Why So Many Changes?
I too am a big fan of Madeline L'Engle and especially the Murry family
time-travel series; so I was both excited and trepidatious to see a
film version of this well-known first book in the series, especially
since it was produced by Disney (I love Disney, but I don't always love
their adaptations of stories that were perfectly fine to me to begin
However, I rented it and was mostly pleased -- although Meg, Calvin &
Charles didn't exactly fit my picture of them in my head (based on
L'Engle's descriptions in the book) the acting was great and they got
the "feel" of the characters mostly right (I missed the "fierceness" of
Meg from the book and the glasses & braces, but she was still very well
portrayed). The scenes from Camazotz are chilling, and gave me the same
creepy feeling as I get when I read the book. And the plot stayed
generally around the same place as the book, most of the time; it
didn't veer as far as Disney's "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe"
did. Allison Elliot is a great actress (loved her in "The Spitfire
Grill") so it was nice to see her as Mrs. Who, pointy hat or not. Most
of the scenery really helped me feel a part of the story; as for the
look of the characters, I can be open-minded and accept that, like Aunt
Beast says, "it's not how things look, but how they are."
However, I just don't understand some of the little changes they made
that seem completely unnecessary and really annoyed me as a fan of the
books. The biggest one is WHY did they change the names of the Murry
parents? I've grown to feel almost a part of this family, so imagine my
shock when dedicated father Alex and loving mother Kate suddenly became
"Jack" and "Dana"! I'd love to know the reason for this, because it
seems pointless. It totally ruined the first 20 minutes of the film for
me, because I kept ranting about it until my husband began rolling his
eyes. And it didn't make sense to change the breed of Fort (the dog)
either; as someone else said, "how hard was it to find a black Lab?"
Bigger changes, like replacing most of IT's role with The Man With Red
Eyes, make more sense (IT was creepy enough in the book, I did NOT want
to see IT on the screen!) but the aforementioned minor character
changes ticked me off. I'd love to hear someone from Disney explain the
choices they made.
I recommend the film to fans of the book and non-fans alike; but be
warned if you cherish the book as much as I do, and try to separate the
film from the book and enjoy it for what it is, not what it should be..
reikster watch Nieruchomy Poruszyciel movie
Meg Murry is having a difficult time. Her father, astrophysicist Dr. Jack Murry, has mysteriously disappeared. Her youngest brother, Charles Wallace, a genius, is teased and belittled and thought to be stupid because he does not talk to anyone but family. Meg does not get along with her peers, teachers, her 10-year-old twin brothers, or even with herself. Into this unhappy situation comes a stranger, the mysterious, weirdly dressed Mrs Whatsit, and her friends Mrs Who and Mrs Which. They take Meg, Charles Wallace and their new friend Calvin O'Keefe via tesseract to other planets, preparing the children for a mission to rescue Dr. Murry from the malevolent "IT" on the planet Camazotz. Along the way they ride on the back of a beautiful winged creature (the transformed Mrs Whatsit), learn about the shadow of tangible evil known as the Black Thing, and visit the Happy Medium. Once they reach Camazotz, however, it is up to Meg, Calvin and Charles Wallace to face the dangers of CENTRAL Central Intelligence, aided only by each other and a pair of Mrs Who's glasses. They do find and rescue Dr. Murry, but Charles Wallace is seduced away from his family by IT's agent, the Man with Red Eyes, and thus comes under the control of IT. Dr. Murry manages to tesser himself, Meg and Calvin away from Camazotz, but Charles Wallace is left behind, trapped in the mind of IT. Angry with her father, Calvin and herself for leaving Charles Wallace behind, Meg is cared for by the sightless and motherly Aunt Beast on the planet Ixchel, and argues with Mrs Which about returning to rescue her brother. Returning alone to Camazotz, Meg must find a quality in herself—love—to free Charles Wallace, and possibly free the planet Camazotz as well..
reikster watch Happiness movie
this is a very fantastic movie.
marii20 watch Bug movie
I love the movie holes it's very interesting and I absolutely love the movie A wrinkle in time it's my favorite movie in the whole world I just absolutely love it .
ejimenez watch High Noon movie
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a great movie about a man who owns a chocolate factory and prepares a contest in which he puts 5 golden tickets in 5 common chocolatwe bars that will be sent out to different parts of the world. The winners of the golden tickets will be invited to the factory and there is abig surprise awaiting the kid who can stay until the end....
diyora watch The Blackout movie
the best movie ever! love it .
wrote it love it never hate ppl say it is good so try it.
Holes is a great movie for 10-12 year olds.
The Fog 2005 brought a few things new to the table after its first appearance, but the bottom line is there are dead people in the fog killing the town's people because their fore-fathers wouldn't let the dead people land their ship in a storm....'course the ship was a plague ship..that had lots of gold on it...and the town minister put them up to it. Revenge. An old saw. But there really was little point to them ravaging the whole town. It would have at least made sense if they just killed off the decendants or stopped when they got the gold back. It would have been a better movie and not slid into the slash & gash category. But both of them had the scare factor down pat..
The Adjustment Bureau gives you enuf of all things to satisfy. There is this guy who is going against all odds to try to get the girl he meets and falls for. Even when he finds out that the odds means going against supernatural forces, as in Fate....as in....maybe, like God. He gets some help along the way from a "guardian angel" who feels maybe they've been wrong with their understanding of "The Plan" as it applies to the hero. And thru it we get to ask the questions, what if....what if we challenged the odds more? Not disrespectfully thumbing our nose at God, but just trying harder and harder because in our hearts we truly believe He wants us to go the way we are going. It has some surprises. And some of it is predictable, but somehow....it doesn't matter because we remember times in ourown lives when we wished we had tried harder, and what if..... It satisfies..
ilike a wrinhkle in time movie ,it helps me.
What the Heck?!?!
I first read "A Wrinkle in Time" when I was seven years old, and since
then it has been one of my all time favorite books. I read it several
times, though in recent years I hadn't picked it up. When I heard that
a TV movie was being made, I was excited. I thought, "Hey, TV, that
means that they can do a miniseries or something, get the story right!"
How wrong I was.
The acting, I must admit, was good. If I totally disassociate the movie
from the book, it's fine. But the fact is, as an adaptation, the movie
really sucked. There's not much of better way to put it. I was watching
the movie tonight, for the first (and last) time, and spent the entire
time thinking to myself "That didn't happen", or "Why did they change
that, of all things!" I started re-reading the book, and tried to keep
a list of changes.
When I had filled up a page with writing before hitting page 30, I
stopped keeping the list.
Disney did a fine job of movie making in this instance, but again, I
have to really forget that the book even exists to much enjoy the plot
of the movie.
They had a chance to make something wonderful: The actors were well
chosen (even though Mrs. Murray should have had bright red hair, the
actress did a fine job), and they did a good job with what they were
given. The witches were a bit off from the book descriptions
(especially Mrs. Which, who should have been a more stereotypical witch
in black robes with a pointy hat), but they were fine actresses, and I
could have overlooked it. But it was about when they introduced the man
with red eyes that the story took a major turn from the plot of the
book. One MAJOR point of contention for me was Mrs. Whatsit's
centaur-like form. What in the world was that, anyhow? It was supposed
to look like a centaur, but not. And what they did was stick a head on
a horse - no human torso, and the proportions were all wrong, and it
was not nearly the beautiful creature it was supposed to be. Bah.
Here is my recommendation: if you have read and loved Madeleine
L'Engle's books as much as I have, don't watch this movie. If you
haven't read the books and plan to, watch the movie beforehand so you
aren't as disappointed as I was. If you don't plan to read the books,
it's safe. If you've seen the movie and plan to read the books, you are
in for a real treat.
I give this 1.5 stars out of 5, for the actors playing the kids, the
father, and props to the rest for trying with a screenplay that
butchered the story.
I feel bad for them..