Kate Elliott March 4th, 2009
Some folk cannot abide spoilers–it ruins a book for them–while others read for process not goal and therefore do not mind spoilers. Now, it makes no never mind to me whether a person hates spoilers, or doesn’t mind spoilers, or checks ahead to see who lives and who dies because the anticipation is killing them. As I say, let a person be the reader they want to be.
As for me, I personally prefer to read or view for the first time without knowing what is going to happen; I like to experience the plot “in real time” with all the surprises, setbacks, revelations and shocks that may entail. I enjoy the experience of my own reactions, and if I really really like a book or film I will read/see it again, which provides yet another experience, the experience of watching the known story unfold and anticipating or recognizing the way the narrative builds and twists.
Others will approach the reading (viewing) experience differently, and that’s as it should be. Continue Reading »
Kevin Andrew Murphy December 31st, 2008
I have just watched The Seeker: The Dark is Rising, a year after it came out (DVR is your friend, except maybe in this case) and I’m gasping in horror at how bad it was, and for no good reason. You’ve got all the elements that would seem to make a great movie: Beloved children’s classic as source material? Check. Lavish sets? Check. Gorgeous costuming? Check. Actors ranging from competent to excellent? Check. Impressive and appropriate special effects? Check. Script by a competent screenwriter? Um, well, I understand they got the guy who did the adaptation for Trainspotting, which I understand was a decent movie, but….
First off, let me make one thing clear: Departure from the source material is fine. The Wizard of Oz dumped the scene in the Dainty China Country from the movie adaptation because it was boring, extraneous, and painfully lame. Glomming the Good Witch of the North and Glinda the Sorceress of the South together makes sense from a dramatic perspective, though making her a bubbly airhead was a bit much (although the MGM version does have her fans). Having the Wicked Witch of the West be responsible for the poppies is fine for purposes of drama, and having them be foiled by snow as opposed to field mice is likewise fine for purposes of staging. Mary Norton’s The Magic Bedknob and Bonfires and Broomsticks do not contain Nazis, musical numbers, a young Miss Price, or magical football matches with talking animals–though all of these things are very fun in Bedknobs and Broomsticks, a movie I adored as a child and had to thank for introducing me to the equally good (if significantly different) book. And Alfonso Cuaron’s version of A Little Princess took numerous liberties with the original novel, including but not limited to moving the setting from London to New York, making Becky black instead of Cockney, and most significantly, having Sarah’s dad not be dead of bad investments in India but instead poisoned by mustard gas and MIA in WWI.
The difference here is that The Wizard of Oz, Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Cuaron’s A Little Princess are all great movies. The reason The Seeker isn’t is not because elements were changed, but because elements were changed for the wrong reasons and the wrong way. Continue Reading »