![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
teslaThe things that all of the critics inexplicably got wrong about Stardust:
1. Stardust was a graphic novel. Nope. It was an illustrated novel. Without the illustrations it would have been a novel. Remove the illustrations from a graphic novel and you have (at best) a TV script.
2. Capturing the star (and eating her heart) will make the witches immortal. The witches clearly say that doing so will regain them their youth, but that they will continue to age. It's like resetting the odometer but not disabling it, and continuing to drive the car.
3. The dead princes' ghosts are in "limbo." Well, no; they're in Stormhold. That's why we get to see them. I could be just as wrong about this one; I think locations probably get a little fuzzy when one is dead.
But didn't the Catholics declare limbo doctrinally unsound, whereupon it collapsed into itself in a puff of illogic?
1. Stardust was a graphic novel. Nope. It was an illustrated novel. Without the illustrations it would have been a novel. Remove the illustrations from a graphic novel and you have (at best) a TV script.
2. Capturing the star (and eating her heart) will make the witches immortal. The witches clearly say that doing so will regain them their youth, but that they will continue to age. It's like resetting the odometer but not disabling it, and continuing to drive the car.
3. The dead princes' ghosts are in "limbo." Well, no; they're in Stormhold. That's why we get to see them. I could be just as wrong about this one; I think locations probably get a little fuzzy when one is dead.
But didn't the Catholics declare limbo doctrinally unsound, whereupon it collapsed into itself in a puff of illogic?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-08-16 03:05 am (UTC)