Skip to main content

adaptation comparison - How does the Movie, "The Seeker - The Dark is Rising" compare to the books by Susan Cooper?


I've not seen the movie, but I really enjoyed the books as a child and I am getting a literature unit ready for my daughter using the books. I wondered how faithful the movie is to the books in considering whether to plan on watching it after we are done reading or not.


I would like an answer with a little detail. I'm quite certain it won't follow the stories exactly, but what is changed? Missing characters? Huge chunks of plot or just small tweaks? Does it correspond to Over Sea Under Stone or do its creators try to fold all five movies into one? I really don't want, "Great movie, but nothing like the book." Or "Movie sucked, don't watch it." Please include the WHY. Thanks.



Answer




It hurt to watch this movie! It is based on the book "The Dark Is Rising", but was badly altered, it seems, in the name of making it more commercial. I have tried to wipe it from my mind, but quite a few things stayed with me:




  • The wonderful, caring, loving Stanton family was messed about with, diminished, siblings chopped out and pointless conflict and hate added.




  • Merriman's character was severely diminished.




  • Will has an evil twin.





  • They became American, I guess also for marketing purposes.




  • Will is older, because maybe there are too many 11-year-old magic users?




  • There is a love interest.





  • Pretty much all the beautiful Celtic myths were chucked out - ie, the heart of the story.




This is an interview with Susan Cooper. Please note the last lines,



"Cooper is waiting for the movie, but with a certain sadness. She says she sent a letter requesting changes to the film's script, but she's not sure any alterations were made."



This is one review: http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-seeker-the-dark-is-rising,3258/


This is the IMDB page, there is a fairly accurate review at the end of the page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0484562/?ref_=sr_1



(There is also a wikipedia page, but I'm not sure how people here feel about links to wikipedia?)


You could maybe watch it with your daughter as an exercise in how books are converted to movies, but I really wouldn't recommend it.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Do the Kwikspell courses work?

In Harry Potter we are introduced to Kwikspell course in The Chamber of Secrets (and never hear about it again). We see Filch taking courses, presumably by mail. The descriptions of Kwikspell make me think it is for people who are weak in magic (kind of like how Neville was supposed to be when he was younger), but had magic in them nonetheless. However, Ron's comments later in the chapter make it sound like it is mainly for Squibs to learn magic. However, it is strongly implied through out all the books that Squibs are essentially Muggles, and will never be able to do magic. How then is a Kwikspell course supposed to work? Do we have any information to know if it works at all? Is it a scam? An answer from any level of canon is welcome. Answer Kwikspell courses are (probably) useful to some wizards, but not to squibs. The Kwikspell course literature comes with two testimonials. Madam Z. Nettles of Topsham writes: ‘I had no memory for incantations and my potions were a family joke...

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...