So, according the most recent news on this page, the film has been put on hold until further notice, does this mean that it should be moved to the Unfinished section?--Gonzofan 08:31, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
Brian and Wendy Froud were asked about the project at a book signing last week; I posted the info here. They say vaguely positive things, but I don't think that this should be a reset on the "one-year rule". The portion of the interview that talks about the sequel lasts twenty seconds; it's at 4:45 on the video. He's talking about things that happened in the past -- making some designs, meeting with the director -- and not something that they're working on now or have been working on recently. He calls it The Dark Crystal 2, which I think says something about the vague level of their involvement.
So I think Wendy saying that it's "inching toward production, very slowly," should be taken more as a cheerful and optimistic thing to say, rather than an official statement that the project is still in active development. In my opinion, the last vaguely official statement happened in mid-April 2009, and if we don't hear anything else, then this moves to Unfinished in mid-April 2010. Anybody have thoughts? -- Danny (talk) 17:52, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
- You said everything I was going to say when I thought of posting this here yesterday but didn't ;) —Scott (talk) 17:55, March 30, 2010 (UTC)
Surprise, surprise! It's back. Or maybe it was always on, but at least now we heard something again. So I guess we need a new rule. If another announcement is made, do we move it back to "In Development" right away, or do we wait for further news? (BTW, I think our moving it to "Unfinished Films" is what embarrassed them back into making another announcement. That's my story, and I'm sticking with it!) -- TomH 18:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- This is a tricky one... We decided recently in a Current events discussion that we would allow Muppet Newsflash info for upcoming releases like videos and books, but we'd be more skeptical about "in development" movie projects. The problem is that Greg doesn't cite his sources -- he says "I have been reassured that the company remains as committed as ever", but that could mean almost anything.
- The only mentions on the internet of Craig Pearce's name in connection with this project are people quoting from the Newsflash. It would be interesting if this turns out to be news, but with the Newsflash being the only soure, I'm not sure. What do other folks think? -- Danny (talk) 19:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm editing the page right now, in fact, to clarify that the "report" comes from the NewsFlash and adding some quotes from it (such as a vague "I've been told" and noting that no specific sources are mentioned). One of the claims, that Omnilab partnered with Henson on Farscape "from 1999 to 2003," simply isn't true as far as credits and press releases and everything else goes (Digital Pictures Network, an Australian house which did VFX on the Peacekeeper Wars, was later bought by Omnilab). So, that could be a mistake on the part of Greg's source, but we have no idea what that source is and that makes the whole thing questionable. Plus Muppet Newsflash has been the source of a ton of vague "everything is fine, nothing has changed" reports on Dark Crystal, when the latest one implies that if it is active, they're likely going back to the drawing board with a different company. I parked the earlier Omnilab rumors below, but Variety reported on troubles at Orphanage, the house originally slated to work on Dark Crystal. The upshot was that Orphange's VFX division is shutting down but at present, the management has sold ownership of the animation studio and Variety claims they're still working on the sequel. It's a paraphrased statement from the head of a company filing for bankruptcy so it doesn't prove much either, but it's a further contradiction. So right now, I'd say we continue to info park and monitor things, but there's no real reason to change the category yet. If/when a concrete statement surfaces directly from Henson (and not filtered via anonymous sources to Greg James), then we can reconsider the issue. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Great work, James! And thanks to both you and Danny for helping to clarify this. -- TomH 04:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
The "one-year rule"Edit
We talked about this project in September, and I proposed a "one-year rule": "If it's been a full year since there's been any reputable mention of the project, then we consider it Unfinished." The last actual information about the movie project was in October 2006, more than two years ago, and the last time it was mentioned in public by Henson staff was in the Jim Henson Company podcast in January 2008.
So it's been a year now since it's been mentioned by anyone. What do you guys think about moving this to Unfinished Movies? Obviously, if anything comes up in the future, we can change the category again, but right now, there's no evidence that this project is still in active development. -- Danny (talk) 11:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, it's me! Are you as surprised to see me here as I am? :) I came to this site specifically looking for more information on this project. Having read all the posts below, I honestly can't see anything that indicates real movement forward on this. As disappointing as it is, I vote that this item get moved to "Unfinished." -- TomH 18:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Really most sincerely deadEdit
Coming back to this four months later, it looks like this project really is dead. It's been a year since the Henson Company has mentioned it at all; there were apparently no announcements at this year's Comic-Con about it. It's not mentioned on Henson.com -- they're promoting things like The Skrumps, Dinosaur Train and the Farscape comic.
- Again, we haven't heard that it's been dropped out of production. For all intents and puporses, it's still in development. We're just not hearing about it. —Scott (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- We don't always hear anything off the record either, but wait long enough (in some cases, two years) and take it out. Of course, this *is* a movie and not a video like the TJ Bearytales thing or a Bert and Ernie special, so a longer lead time is a given. While I don't think we need to rush to declare projects dead, a full year, with the last notice then being a Comic-Con remark that there'd "been a bit of a setback," is a fair wait (even IMDb has moved the project to undetermined, especially since the). Also, this may not be definitive, but it's worth looking at InBaseline (like IMDb only actually controlled by industry professionals and researchers who work from actual press releases and cast lists and so on, not guesses). A lot of the specifics are only available to "studio system" subscribers, but they keep a tally on various companies. It's not fully accurate but their entry on the Jim Henson Company has a long list of projects, divided by past (lots), current/on-air (none, Sid isn't registered), coming soon (a ton), and "inactive." They have an entry for The Dark Crystal TV series which was supposed to follow this, categorized as "inactive" based on communications with the studio and so on. They still list "coming soon" for dead projects like The Seven Deadly Sins, and no entry at all for Power. Again, it could be nobody at Henson bothered to submit, and most of the other "coming soon" titles are dead (Good Boy 2???), but it's not exactly encouraging. We don't have hard or fast rules, but I'd say a full year without any news, following years of announcements and optimistic reports without any sign of actual production, is a pretty good reason. Even IMDb has finally categorized the film as status "unknown," and managed to remove the cast list composed wholly of fan guesses and wishful thinking. So in this case, I'm in favor of, at the very least, considering recategorization in the very near future unless we have a definite reason not to. We're nearing the third year anniversary of the initial announcement, again with indications that even pre-development is shaky and uncertain (no further mention of Tartakovsky or a screenwriter or anything, beyond countering the direct to DVD rumors). We can always recategorize if we hear anything. Kind of like I said on Henson, I don't think we need to rush to recategorize as long as the article itself is accurate about the last known status, but in this case, speaking for myself, I'd say waiting until, say, January and yanking if we hear nothing is pretty darn generous. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- My problem with putting it in "Unfinished" is that people come here and say, "oh, Muppet Wiki says Henson never finished the Dark Crystal sequel, so it looks like it was canned." Right now it's in a limbo spot somewhere in between "In Development" and "Canned." IMDb covers its back by saying undetermined, but we don't have a category for that. We don't need one of course, but I think we need more conclusive evidence that the film has really dropped out of active development. —Scott (talk) 01:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- One last note. Over on the related Henson discussion, Danny had mentioned website updates. Empire, which strikes me as kind of flybynight, doesn't update their website that often. Henson updates fairly periodically, and while they still have an "in development" page for Tinseltown (also more than a yea rold; pilot was made and aired but not picked up and no reason right now to assume it will), they have none for this. All they have is a footnote on Power of the Dark Crystal saying "Stay tuned for updates on "Power of The Dark Crystal", the sequel currently in development at The Jim Henson Company." Well, we've stayed tuned and nothing has happened. Rumors have spread that this project is dead and officially canceled for ages. Right, now, if it's not dead, it's definitely more than resting, so recategorizing until we have active news and anything beyond "we've had a slight setback" (given how long it's been) makes sense to me. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Also, Scott, how long do you think we should wait for it to be considered "definitive evidence"? We waited two years before deciding Ernie and Bert Special was dead. I agree a movie needs a longer gestation period, and I understand not wanting to generate fan rumors (rumors that the project died have been going on since early 2007). But in this case, if by the three year mark no signs have surfaced, I don't think it's too precipitous. Though it's the kind of thing Nick does, I may try to e-mail Henson, but they're certainly not pushing or promoting the project beyond that single "stay tuned" notice and the past press releases, so if anything that is fairly suggestive evidence that nothing's happened and that the project has, in all likelihood, died. We can reword the page accordingly so as to avoid saying anything like "Henson has canned it" and to leave an opening just in case news does surface, but likewise I don't see a point in waiting until four or five years have passed if nobody involved tells us it's dead. Hard and fast deadlines on when to consider a project dead really can't be applied, but in this case, I think some kind of limit really is reasonable. Oh, checking some more, the last widespread official Henson press release, or so it seems from this page, was that initial announcement, with everything else coming from MTV, fan excitement, podcasts, or off-hand con announcements or presentations. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- I just sent a respectful e-mail to Nicole Goldman (the only direct contact at Henson with a public e-mail address). I thought of trying someone at Orphanage Animation, but their website is just a blank businesscard with address, phone, and fax numbers but no e-mail. A response may or may not come, and may or may not mean anything, and to some extent this is really just a product of the internet era. In the past, announcements of optioned properties or the next Muppet movie seldom made it outside of the industry or a few privileged fans or insiders. The original Dark Crystal took more than two years to produce, and development may have been even earlier. Still, the fact is that the only full *official* Henson announcement was that the project was planned and an animation studio partnered back in January 2006, with notices to "stay tuned" and "We'll be sure to keep fans up to date as more information is confirmed." Not too different from the Sesame Workshop announcement in 2004 about a Bert and Ernie Special, except that it usually takes less time for a TV special to be produced and the fact that Dark Crystal spawned more media news articles and fan speculation. So if no information at all *is* confirmed within the next few months or year (I'm definitely not saying we need to recat today), I honestly don't think Muppet Wiki is being anything other than honest to remove the project from "In Development" and say that, as of this time as far as is known, it's "unfinished" (if need be, we can always add a notice to that category that projects will be removed if signs of life surface). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I would propose a one-year rule -- if it's been a full year since there's been any reputable mention of the project, then we consider it Unfinished. It's true that movies often take a long time to gestate; The Dark Crystal is an example. But during that gestation time, you get more information. It's in the production company's interest to let people know that the movie is developing, to keep buzz going or to at least remind people that the production still exists. You guys were right about the Fraggle movie -- the screenwriter is blogging about his progress, and that's how we know that that movie is being worked on.
Yes, there were rumors dating back to 2007 that the project was dead. Those rumors were correct. In the age of the internet, if anybody in the world was still working on this project, then somebody would have mentioned it in the last twelve months.
I think a one-year rule is reasonable. We're only changing the category, not deleting the information from the wiki. If we don't have some kind of reasonable standard to say that a project is dead, then we might as well say that Johnny Carson and the Muppet Machine is still in development. Sometimes projects die. -- Danny (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's only been 9-months since Henson last spoke of this project. Nicole Goldman talked about the film's status in a January 2008 installment of the Henson.com podcast, stating:
|“||...[The film] is deep in development here, and we are as committed to it as ever. We are still planning our original vision of a film, which is a theatrical release... We are anticipating a beautiful blend of puppetry and animatronics with CG animation backgrounds as we've said all along... We're all very excited to see the film come together, and we'll be sure to update the fans to the progress as we have those updates confirmed. So stay tuned for more information on Power of the Dark Crystal!||”|
- I think January 2009 is a good date too. To be honest, the Goldman response first came in an e-mail to a few blogs and fans about rumors of a DVD release, and the podcast comment from that time doesn't really say much beyond "stay tuned" and "we are committed" and "we are anticipating" (not "we are actually *doing*"), and it was never released as a formal press release and there's nothing in fact to really indicate where the project was nine months ago outside of "deep development." I e-mailed politely, acknowledging that they probably get a lot of fan e-mails but asking if it's possible to verify if any of the claims in the original 2006 press release are still accurate or provide any generalities or specifics to indicate actual status. I may or may not hear back, but if some news doesn't surface by January (and personally I don't consider "stay tuned" news), I think recategorizing is the best thing. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 02:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- Nice find, Brad. It's good info and worth adding to the page, *but* let's look at what it actually says: "Do you know when the movie is due out?" They’re hoping for 2009." "What role do you have in the production? I’m working on the design of a character, Wendy has helped now in Jen and Kira, like last time, but at the moment they haven’t decided on a start day, I think they're still organizing the pre-production and funding process." So if that seems to imply anything, it implies that Brian Froud hasn't heard anything either and is still going by anticipations that a movie that hadn't started yet would be finished by 2009. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 02:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- One last find. At this point, I think we're going to just wait until January (unless anyone has any objections). But I registered for a one-week only free trial account with InBaseline's Studio System which, as I said, is essentially a film/TV database. The Studio System is generally available only to studio employees, writers, companies, and industry journalists and researchers (I got in because the person screening is a Muppet Wiki fan, so yay!) Their entry for The Power of the Dark Crystal was created by Henson on October 21, 2005. It was last updated on February 1, 2006, changing the status to "active development." Nothing since, and in contrast, Fraggle Rock was updated in May (the same time the Henson press release announced Cory Edwards' signing as a writer) and Henson's created new entries for all of their more recently optioned properties like Doubtful Guest and so-on. It's mildly possible that Henson just hasn't bothered, but it certainly seems to add to the fairly strong evidence that this is dead. Looking around InBaseline's register is interesting, actually. A few projects are listed as "inactive," a move made only when officially notified by the studio, producer, or someone along those lines. This *has* happened with several TV projects, including the Dark Crystal TV tie-in; their official phrasing is "dead," though nobody bothered to update it until July 9 2008. Film projects, however, are still listed as "Upcoming" barring such notice (which has only happened when an option expired and someone thought to update or in a few other cases), so Power of the Dark Crystal is still listed along with Oh, the Places You' Go (announced in 1990; someone updated it in March 2008, which may or may not indicate an actual revival or the possibility that another company entirely has the option now), The Boggart, Good Boy 2, and countless others. So the mounting evidence is enough, in my opinion anyway, to suggest that if no *direct* news from Henson comes out by January, this should indeed by recategorized. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 22:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- If anybody cares, someone asked about this movie at an event Brian was holding in MD a couple days ago and according to him, the movie is still happening. They are taking their time with it according to him. So I doubt the project's dead, it's just not going to happen this decade. --Philo & Gunge 18:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- Just more info parking, but more rumors have been sparked here and there by an Australian Inside Film article. The website and magazine are supposedly "the bible for Australia's filmmakers," but some pieces read as gossip. The specific article, no sources cited, claims that a company called Omnilab has taken over and will use Australian director, crew, and writers, and that Omnilab now "owns the rights to the project" and has received a certificate from funding group Screen Australia. On the one hand, it's not entirely impossible (see Farscape), but this article is the sole source. It also claims this reboot of Power of the Dark Crystal "will have the Henson family stamp of approval, with the Jim Henson Creature Shop reportedly visiting Sydney in July." "Reportedly," no source, not a peep from Henson or anything on Omnilab's website. At this point, especially given what they've been doing with Unstable Fables and the like, and given how much time has passed with the project officially listed as dead with Hollywood groups and so on, it's odd but not impossible that they'd just farm the whole thing out to somebody else and let them bother, since it sounded from Froud and others like nothing had really started beyond a couple hires and the concept art. Anyway, we'll see come January. Barring any definite provable news (and not just "Brian Henson said it will still happen at some event"), it would make sense to rewrite, with the clear understanding that status can change if we have definite signs of life. It may not be dead, but if it doesn't happen this decade or next and with nothing but rumors, there's not a lot of value to listing it as in active development (a lot of Disney films went through this; some were made eventually, others went through attempts every twenty years and still never reached fruition). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 05:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
The news on this project has grown very cold, and I think stating a scheduled release date of 2009 may no longer be accurate. This article references 2006 press releases which are no longer available at those links anymore. Eternal optimist Greg James last posted news about the project in September 2007. It's possible that the project will be revived, but Henson has a long history of producing nothing but press releases and Comic-Con rumors.
The Cinema Blend blog post that Scott referenced in January quoted a vague statement by Nicole Goldman, Henson's Vice President of Marketing and Publicity:
"We are thrilled and grateful that fans are so interested in the progress of Power of the Dark Crystal - an especially important project to us that will require great care and attention throughout the production process. A project of this scale takes a lot of time and energy and we continue to work through the development phase, maintaining our original vision of a film for theatrical release that combines traditional puppetry and animatronics with cutting edge CG animation. We'll be sure to keep fans up to date as more information is confirmed."
This basically doesn't mean anything. They've been "working through the development phase" for more than three years now. If more news surfaces, then that would be great, but right now, I'm skeptical that this will ever get made. I'm going to rewrite the article to take a more objective and less optimistic view. -- Danny (talk) 03:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- That makes sense. I'm taking Power of the Dark Crystal and the tie-in animated series (last news in 2005) off the 2009 page right now. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 03:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- Cool. I rewrote the article, trimming it down just to the things that we could source. It turns out that there are only a couple of mainstream-press articles on the project -- a couple articles from Variety, and an article on MTV.com, who will apparently print anything. Everything else is from fan press.
- I agree, unless a specific month or day is also given and it concerns a more short-term project (merchandise, book, new Sesame video, etc.; the bulk of that comes out when scheduled, or even a couple days earlier in some markets, *if* a specific date is mentioned). -- Andrew Leal (talk) 05:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
More rumor debunking. The other day a Muppet Central article announced that Power of the Dark Crystal would be coming straight to DVD only. What was their source? A chatty piece from Latino Review. And their source? Wizard Universe, the website for Wizard magazine, a comic/toy/movie promotional mag, and the source article says nothing about going straight to DVD. It lists the project with other comic-book themed properties, most of which will be direct to video, but it also includes the AstroBoy remake, which all sources confirm is, at this point in time, slated for a theatrical release. So, if/when the movie gets made (Wizard lists a Winter 2008 date, but aside from a Lisa Henson quote which may or may not be new, there's no real indication of what their sources are either), it's not impossible for it to go straight to DVD, but it's hardly proven. I'm parking all of this here to avoid the back and forth editing which happened with the earlier cancellation rumors. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Cinema Blend received word from Henson that the film is still slated for a theatrical release. —Scott (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I've temporarily protected this page (which in theory should only block non-registered users; I encourage any registered editors to take a stab at it, just to check), due to the rumors going around about the project's cancellation. They may very well be true, but they mostly stem from anonymous sources. One such source has posted here, User talk:184.108.40.206. He wouldn't identify himself when asked, just included the edit summary "I work for the associated press, we just got this news." With the following paragraph: "Production on The Jim Henson Company's sequel to the 1982 cult classic "The Dark Crystal" -- titled "The Power of the Dark Crystal" -- has been put on hold after more than two years of pre-production, casting and preparation. It's believed that Henson Company executives and Genndy Tartakovsky ultimately decided to cancel production on the film and not move foreword. Production is said to be "on hiatus", but it looks unlikely that fans of the original will ever see this follow-up fantasy film completed -- Henson has not commented on the production status and insiders say production is not planned to move forward."
He cut and pasted it here, on Wikipedia, and on the ReelFanatic blog, amongst others. His most recent update included a list of links, but they all seem to be cannibalizing from each other on the rumor, and all seem to have more or less stemmed from the same anonymous source, in all likelihood: Cinematical, Dark HorizonsFilmick, and G4tTV. While it wouldn't surprise me at all if the project were abandoned, right now it's just a lot of anonymous blather and blogs regurgitating amongst themselves. The fact that absolutely nothing has surfaced from "Associated Press," and the general unlikelihood of their covering such a story, especially with speculation and vague references to "insiders," futher raises my doubts. If anyone can find any actual evidence, any non fan blog/anonymous source stated, please, feel free to share. -- Andrew Leal (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Two questions. First, almost all of the information under the "Credits" heading is in the box at the top, so why do we need the "Credits" heading.
Second, I know the plot description comes straight from a Henson press release, but the Dying Sun is one of the 3 suns in the sky, not at the center of the world. --Erik Ebrowne 21:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, right now we only know a limited credit list most of whos involved right now. And except for Producers and Executive Producers these people are also the select fields included the info box at the top. But in time the credits section will grow to include more (if not all) of the major people involved in the film - a lot more than the little box will. So right now it seems reduntant but I think it doesn't hurt and in time it will be more useful to have the cast/crew listing in one place. Look at some of the other movies on the wiki, they list the director, release date, and whatnot in the box and in the article.
- Second, the plot description is straight from Henson. I would say that it is accurate. How do you know the dying sun is one of the 3 in the sky and not at the center of the world? Only one official statment about the plot has been released and it says they are tying to "reignite the dying sun that exists at the center of the planet." I would say to go with that until we know more about what's going on, we should not assume what the plot will be. We should just go with the official information. And officially the dying sun is said to be at the center of the planet. -- BradFraggle 22:53, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't say that the dying sun is one of the 3 in the sky, I said that the Dying Sun is one of the 3 in the sky (the other two being the Rose Sun and the Great Sun). The mention of a dying sun in the plot description makes me wonder if someone got confused. Press releases can have errors. Anyway, I'm not suggesting a change, I'm just registering my doubts about the given plot description. --Erik Ebrowne 00:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
Edit, minor: Edit
can the caption under the second picture be changed from "appears" to singular "appear"?
Minor! :) thanks! Noogie 01:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)