“So I suggested the posters say, ‘Stardust: It’s Not a Sequel to Anything.’

“And they very politely didn’t ask for any more suggestions after that. But I’m not so sure it’s such a terrible idea.”

Considering the flood of films that have opened this summer with a numeral attached to their titles, he may be on to something. Of course, with names like Claire Danes, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert De Niro and Peter O’Toole attached to the project, “Stardust” is likely to stand out from the crowd anyway.

And then there’s the Gaiman name, which is more than enough to grab people’s attention on its own.

Gaiman is a multi-awardwinning author of short stories, comic books, occasional poetry and a string of ingenious fantasy novels that invariably make their way to the bestseller lists. His accomplishments have won him a huge following of admiring readers and a horde of fans who worship him with a fervor usually reserved for rock stars.

But though there have been a number of near-misses, he’s never cracked the big-time movie barrier until now. However, for approximately the next year, a virtual parade of Gaiman-based films is slated for theatrical release.

“People have the perception that I’ve recently been beavering away, turning out movie projects

First up is “Stardust,” based on his 1999 novel. Written in an entertaining echo of early 20th-century fantasists like Lord Dunsany and accompanied by delicate illustrations by Charles Vess, the story is an unabashed excursion into fairytale country. Both book and film relate the story of a young man who crosses into a magical realm in search of a fallen star he’s promised to bring back to the girl he loves.

His simple quest turns into a full-blown adventure that includes murderous witches, bemused ghosts, a flying ship and unexpected romance.

“It’s a very small, very simple, very comfortable little story,” said Gaiman, “and I like the movie that we’ve made of it. It really is a lovely film, the perfect date movie. It has the same sense of humor and sense of magic to it that ‘The Princess Bride’ had. The studio, of course, doesn’t want to make those sort of comparisons, but everyone who’s seen the final print feels the same way, and they enjoy it for the same reasons.”

That may come as a surprise to those who have noted the trailer’s emphasis on action and especially swordplay, an element that was virtually nonexistent in Gaiman’s book.

It’s been an object of concern for the author’s fans, a number of whom have expressed fears over the movie’s departures from the original.

“I understand their thinking,” said Gaiman, “but I can promise you that if I’d thought it was a bad film of the book I wouldn’t be giving interviews all over the place and saying how thrilled I was with it. I’d be using weasel words if forced to comment, and keeping a low profile.

“As for the sword nonsense,” sighed Gaiman, “people don’t understand what trailers are about. They’re constructed not to tell the story of the movie but to get people’s attention. The early trailers were sort of a desperate attempt by Paramount to avoid saying the ‘Princess Bride’ word. But if you see the film, you’ll see it’s not about swordfighting.

It has action, yes, but also romance and magic and a wonderful wicked witch played by Michelle Pfeiffer, who is marvelous.”

Those fretting fans may have overlooked the fact that, though he didn’t write or direct it, Gaiman is one of the film’s producers.

“What I did was find people I liked, such as Matthew Vaughn, the director, and Jane Goldman, the writer, and trusted and let them get on with it. Occasionally they’d suggest a change and I’d say no, that has to stay in, but I wanted to let the experts do their jobs. Some things were signed off on and then had to be abandoned because of the budget—a fight between a lion and a unicorn, for instance, and even some characters.

And, of course, shooting the entire book would have given us a film so many hours long that no one would sit in a theater to watch it, so parts of it would have had to be trimmed away in any case.

“That’s why we have a ship’s captain with a different name in the movie. In the book, when we escape from the inn we get a holiday and things ease up for a bit. But when you’re telescoping events in a film, we found that it worked a lot better if things started ramping up. And so the captain, who was named Alberic originally, became a different person, and we changed his name to Captain Shakespeare.

That’s Robert De Niro, who’s brought something to the role that I’ve never seen him do before.

He has some wonderful scenes with Charlie Cox and Claire Danes that fit in beautifully with this view of the story.”

Asked if there’s a similar reason the story’s leading man (played by Cox) is named Tristran in the book and Tristan in the movie, he laughed.

“No, he’s very much the same character. Bizarre but true: There was a UK trade paperback edition that had a typo on the back cover that spelled it Tristan. When Matthew was doing the final version of his shooting script, he picked up the book and wrote down the hero’s name as it was on the back cover and it stuck. I don’t mind. I’d like to think that if Tristan met Tristran they’d get along quite well. They have many shared experiences.

“Yes, people who know the book backward and forward will see that there have been cuts and changes, but my experience is that that’s a good thing.

“My very first graphic novel was one called ‘Violent Cases,’ and I was fortunate that it came to the attention of a very good theatrical director who promptly adapted it into an incredibly faithful adaptation and put it on stage. That was a cool and wonderful thing, but at the end of it I had to face up to the fact that it hadn’t been very good—because things that worked brilliantly on the page didn’t always work in the same way on the stage. It’s a very good realization to have when you’re age 26 or 27 that different media are different.

“So perhaps one day there may be some sort of definitive BBC eight-hour version, but in the here and now I’m completely thrilled by the version that we have. It’s a smart, funny, romantic, exciting adaptation of ‘Stardust.’ I think you can have a wonderful time watching it even if you’ve never read the book. And I’m proud of it on both scores.”

James Vance 581-8372
james.vance@tulsaworld.com