Its ok, the first one was loosely based on the comic. Pretty much the story and its message and charachters was so vastly different really you couldve called the movie something else, in anycase it doesnt matter, the sequel will be just s different from the comics as well.

Just because a writer wrote a Winnie the Pooh script doesn't mean he can't also write an action movie script with a lot of mindless violence. Versatile writers can actually write in a number of different styles and forms.

Some guy named Shakespeare wrote both comedies and tragedies as well as both fantasies and historical dramas. WTF?

The snark in this article is yet another indication that SciFi Wire has been handed over to amateur journalists with fanboy attitudes.

@Thom
The Sci-fi community is a small group of viewers who love their sci-fi.
The sci-fi fans have a fanboy attitude and want to experience a fantasy life, enjoying sci-fi, not choosing to be booooored to death with Shakespeare and drama.

If you are looking for Shakespeare journalists, you wont find any here on the scifiwire geek webpage, WTF

Starion,

I've been coming to SciFi Wire for my science fiction news for at least four and a half years (perhaps longer if it was around before that), so I'm part of this community. However, since SciFi Wire branched off onto it's own Web site separate from SciFi.com, the reporting of "news" has become snarky and amateurish.

I'm looking for professional science fiction journalism, not another Newsarama.

WTF! back atcha.

B**ch better have my hunny!

@Starion (and indirectly Thom)

I'm not going to defend SCI FI Wire or its questionable editorial choices and I'm certainly not going to rush to the defense of the monkeys in business suits making programming decisions for the Sci-Fi Channel, but with respect to the community itself, I feel your comments to Thom sell us all short.

The Sci-fi community is actually a _large_ group of viewer, _readers_, _gamers_ and _creators_ who love their sci-fi.

The sci-fi fans have all manner of diverse interests, social, education and economic backgrounds and espouse all sorts of attitudes and passions.

Some dismiss Shakespeare as boring, other read works like The Tempest, open their minds, and produce seminal works like Forbidden Planet.

Some people see Sci-fi as all special effects with no room for character or plot, others take a campy kids show like the '79 version of Battlestar Galactica and re-imagine it as one of the best dramas on TV.

To summarily dismiss concepts like serious drama, professionalism, journalistic integrity and the craft of writing as having no role to play in "enjoying" sci-fi (and perhaps even detracting from it) is a disservice to the sci-fi community as a whole (A bit like rebranding Sci-fi as SyFy: the syphillis channel for 30 year old geeks who live in their parents' basements and think of the Victoria Secret catalog under their bed as their "porn stash")

You may find Shakespear boring, and that is your right. I could say the same thing about Asimov (sure, he's one of the three pillars of sci-fi, but his stuff just never worked for me, oh well) We probably don't even have the same favorite flavor of ice cream (mine's coffee oreo, BTW). The point is such thing are just matters of personal taste. Just because Thom's tastes vary from your own is no reason to ridicule his point about writing or to demean all of us by stigmatizing the sci-fi community at large with an ill-conceived stereotype. We've got a lot more dimension to us than that.

Fortunately Sci-fi fans also tend to be very open-minded and generally more tolerant that your average joe off the streets, so say what you like. You are more than welcome to voice your opinion, just know you don't speak for all of us

starion, I'm a fan of Shakespeare. A lot of early fantasy originates with him and half the antagonists of the cult animated series Gargoyles came from Shakespeare.

As for this article, I'll admit the writer choice IS odd however, yes, a good writer can be diverse.

Stephen King has written serious drama and horror. Clive Barker has written children's blooks and The Books of Blood.

R. L. Stine has written young adult horror and adult suspense while producing the likes of Eureka's Castle.

The woman who wrote Disney's Beauty and the Beast the Broadway musical's libretto also wrote the Libretto for The vampire Lestat play.

The composer for the Scarlet Pimpernel also did Dracula for Broadway.

The Brothers Grimm collected Faery tales and werewolf folklore. Oscar Wilde wrote the horror story The Picture of Dorian Gray and children's stories like The Happy Prince, The Fisherman and the mermaid and The Canterville Ghost.

Good writers are diverse and should be diverse.

The first one didnt leave much opening for sequels.

J. Michael Strascznski, creator of Babylon 5, got started working on such shows as Murder, She Wrote, Thundercats, and Walker: Texas Ranger. Carl Binder, one of the fans' favorite Stargate: Atlantis writers, wrote the screenplay for Disney's Pocahontas. It's pretty stupid to think that someone who wrote one kind of work couldn't write excellent stuff for a different kind of work. I think Shakespeare is boring, by the way, so this has nothing to do with wanting to recognize every genre as equally good. It's just plain dumb to think someone who writes in one genre can't also do good work in another. Some of the best SciFi writers got started by doing other things. That's the nature of the business at this point.

@Mandy
Faery stories at the time of the brothers grimm were basically horror stories, just like werewolf lore, they are a bad example, as they had little diversity.