that we are squarely in the mid-80's, do you mind telling us how many fresh and new animated shows Disney has produced up until now? And personally, I do consider puppetry as a form of animation, especially if we're talking about Jim Henson himself.
SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY!!!
Okay, so, I want to float an idea here: since Captain EO has been butterflied, and Bowie missed out on Labyrinth, would it be out of the realm of possibility for Bowie and Disney to collaborate together on some space thing ITTL? (Maybe something based off of Ziggy Stardust?)

Also, while I'm part of the (I believe small) camp that the ending Little Shop of Horrors got is better than the original, cut ending, I admit salvaging it by retooling it into an imaginary sequence within the film is a brilliant idea.
I'll kick around a few ideas there.

The original ending of LSoH was DOA the second they cast Rick Moranis. They just made him and Audrey too likeable and sympathetic and all of A2's victims were too dislikable so murdering and dismembering Audrey's abusive Dentist boyfriend, frex, hardly felt like a crime needing consequences. But I did want to find a way to keep that awesome footage with the Audrey Babies devouring NYC.
A film version of Jeff Wayne's The War of the Worlds? The film rights must be floating around somewhere by the mid-80s.
Hadn't put much thought into it, but I'll check it out.
Could Disney get the rights to the Discworld books sometime in the '90s when the series really started getting steam? While the books have seen some decent adaptations it'd be interesting to see a more polished adaptation make it to silver screens.
please keep hollywood away from them. i mean Good Omens was a fairly good adaption, but still things were left out and changed, to cope with american sensibilities & tastes.
and not even talking about the current abomination that is in the making, Pterry probably is spinning in his grave at 1000Rpm
Stay tuned there too. Always a mixed blessing to see the stuff you love get "reimagined" and Diskworld is pretty damned idiosyncratic and hard to really reproduce in a different medium. I did like the Good Omens adaption (Az and Crowley were practically perfect IMO) and I haven't seen the Watch, but the trailer did not impress. The Acorn stuff wasn't bad and the Hogfather adaption has become a Solstice tradition in the household (though they really needed a better editor).
 
Could Disney get the rights to the Discworld books sometime in the '90s when the series really started getting steam? While the books have seen some decent adaptations it'd be interesting to see a more polished adaptation make it to silver screens.

please keep hollywood away from them. i mean Good Omens was a fairly good adaption, but still things were left out and changed, to cope with american sensibilities & tastes.
and not even talking about the current abomination that is in the making, Pterry probably is spinning in his grave at 1000Rpm

Stay tuned there too. Always a mixed blessing to see the stuff you love get "reimagined" and Diskworld is pretty damned idiosyncratic and hard to really reproduce in a different medium. I did like the Good Omens adaption (Az and Crowley were practically perfect IMO) and I haven't seen the Watch, but the trailer did not impress. The Acorn stuff wasn't bad and the Hogfather adaption has become a Solstice tradition in the household (though they really needed a better editor).
My personal inclination is to wait until the 2000s before bringing Sir Terry of Discworld into the timeline. I can readily imagine Jim being a great fan of the books and always having ideas for potential adaptations in his sketchbook but I kind of want Brian Henson to take the wheel on this one. You've also got the rising tide of interest in fantasy after The Lord of the Rings trilogy (which I understand was turned down by Disney before Warner picked it up OTL, there's an easy change for this timeline!), so Disney might see an opportunity to branch out into fantasy of an entirely different tone while the market's already primed.

I'd love to see The Wee Free Men (2002) as Disney's first foray into the Discworld, it's a reasonably short book so you loose less in the adaptation, plus it's a fairy tale for younger readers, which is right in Disney's wheelhouse.
For the main novels themselves I think an ideal avenue for adaptation would be the miniseries format rather than feature films, you have a more freedom with pacing that way, especially when adapting a novel that takes many hours to read, and provided Disney still has their own channel by 2006-10 you already have an inbuilt distribution outside of syndication or seasonal demands.

I'm more optimistic about this timeline's version of Disney doing any Discworld adaptation, what with their growing record of creative experimentation and 'making movies, not stock options' as I'm sure someone will have said at some point.
I can readily see Brillstein go off on some studio puke worried about marketing optimization and test audiences with a rant that includes stuff like 'we want to make money to stay in business, we're in this business to make movies!' and 'you can't pre-select your audience, you've got to make a good story and then it's your job (pointy finger) to make sure the folks out there who'd want to see that story hear about it!'
I have more confidence in this TL's Disney's record with adaptations (knowing wink @Geekhis Khan).

After saying all that I think The Muppet Christmas Carol set a good precedent when Gonzo/'Mr. Dickens' tells Rizzo 'if you liked the movie you should read the book' as the credits start to roll.
 
I'd love to see The Wee Free Men (2002) as Disney's first foray into the Discworld, it's a reasonably short book so you loose less in the adaptation, plus it's a fairy tale for younger readers, which is right in Disney's wheelhouse.
That would be interesting. My main fear is that they might try to turn Tiffany and Roland into more of a love story, but if it's, say, 2012 or so and Disney are in roughly the same place that produced Brave and Frozen ITTL, they might resist the urge.

(It also occurs to me that they may feel "girl goes to fairyland to rescue her baby brother" is an unfortunate reminder of past failure...)
 
an unfortunate reminder of past failure
Or an opportunity to do it right. I don't think anyone would really make the comparison to Labyrinth other than that one point of commonality and besides, Tiffany Aching is a very different girl from Sarah Williams. The challenge might be in casting someone around the age of 9 who can pull off someone so thoughtful. That should also save the film from studio-mandated-romantic-subplot-because-it-tests-well-with-audiences-it-says-so-on-this-spreadsheet because it's hard to take 'romance' between preteens seriously.

And at least it won't be a musical, nobody wants to hear a Gonnagle sing/recite 'poetry'!
 
On that note, what would (for example) a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy adaptation look like with this Disney behind the wheel, especially with Creatureworks doing the effects?
 
On that note, what would (for example) a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy adaptation look like with this Disney behind the wheel, especially with Creatureworks doing the effects?
well probably the main characters name will probably be updated to something modern lol Ford Escort probably or maybe even Citizen Bank (or something like that)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top