The Seeker
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.97 You Save: $11.01 (73%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Seeker
Movie Review: The Seeker
Summary: 3 Stars
While there were a lot of interesting adaptations, some of the changes did not seem to serve the story. Will's move into the attic became a way to have his brothers pick on him instead of the treat that his brother Stephen provided for him. The brother who died before Stephen's birth became Will's twin who was stolen at birth. Other than that, I enjoyed how they tried to accomodate the book action to film.Movie Review: Not a movie to strain yourself seeking
Summary: 3 Stars
I rented this DVD and allowed the replay to run it's normal course. I was not bored but the movie was not anything to shout about. Basically it is an adventure movie best enjoyed probably by Harry Porter fans. A seeker to return the power of the light? 'let there be dark' is a corny idea but certainly not novel!Movie Review: Great cinematography, weak ending
Summary: 3 Stars
It's a good family movie in my opinion, but the ending is fairly weak. I won't spoil anything here about the ending for those that are interested in seeing it, but the overall great cinematography makes it worth seeing. If your children enjoyed the Narnia movies, this is fairly similar in scope and fantasy.Movie Review: good for young audiences & not so good if thought about a lot
Summary: 2 Stars
There was definitely some talent involved in the making of this film. A lot of the camera work is very creative, unusual angles are effectively used in many scenes (including brief cuts with it being upside down that are subtle enough not to be easily noticed!).
However, the creativity seemed to run short in a lot of ways. A lot of the shots of the 'rider' were slightly reminiscent of the Nazgul in the Lord of the Rings, particularly the times when he is mounted. Additionally, while the style used to establish the mood around the 'rider' was effective in the beginning, it did not vary much over the course of the movie, and thus began to feel stale by the end. The director also could not seem to resist the urge to slow down action shots in 'Matrix' style.
As for the acting, Alexander Ludwig does a good job as Will Stanton. Christopher Eccleston is a very talented actor, and seems to be holding back in this movie, somehow, or not quite on his game, which is rather disappointing (maybe he dislikes Romania).
Now, the biggie: the story. All in all, I have to rate this by far as one of the weakest book adaptations that I have seen (ok, the Scifi Channel adaptation of 'A Wizard of Earthsea' was FAR worse). That does not mean it is a terrible movie though. The book is of a high enough quality that even this watered down, very loose adaptation of it still has some merit.
What is difficult for me to understand though is that the novel was saturated with the myths and traditions of the british isles, and that whole feeling is entirely removed from the movie. Some have suggested that this was because the director felt these were in opposition to his Christian beliefs (which seems odd as King Arthur is universally portrayed as a Christian). The signs were originally all in the shape of celtic crosses, for instance, and the last great battle which the movie places as '1000 years ago' was, in the book, the battle of baden hill with King Arthur (and Merriman Lyon actually being Merlin), etc. This is all removed, and the movie could just as easily have taken place in Romania, where they filmed it.
The biggest problem that I had though is that instead of him being part of something bigger than himself in the battle against the dark, this telling of it has the other 'Old Ones' have to resort to cross bows and swords, because they seem to have virtually no power of their own. Not only does this lack literary sense, it also has the effect of making much of the movie feel like a superhero-worship film, instead of an epic, large scale battle which is much more. Will becomes this embodiment of light, placed opposite the 'rider', who was the embodiment of the dark. This one-on-one situation might appeal to modern movie audiences, but just serves to be reductionist and effectively VASTLY limits both what the light and the dark are.
The sub-plot about his father being a physicist who had studied the actual nature of light and dark struck me as a total non-sequitur, which did little to nothing to enhance the story and just sucked up time which should have been used in more meaningful character development.
Another sore thumb is that members of his family get carried on his time journeys with him, and he doesn't just wipe their memory (a power old ones have in the book) afterwards. Aside from being weirded out at the moment, the subject never comes up again as it would in reality.
The ending was particuarly painful. What was, in the past, an epic battle between light and dark which the light barely won, was a quick and trite utter dominion of the dark by will (without the aid of any of the other old ones, annoyingly enough). I was just like, the whole movie has been leading to this moment, AND THAT IS IT?
Overall, not a total failure, but definitely not the inspiring triumph that the book is. It would be enjoyed a lot by people in the 8-14 range, in particular. It is not really an adult film, although adults with a particular love of fantasy, who have not read the book, would be likely to enjoy it as well.
Movie Review: I saw the sign
Summary: 2 Stars
Susan Cooper's "The Dark is Rising" has been considered a teenage fantasy lit classic since it was released in 1973 and received a Newberry Award. It powerfully blended Arthurian myth, Celtic legends, Welsh customs and language along with the-then present day (post-WWII England) Unfortunately, in its translation to the big screen, it lost most of its spirit, along with the plot. Catholic author Michael O'Brien, in his book "Landscape with Dragons",lambasted the series for being insufficiently Christian;one wonders if he'd be happy to see how the plot has gotten an extreme makeover.
Evangelical director Michael Cunningham ("Path to 9/11") purged the story of its pagan elements. For example, the hero Will Stanton has his birthday on Dec. 23 instead of Midwinter's day. The theological argument between Will and the Rector in the church is replaced with a cheesy battle with hundreds of snakes. He finds one of the signs in a stained glass window depicting Eve giving the Forbidden Fruit to Adam.The Book of Gramarye is replaced with "The Book of the Signs" with a Celtic cross. There is an added plot element of Will having a lost twin brother who is a "prodigal son" figure. In the book, the large Stanton family exemplifies "family values" evangelicals would enjoy;however, in the movie,they're dysfunctional,like an Afterschool Special. Evangelicals are fascinated with dysfunctional families. I've been to Christmas musicals that tackled subjects like divorce and abortion. Will's older brothers beat up on him; his father has become negligent in his obsession with physics; Will's brother Max is a college dropout.
In the books,Will is 11;he learns he is an Old One and immortal-there isn't a romantic element. In the movie,Will is pubescent and dealing with his attraction to girls.
On the positive side, Alexander Ludwig gives a convincing performance as Will. He captures the adolescent angst perfectly,the strangeness of puberty. Gregory Smith, looking a great deal handsomer with facial hair, is pitch-perfect as Max tempted to the Dark. Former Dr. Who Christopher Eccleston is more menacing as the evil country doctor rather than as the feathered Rider. Ian McShane,who I'll always associate with his role as Judas Iscariot in Franco Zeferelli's "Jesus of Nazareth", is excellent as the sagely Merriman Lyon. He has the gravitas.The special effects are also spectacular.
Unfortunately, there are cheesy elements as well. The conflicts between Will and the Rider can be summed up as-
Rider:Give me the Signs!
Will:No!
Maybe the Rider wanted to see the M.Night Shmayalan movie with Joaquin Phoenix&Mel Gibson. There's a magical snow globe ("Rosebud"),evil mall police,and Will googling "light and dark." It's overly modernized with cellphones and iPods. The opening sequence recalls High School Musical;one expects the British kids to break out singing,"We're all in this together!" Worse, Light and Dark aren't explained. In Cooper's sequence,Will's role is to bring balance to Light and Dark. This has been expunged. The Walker has been cut out. The cinematography is dizzying and induces motion sickness. It's a tilt-a-whirl in the movies!
"The Seeker" comes across as a half-baked Harry Potter clone (in fact,the actor who starred as Cedric in Goblet of Fire now stars as one of Will's brothers) It lacks a sense of humor...and depth. Scriptwriter John Hodge was dismissive of the Arthurian elements and deemed them confusing (despite the fact that Merriman is supposed to be Merlin himself). The moviemakers should've gone all Celtic&stayed true to the spirit of the books. It's telling that the movie's title is "The Seeker",a term favored by both evangelical and progressive churches. Seekers denote those looking for spirituality in their lives. Sadly,this movie lacks spirituality. Instead of being a mystical adventure, it's a generic sword-and-sorcery flick.