trb (01/03/83)
I have already posted a review of "Dark Crystal." (Good technically, lousy plotically.) I see some people defending Dark Crystal solely on the basis of the muppettesque creatures, saying things like "you seen one quest, you seen 'em all." That, gentle readers, is a crock of crap. Rich and ingenious Jim Henson and his friends spent mega time, effort and money to make (what I assumed they wanted to be) a fine movie. After all that expenditure, I find it amazing that they couldn't see that their plot sucked. Surely they could have shown the screenplay to a trusted creative consultant. I would have done the job for a sub-six-digit salary. I get the impression that the techies out there (who approve of brain-damaged productions like "Dark Crystal") believe that technical aspects of a production (editing or photography/sound or muppetry) can be perfected (because techies have a grasp of these quantities) whereas aesthetic aspects (plot and dialog) can't be perfected and are more hit and miss. Piffle. I maintain that there is no excuse for producing big-budget movies like Dark Crystal without including viable plot and dialog. If it really was Henson's intent to produce a hi-tech lo-aesthetic production, he should have had the good grace to let us know what we were in for before we shelled out our bucks. Andy Tannenbaum Bell Labs Whippany, NJ (201) 386-6491