Copyright

All blog posts, unless otherwise noted, are copyrighted to the Author (that's me) and may not be used without written permission.

September 30, 2007

The Dark Is Rising

When I first heard they were doing The Dark is Rising as a movie, I was ecstatic. Susan Cooper's novels are so visual, so arresting, and so subtle that I thought they would translate well and be great on-screen. Plus, with their tie ins to Arthurian legend, I thought it would be a great way to reintroduce those legends on-screen after some duds relating to those legends in recent history. The fact that they were skipping my favorite book in the series, Over Sea, Under Stone, in favor of the four books that focus on Will Stanton, I was willing to overlook.

And then I started hearing rumors about the changes they were making. At first, I didn't think too much about them as all directors and scriptwriters make changes they hope will make the books more "cinematic" (as an aside, it doesn't seem to matter how visual the originating story is-- even when it is a comic book which is practically a story board already).

But then I kept reading and hearing more items on the changes. I started seeing interviews. And now they have changed the title of the movie and have released some previews that, until I looked up the movie on IMDb.com , I didn't recognize as The Dark is Rising at all. When someone who knows the novels doesn't even recognize the story in the trailers for the movie, I think you could say that some red flags were raised.

Without going into detail myself, this blogger has already created an in-depth grid that shows the incredible number of changes they have made.

Link

I was hoping for the LotR treatment; changes made being acceptable even if a tad annoying to fans of the books, in order to make a good movie/series. Instead, it appears we have something closer to Catwoman, a movie that barely shares the name of the original source and is otherwise unrecognizable.

The biggest complaint I have is that the lead in the books has a normal, helpful, supportive family and that familial relationship is pretty much the point of the novels and allows Will to be the champion he needs to be. You would think, in this time of relative moral decay and the destruction of the nuclear family, that filmmakers would want to show us the power of a strong family and good family ties. But, no, the central source of strength and power for the film version of this much-loved character has turned into something unrecognizable, ego-based, and meritless.

And don't get me started on changing Will to American and ignoring the entirety of the Arthurian legend-- it basically means this cannot be the start of a movie series as the remaining books (3-5, for some reason they are ignoring book 1 and starting with book 2 for the films) deal heavily in British and Arthurian legend.

So, this movie has leaped from being in my top 4 list of movies to see this year to not even on the considered list. It will take an incredible number of positive reviews and word of mouth to make me go to this in the theater.

I am sitting here quite literally scratching my head and wondering what the hell they were thinking.

1 comment:

  1. That really is a shame when they completely butcher a story. :-( I don't understand the need!

    And don't get me started on 'Catwoman.' I'm sure I left a few IQ points laying on the floor in the theatre for that one - I actually felt less intelligent for suffering through it when I left. :-P

    ReplyDelete