I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
-- Karen Lofstrom lofst...@lava.net -------------------------------------------------- "A man could not be in two places at the same time unless he were a bird!" -- Sir Boyle Roche
Karen Lofstrom wrote: > I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard > of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
The advertisements were enough to make me not dare switch it on, for fear that I would have to spork my eyeballs out.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:12:56 -0000, lofst...@lava.net (Karen Lofstrom) wrote:
>I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard >of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
You know there are going to be difficulties when they can't even get Sparrowhawk's real Name figured out. I winced when, in the opening minutes, his gal pal called him Ged. (It's been years since I read the series, but wasn't he Duny before leaving Ten Alders?) Atuan just felt entirely wrong. The Gebbeth wasn't scary enough. And where was Hoeg? Must go reread to get the bad taste out of my brain.
> Karen Lofstrom wrote: > > I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the > > Wizard of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
> The advertisements were enough to make me not dare switch it on, > for fear that I would have to spork my eyeballs out.
I've just had a look at the website. Aren't the characters a little old? It's a long time since I read the books, but I remember Ged and Tenar as being adolescents. By what I can see of the show, it isn't even a case of adults playing younger than their age. Vetch is a contempory of Ged, but on the website he looks more like "old letch" than "young Vetch".
One day in Teletubbyland, "czarfi...@aol.com" <czarfi...@aol.com> said:
>Is it that bad? Did LeGuin have any over sight of the project or >she just gave her approval?
It's been reported that she was REALLY unhappy with it. -- 73 de Dave Weingart KA2ESK Loyalty oaths. Secret searches. No-fly mailto:phyde...@liii.com lists. Detention without legal recourse. http://www.weingart.net/ Who won the cold war, again? ICQ 57055207 -- www.cafepress.com/Politicklers
lofst...@lava.net (Karen Lofstrom) writes: > I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard > of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
> One day in Teletubbyland, "czarfi...@aol.com" <czarfi...@aol.com> said: > >Is it that bad? Did LeGuin have any over sight of the project or > >she just gave her approval?
> It's been reported that she was REALLY unhappy with it.
Funny, I don't like what she's done with the series either.
As to the TV production -- if you try to watch it as a version of LeGuin's story, it's a moldering disaster. Everything is wrong.
If you watch it as a standalone fantasy movie, it actually isn't so awful. I think. (I have trouble filtering out the expectations.) However, the writing is dead lame (fantasy dialogue central, how many pounds of screenplay do you need?), the world has no thought in it, and the visual design is only occasionally interesting. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone even if I'd never heard of Earthsea.
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..." * I'm still thinking about what to put in this space.
Watching the film, the only connection to the books is that the POV character has the same name and somewhat similar personality, set in the same locale, with a somewhat similar system of magic, based on true names.
But he did *look* like Ged, look like I thought Ged would look about halfway through the books.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:12:56 -0000, lofst...@lava.net (Karen Lofstrom) wrote:
>I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard >of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
I'm taping all four hours together tonight. The WashPost critic panned it for being derivative -- derivative of movies made after the Earthsea books were published.
> I'm taping all four hours together tonight. The WashPost critic > panned it for being derivative -- derivative of movies made after the > Earthsea books were published.
This is not actually oxymoronic.
Panning the Earthsea *books* for being derivative of the books that came after that were inspired by them, that's stupid. But a media change, is a big enough change, that the critics charge can have some elements of truth.
"I wonder if the people who made the film of The Lord of the Rings had ended it with Frodo putting on the Ring and ruling happily ever after, and then claimed that that was what Tolkien "intended..." would people think they'd been "very, very honest to the books"?" -- Ursula K. LeGuin.
I don't remember a whole lot about the books, so I don't suppose I would overly notice untrueness to the books, but I hadn't planned to make any effort to watch it, either.
-- Yes, I am the last man to have walked on the moon, | Mike Van Pelt and that's a very dubious and disappointing honor. | mvp.at.calweb.com It's been far too long. -- Gene Cernan | KE6BVH
Andrew Plotkin wrote: > Here, Dave Weingart <phyde...@liii.com> wrote:
>>One day in Teletubbyland, "czarfi...@aol.com" <czarfi...@aol.com> said:
>>>Is it that bad? Did LeGuin have any over sight of the project or >>>she just gave her approval?
>>It's been reported that she was REALLY unhappy with it.
> Funny, I don't like what she's done with the series either.
> As to the TV production -- if you try to watch it as a version of > LeGuin's story, it's a moldering disaster. Everything is wrong.
> If you watch it as a standalone fantasy movie, it actually isn't so > awful. I think. (I have trouble filtering out the expectations.) > However, the writing is dead lame (fantasy dialogue central, how many > pounds of screenplay do you need?), the world has no thought in it, > and the visual design is only occasionally interesting. I wouldn't > recommend it to anyone even if I'd never heard of Earthsea.
> --Z
As a director I can tell you that Ron Libermann, who directed Earthsea is a true hack. I have never heard of him before but after 30 minutes I could tell he was a no talent. Or if he has talent he did not use any on this job and took it solely for cash. The acting was wooden and he had some good actors in the cast. There was no coherent or clear storyline, everything was mashed together without any thought.
> > I'm taping all four hours together tonight. The WashPost critic > > panned it for being derivative -- derivative of movies made after the > > Earthsea books were published.
> This is not actually oxymoronic.
Makes sense to me. The Harry Potter chapter is not exactly subtle. There's a bunch of Empire Strikes Back, too, now that I think about it.
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..." * I'm still thinking about what to put in this space.
James A. Donald wrote: > But he did *look* like Ged, look like I thought Ged would look > about halfway through the books.
Apart from the skin colour, that is..?
-- Joel Polowin jpolowinXY...@sympatico.ca but delete "XYZZy" from address "If you show trophy fish in first act, then by third act you must show that it is only red herring." -- Pavel Chekov
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:57:33 -0500, Marilee J. Layman wrote: > On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 08:12:56 -0000, lofst...@lava.net (Karen Lofstrom) > wrote:
>>I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard >>of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
> I'm taping all four hours together tonight. The WashPost critic > panned it for being derivative -- derivative of movies made after the > Earthsea books were published.
From the reviews I've seen, EVERYTHING that was distinctive about the Earthsea books seems to have been carefully kept out of the movie.
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 19:31:27 -0500, Dale Ratner <Shadow6...@aol.com> typed
>As a director I can tell you that Ron Libermann, who directed Earthsea >is a true hack. I have never heard of him before but after 30 minutes I >could tell he was a no talent. Or if he has talent he did not use any on >this job and took it solely for cash. The acting was wooden and he had >some good actors in the cast. There was no coherent or clear storyline, >everything was mashed together without any thought.
Lieberman's credits from IMDB:
Director:
"Legend of Earthsea" (2004) (mini) TV Series "Jake 2.0" (2003) TV Series (pilot) Jake 2.0: The Tech (2003) (TV) Second String (2002) (TV) The Dead Zone (2002) (V) Red Skies (2002) (TV) "The Dead Zone" (2002) TV Series ... aka Stephen King's Dead Zone (USA) "Strong Medicine" (2000) TV Series (episode "Pilot") "Once and Again" (1999) TV Series NetForce (1999) (TV) Rag and Bone (1997) (TV) Titanic (1996) (TV) D3: The Mighty Ducks (1996) "Moloney" (1996) TV Series "Medicine Ball" (1995) TV Series "Under Suspicion" (1994) TV Series "Harts of the West" (1993) TV Series "The X Files" (1993) TV Series (episode 7.05 "Rush") ... aka The X-Files (USA) Fire in the Sky (1993) All I Want for Christmas (1991) To Save a Child (1991) (TV) ... aka The Craft (USA) "Gabriel's Fire" (1990) TV Series (episode "'Tis the Season") (episode "Gabriel's Fire") (episode "Money Walks") (episode "A Prayer for the Goldsteins") "The Young Riders" (1989) TV Series "Dream Street" (1989) TV Series "thirtysomething" (1987) TV Series Table for Five (1983) Will: The Autobiography of G. Gordon Liddy (1982) (TV) Fighting Back (1980) (TV) ... aka Fighting Back: The Story of Rocky Bleier Gaucho (1978) (TV) A Home Run for Love (1978) (TV) ... aka Thank You, Jackie Robinson (USA: video title)
Producer:
"The Casino" (2004) TV Series (executive producer) "Jake 2.0" (2003) TV Series (executive producer) Jake 2.0: The Tech (2003) (TV) (executive producer) "The Dead Zone" (2002) TV Series (executive producer) ... aka Stephen King's Dead Zone (USA) "Strong Medicine" (2000) TV Series (executive producer) Rag and Bone (1997) (TV) (executive producer) "Moloney" (1996) TV Series (executive producer) Abandoned and Deceived (1995) (TV) (executive producer) (as Rob Lieberman) "Medicine Ball" (1995) TV Series (executive producer) "Marilu" (1994) TV Series (executive producer) "Under Suspicion" (1994) TV Series (executive producer) "Harts of the West" (1993) TV Series (executive producer) To Save a Child (1991) (TV) (executive producer) ... aka The Craft (USA) "Gabriel's Fire" (1990) TV Series (executive producer) "Dream Street" (1989) TV Series (executive producer)
-- ============================================================= "They put manure in his well and they made him talk to lawyers!" -- Cat Ballou mike weber <mike.we...@electronictiger.com> Book Reviews & More -- http://electronictiger.com
<see_signat...@filklore.co.uk> wrote: >I've just had a look at the website. Aren't the characters a little old? >It's a long time since I read the books, but I remember Ged and Tenar as >being adolescents. By what I can see of the show, it isn't even a case of >adults playing younger than their age. Vetch is a contempory of Ged, but on >the website he looks more like "old letch" than "young Vetch".
Getting actors that look like the character is expensive as it involves a lot more time auditioning and delays start of filming. Jeremy Brett does not look anything like the drawings of Sherlock Holmes in the original stories but he is best Holmes of them all. Sean Connery looks nothing like the Bond that is described in the books but he is still one of the best Bonds around.
So sometimes it is better to go with someone who can act the role even if he does not look the role. And when you have a tight budget as any TV series will have, you do not even need someone who would be the definitive Ged. Especially as the child labor laws would kill the budget if you got people who really are the right age.
Danny Don't question authority. What makes you think they know anything? (Remove the first dot for a valid e-mail address)
Sea Wasp wrote: > Karen Lofstrom wrote: > > I'm watching something that purports to be a dramatization of the Wizard > > of Earthsea trilogy on the Sci-Fi channel. Oh, the humanity!
> The advertisements were enough to make me not dare switch it on, for > fear that I would have to spork my eyeballs out.
Is it that bad? Did LeGuin have any over sight of the project or she just gave her approval?
> On 14 Dec 2004 13:36:42 GMT, Chris Malme > <see_signat...@filklore.co.uk> wrote:
> >I've just had a look at the website. Aren't the characters a little > >old? It's a long time since I read the books, but I remember Ged and > >Tenar as being adolescents. By what I can see of the show, it isn't > >even a case of adults playing younger than their age. Vetch is a > >contempory of Ged, but on the website he looks more like "old letch" > >than "young Vetch".
> Getting actors that look like the character is expensive as it > involves a lot more time auditioning and delays start of filming.
That is not what I was suggesting. I was talking about casting actors who are either about the right age or can look and act roughly the right age. Generally it is quite acceptable for the actors to be a few years older that the part they are playing, provided they give a convincing performance. The two characters I mentioned are (if I recollect correctly) in their teens, and yet one seems to have mutton chop whiskers, and the other a three day growth of beard.
Yes, kids *can* have facial hair. But if you are casting a 20-something actor to play a mid-teen character, it is far more believable if they are moderately clean-shaven.
For example, compare James McAvoy in Children of Dune with Shawn Ashmore in Earthsea. They are the same age, but McAvoy is far more successful in playing a role younger than himself. Look at Michael J Fox, who was in his early 20's when he played a 16 year old in Family Ties, and 3-8 years older when still playing a high-school kid in the Back to the Future movies. Look at the Buffy cast.
> Jeremy Brett does not look anything like the drawings of Sherlock > Holmes in the original stories but he is best Holmes of them all. Sean > Connery looks nothing like the Bond that is described in the books but > he is still one of the best Bonds around.
Yes, but neither of them were playing an adolescent boy.
>> The WashPost critic >> panned it for being derivative -- derivative of movies made after the >> Earthsea books were published.
>Heh. Reminiscent of movie reviewers who criticized Arrakis in the movie >version of Dune for being derivative of Star Wars' Tatooine.
Or the people who see "Dark Star" and claim it's derivative of "Star Wars", when actually it's somewhat the other way around... -- ============================================================= "They put manure in his well and they made him talk to lawyers!" -- Cat Ballou mike weber <mike.we...@electronictiger.com> Book Reviews & More -- http://electronictiger.com
>>As a director I can tell you that Ron Libermann, who directed Earthsea >>is a true hack. I have never heard of him before but after 30 minutes I >>could tell he was a no talent. Or if he has talent he did not use any on >>this job and took it solely for cash. The acting was wooden and he had >>some good actors in the cast. There was no coherent or clear storyline, >>everything was mashed together without any thought.
>Lieberman's credits from IMDB:
>Director:
>"Legend of Earthsea" (2004) (mini) TV Series >"Jake 2.0" (2003) TV Series (pilot) >Jake 2.0: The Tech (2003) (TV)
This was an interesting series that had big holes in the plot. The actor is now playing a much better role in Medical Investigation.
>Second String (2002) (TV) >The Dead Zone (2002) (V) >Red Skies (2002) (TV) >"The Dead Zone" (2002) TV Series >... aka Stephen King's Dead Zone (USA)
I like this show, I watch most of the eps.
>"Strong Medicine" (2000) TV Series (episode "Pilot")
I don't remember this ep, but I've seen all of them.
