Comments | keestone: Dark is Rising speculation...

keestone

Dark is Rising speculation...

Sep 04, 2007 02:24

So, when I saw Stardust, I noticed that one of the trailers was for something called The Seeker: The Dark is Rising. My first reaction was honestly, "Squeee!!! They're making a movie out of The Dark is Rising! Yay! Really good books get attention paid to them! Okay, so they're making Will American now. That could work. Yay! The Dark is ( Read more... )

movies

Comments 8

jade_sabre_301 September 4 2007, 02:38:22 UTC

Haha. Are you friends with Rowana? If not, do you mind if I direct her to this post? I suspect you and she would have a great deal to talk about.

(having never read The Dark is Rising books, I cannot actually comment on the content. From the sounds of it, though--especially with this Ian McShane guy--it sounds like it's going to be...a tragedy? No, a farce. ~_^)

keestone September 4 2007, 03:16:58 UTC

Go ahead and direct Rowana and whoever else you want to the post. Also, go find some Susan Cooper in the library. I think I can guarantee you'll love her. :) It's been a long time since I've read most of the books though, and I'm now 5,500 miles away from them again.

And Ian McShane? Ye gods and little fishes! The man got a chance to play Merlin and he doesn't even realize it. Stupid stupid stupid! This interview is going to color everything I see him in. He can't hack a third grade reading level book and he thinks an epic magical/mystical battle between good and evil is Science Fiction. How can he be a good actor if he can't understand his roles?

rowana September 4 2007, 15:23:14 UTC

Hi, Jade pointed me in this direction. You've put it very well - I can see how the books would be difficult to make into a good movie, and I'm trying to stay ambivalent, but it's difficult, for the reasons you listed. I've never seen Ian McShane in anything else, but Christopher Eccleston is a big draw for me.

From what I hear, just about everything's been changed except for the names. It's been a while since I read most of the books, but I remember loving the sense of family and community - and the fact that what really made Will an outsider for me, was that in a family where everyone was so close, he would always have a secret, and that he would - as far as I remember - outlive them all. It seems to me that having him already alienated from his family ruins a huge part of what seemed really appealing about the characters and Will's own story.

It seems a shame, because I think a film done well could have been fantastic.

(And hey, a Neil Gaiman fan too, I must go and see Stardust sometime.)

keestone September 4 2007, 16:05:17 UTC

BWAH! I love your icon!

". . .in a family where everyone was so close, he would always have a secret, and that he would - as far as I remember - outlive them all."

Exactly!

Christopher Eccleston seems to be a big draw for a lot of people. I've really only seen him in Heroes so far. He was very good in that, but I'm not to the point of seeing anything that has him in it. As well, he looks nothing like how I picture the Rider.
I'll probably still end up seeing the movie. (Sometimes it's really nice to have an unlimited card at the cinema. I won't feel guilty for wasting my money, because it's already been wasted. It's only the wasted time I have to mourn, and I sat all the way through the Simpsons Movie.) I guess I'm glad I found out ahead of time what it looks like they're doing to the book. Forewarned, I shouldn't be quite so disappointed.

Now, go see Stardust. One of the best movies of the year! (Competing with Surf's Up and Die Hard 4.0

carbonelle September 6 2007, 06:00:37 UTC

I suspect the buzz is accurate. I'm sorry to see Walden screw this one up.

Or rather, I'm sorry to miss seeing TDIR adapted to the screen: it's actually a very cinematic story, played straight). Whatever this movie is (and it might be very enjoyable) it isn't TDIR

Since they had the kindnes to change the title, though, I may forgive them.

keestone September 6 2007, 14:02:54 UTC

It both is and isn't cinematic as a story. If you hold to the Hollywood conventions of Bad Fantasy, of course they'd have to change it. (Sigh.) I suspect that a faithful adaptation would end up a classic but wouldn't make a great deal of money, partially because they wouldn't know how to market it.

I recognized it as an adaptation of The Dark is Rising, so they didn't change the title enough. :(

carbonelle September 6 2007, 20:29:31 UTC

I disagree: Call it "magic realism" (Like Water for Chocolate") and see where it takes you.

The strenghts of The first Dark is Rising Movie are (1) Atmosphere (2) Personal / family relationships and (3) Keen magic-y stuff.

The first Hollywood can capture easily--more easily than can an author--by music and lighting.

The second is harder--it requires good character actors and an attention to scenes that develop the relationships. The popularity of soaps, the MTV's "real world" and shows like "Friends" demonstrate that this aspect is still very, very commercial.

Finally, we live in the golden age of special effects. All the coolness the author described is easy-peasey nowadays.

The problem is, I suspect that book-to-film adaptors are like translators. What's wanted in any translation is someone who's a native speaker in both languages, a thing harder to come by than you'd think. Whoever adapted this book for Walden is probably fluent only in film, not book ( ... )

keestone September 7 2007, 02:06:50 UTC

I totally agree with you on the aspects of The Dark is Rising that are very cinematic and could make a great movie. There are aspects of it, like the bitter cold brought on by the Dark, that I just don't think can be evoked through the other senses. (The reader's imagination just rules sometimes.) Also, the director has gone on record in interview about the cinematic problems of a lot of the action in the book being internal. Not that it would be too much to worry about if they did get other things right with the atmosphere. They could do so much with the rooks, the music, the lighting, the film angles. . .

Personal / Family relationships is an interesting one. It is a strength of the book. The thing is, it doesn't fit the common screen stereotypes (or bad Hollywood conventions) of friction. And unfortunately, it looks like the screenwriter adapting it didn't know how to handle it, so he changed it. If that is true, then they've messed up with the atmosphere as well because so much of the atmosphere is the community -- the ( ... )