Review: The Seeker: The Dark is Rising
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, New Releases, Theatrical Reviews, New in Theaters, 20th Century Fox, Family Films
.jpg)
If I were going to pitch Susan Cooper's kid-lit fantasy series, The Dark is Rising, to a room full of studio execs, I'd proceed as follows: "Listen, guys. I'm not gonna lie. This is gonna be a real challenge. These books are not only noticeably dated from a sci-fi/fantasy fan's perspective, but also remarkably insular and plotty, and not even the good kind of plotty. They aren't 'every chapter is a new adventure' plotty, but more like a catalog of meaningless busywork-tasks the hero has to perform. The books remind me of a third-rate Atari 2600 game, in which the hero has some Arthurian pedigree that's spelled out in the booklet, but on-screen he's just a bland avatar who has to collect six out of nine sacred talismans and place them in the right spots on the map, in order to thwart the 'forces of darkness.' That's all this series amounts to, but I wouldn't be pitching this to you if I didn't see some ways we can get around that stuff. So allow me to proceed.
We're going to adapt the second book in the series, for two reasons: first, because it's called The Dark is Rising, which will make a cool title, but also because it contains an intriguing substrata. The main character, Will Stanton, is a 14 year-old wizard who is struggling with puberty just as he's discovering his wizarding ways. The bad guys know this, so they send a witch to tempt him, in the form of a hot, older girl. In the book, this is hardly more than a footnote and most of the plot is given over to the young wizard learning his craft from an old wizard, but that's just bo-ring. We're going to downsize that angle considerably and make the witch subplot the A-story. I'm envisioning a tragic first-love saga between this kid who doesn't know any better, and this more experienced girl who is allied with the forces of evil, but isn't totally evil to the core. There's a sort of Anakin Skywalker quality to her, which a good script will heighten. With me so far? Good.
Now, there are other sinkholes in the book we'll have to avoid, such as the fact that this is an 'anything goes' fantasy book. These warring wizards can travel through time on a whim, shoot fire and ice, cause great eruptions in the weather, and more. None of those actions ever really add up to a story, though. They just sort of happen, and no one seems to have limits on their power, which as you can imagine, makes for an annoying read. We're going to fix that. We're going to reduce the scale and focus on the time-shifting element, which we think has the most potential. Yeah, I know, time-travel has been done to death, but we see some potential in having these Lord of the Ring-style characters getting jerked back and forth between their world and modern day London. That's not the way it happens in the book -- the characters in the book seem to time-shift from one boring time and place to another -- but as I've tried to convey, relying on the book is suicide.
Our story will basically be about a modern American teenage boy who moves to London with his family -- dad has business there -- and meets this hot, older British girl who takes an inexplicable shine to him. When some local yokels in the British town start to talk to him about his powers and the existence of wizards -- think American Werewolf in London, as a tonal reference -- he blows them off, but he eventually comes to realize that he does have powers, and this hot British girl is intent on steering him towards the dark side right out of the gate. Before you know it, they've sort of cast their lot together against the dark (although she might be faking) and time-travel fighting these guys for control of a talisman (one, not seven million, like in the books) and of course the final showdown will revolve around whether or not the girl is truly allied with the dark or with Will. It's a big departure from The Dark is Rising book, but not so much that it's unrecognizable. What do you think?"
Sadly, I did not get to make my pitch to any studio exec, but David Cunningham got to make his. His poorly-scripted, aggressively family-oriented and stupidly re-titled film, The Seeker:The Dark is Rising has the feel of one of those Disney Channel original movies where the writing is purposefully static and bland and there's no way to conceal that every decision made along the way was subservient to maintaining the PG rating. The basic plot of the book has been retained: Will Stanton (Alexander Ludwig) moves to England with his family and learns that he's a wizard, caught between the forces of the light and the dark. The book's two fatal flaws, mentor-porn and quest-porn, have also sadly been retained. At least half the film is given over to Will being lectured on wizarding by an older wizard, played here by Ian McShane, and the lecturing is on the level of McShane's character telling Will that he is destined to save the world because "you're the seventh son of a seventh son" and "you are the last of our kind." Snore.
When Will isn't inhaling this nonsense, he's on his talisman hunt, searching for trinkets that have to be aggregated together at the right place, in order to stop a guy who wears a bandit kerchief over his mouth and rides a horse -- he's called The Rider! -- from destroying the world with bad weather. And believe me, this character, played by Christopher Eccleston, is just as ridiculous as he sounds. And the girl I referenced in my pitch? Her character, played here by Amelia Warner, is not only a footnote, but also terribly mismanaged. There are scenes where Warner has to speak embarrassingly bad dialogue and act in such an unnatural way that she probably wanted to crawl under a rock after the day's filming. There could have been a good movie made out of Cooper's lame series, but Fox was clearly more interested in kicking over the most accessible fantasy-lit rock and sending what they found through their creakiest and most unsupervised assembly line. The movie they've produced is dead on arrival.









Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
10-05-2007 @ 10:43AM
den said...
My knee jerk reaction was to try and defend the books (“lame” was a bit harsh), but they are what they are. Young adult fantasy meant to be good light reading. As a young man they struck a cord with me because they synched perfectly with my growing knowledge of Arthurian legend. I grew up in Texas so the various UK settings were pretty exotic to me and forced my young imagination into overdrive as I tried to picture what these locales looked like. As I finished the series it was the first time I was actually sad that a book series was over. Obviously I have a soft spot for these books.
All that being said, I’m glad the movie is receiving poor reviews and is being seen for what it is: a cheap attempt to cash in on some of that Harry Potter mojo by adapting yet another children’s book series in a quest for franchise gold. The stunt casting of Ian McShane and Christopher Eccleston annoyed me. But making Will a wise cracking American was the final straw. I hope this film dies a horrible death and I plan on making no mention of it when I eventually introduce the book series to my daughter.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 10:54AM
Veggieboy said...
I very much enjoyed the books as an eleven year old and cringed when I saw the trailer.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 12:39PM
The Pepto Pimp said...
I have to agree with the post above. I dug on these books when I was in the 6th grade, but when I saw that trailer I rolled my eyes and sunk down into my seat...
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 1:23PM
Flit said...
Anyone who enjoyed these books should really read the "his dark materials" trilogy before Golden Compass comes out. It really is a fantastic set of books, for any age, and the best part is they don't "dumb down" anything because it's a kids book. Kids books that respect the intelligence of kids and adults alike.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 1:33PM
Jen said...
The parts of the books you found boring are the parts that the fans *actually liked.* If you're going to dismiss the them as *lame,* clearly you have no more undertanding of the material than the idiots who made the film.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 1:36PM
Ben said...
Uh, I thought the books were pretty good actually. Unfilmable, maybe ... but boring and lame, certainly not. The Grey King is an especially good book, but they all have a great ambiance to them. Some things about the fantasy world are not clearly defined, but that's probably because it's trying to be like folklore ... in which the details are rarely clearly defined.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 2:33PM
Cath said...
I guess not everyone's a "reader." Nevertheless, what concerned me about this adaptation was the removal of the pagan elements of the books out of fear of offending Christians, just like what they're purportedly doing to His Dark Materials. Kinda sucks the heart out for me.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 4:45PM
pbarnes26 said...
You keep stating that the books are boring and "lame," yet strangely many of the elements you attribute to the books actually are not related to the books at all but to the MOVIE. Have you actually read them, or at least read them lately? Your memory seems very faulty, if so. I agree that it might be very hard to adapt Cooper's novel into a movie, but I'm certain this lot (and you as well) are not the ones to have attempted it. Also, what's the title of your Newbery Honor and Newbery Award books?
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 5:14PM
Beth Carey said...
I am sorry you didn't manage to find the charm in the books like a lot of us did. These were written in another time period about another era. JKR even says its one of the series she read which inspired her. Trust me, there were plenty of ways the movie could have been made to work. However, when you strip the book of all of it's foundations, murder the characters by morphing them into mockeries of themselves (including changing names and what happened) and decide our children are so dumbed down that they can't handle watching a British boy in Britain and then throw in the ubiquitous love scene and malls etc., it's just well WRONG.
The casting stinks as well. Even little details have been tossed for someone's grand vision - a vision hampered by the fact they barely read this book let alone the series. I hope this thing dies right here and no sequels are allowed to be made. Perhaps in ten years when Hollywood has run out of things to remake, they can then start again. Or better yet, someone else picks it up and does it the justice it deserves.
I for one still read these stories, they are one of the building blocks that got me into the lovely world of reading. Too bad many kinds will get their first taste of this from this crap movie.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 5:50PM
Laura said...
Funny, all those "lame" things that supposedly happened in the book, didn't. And, Ryan, your take on the book is not only a big departure, but, yes, unrecognizable. On the other hand, it's not worse than what David Cunningham has come up with.
Reply
10-05-2007 @ 10:17PM
Ash said...
"Sill Stanton moves to England with his family and learns that he's a wizard, caught between the forces of the light and the dark."
...you do know that none of that is in the book except the Light and Dark part, right? He's from Buckinghamshire, and he's an Old One, which is not a wizard.
Reply
10-06-2007 @ 12:01PM
shadowmaat said...
If you're going to do a comparison between the book and the movie it might actually help to read the book- or at least skim a summary so that you can tell the difference between "book stuff" and "movie stuff." Otherwise people will twig to the fact that you don't know what you're talking about. Since the book is obviously too much for you to handle (it doesn't have any pictures, requires an attention span of longer than three seconds and caters to people who have an interest in literature/mythology) you might try Wikipedia instead. That seems to be more your speed.
Is the movie as terrible as you say? Well, I'd certainly recommend that anyone who has actually read the book(s) avoid it like the plague, but as for trying to pin some of its failings on the book itself? Sorry, but no. If anything, they should have been more faithful to the book (which bears no resemblance to your description); it might have made the movie less "lame."
Reply
10-08-2007 @ 2:46AM
Jo said...
Ryan Stewart you have clearly never read the books otherwise you would not have made a blatant error in stating 'The basic plot of the book has been retained: Will Stanton moves to England with his family '
Will Stanton was for starters 11 not 14. He was English not American. His family did not move to England they already lived there - and they are just a few of the highly irritating changes.
The books are a hands down better series than the drastically over hyped Harry Potter and deserved better than this absolute rubbish churned out by Fox.
They have shamelessly changed the major parts of the books and already alienated the Dark Is Rising readership long before the director called 'check the gate'
We have been waiting years for a film adaptation and they give us this travesty.
Reply
10-08-2007 @ 7:17PM
darklink said...
Wow. Just wow. These books sure are dense. That's how I managed to read them at frickin' EIGHT. Jesus, this guy's an idiot! Boycott the movie, it really really sucks. "I've read the book", one of the lines is. So did I, and it's a)got nothing to do with and b)is much better than the movie.
Reply
10-08-2007 @ 7:25PM
darklink said...
Well, not quite accurate. It's a better movie than Eragon, but the trail downward was much much much much much much more pronounced, it's way crappier than the book then eragon is crappier than the eragon book. Does that make sense???
Reply
10-09-2007 @ 3:05PM
arjumand said...
Please do some research before writing a film review. Even a cursory glance at the IMDB page for "The Seeker" would have shown that nearly nothing of the original book was transferred to the movie, except for the protagonist's name. His age, nationality, interests and character were all changed, and those were only the minor changes.
I also find it strange that so many adults nowadays call these books "dense" (forward, Ian McShane), while a number of the posters (and I include myself) remember reading and falling in love with them as children - is it something in the water, causing people's brains to atrophy?
As for the so-called 'lame' and 'dated' books, I would like to point out that one of the books in the series won the Newbery Medal for excellence in children's literature, but maybe that's lame too.
And dated?! I really must read The Dark is Rising Again, the first few times I must have missed all those references to the 70s which stand out like a sore thumb nowadays.
Or maybe by dated you meant "well-written and interesting", "moving and magical", a type of writing which is truly rare nowadays. In which case, yes, they are dated.
Reply
10-09-2007 @ 3:50PM
Molly said...
I read these books for the first time almost 14 years ago when I was 10. I've read the series damn near once a year since that first reading, and they will always be one of my favorite fantasy series. I don't think you can really bash the books for the s**t the movie is. They totally changed the story from what I saw in the trailer, and I refuse to see the movie. You also clearly never read the books as others have stated as your review of them is totally off.
Next time you're going to rip apart a loved series of books, you had better do some homework and watch your wording.
Reply
10-10-2007 @ 12:14AM
shadowmaat said...
By the way, if anyone is interested in a comprehensive list of the REAL differences between the book and the movie, read about them from someone who actually knows what she's talking about. And my oh my, what a list it is!
Reply
10-10-2007 @ 12:17AM
shadowmaat said...
Hmm... link didn't work. Just figures, eh? Try here: http://community.livejournal.com/authorblog/5880.html#cutid1
Reply
10-11-2007 @ 9:46AM
Eve said...
Please, PLEASE, read the books before insulting them. The books have been in print since the seventies. They have won awards; they have been taught in classrooms. They have been passed on through one or two generations and will certainly be passed on for several more. It's heartbreaking that you seem to be trying to damage their reputation as wonderful books by assuming they are so much like the movie. Did it occur to you that John Hodge, the scriptwriter, took several liberties? That neither Hodge nor the director, David L. Cunningham, cared about the books or the fans because we didn't have Harry Potter's numbers and sales figures? They even blew off the author when she sent them suggestions.
Your review is degrading to a great series of books. Below is a link to only some of the changes they have made, before they cut another one of the characters completely. For more, might I suggest the IMDB boards? One thing that remains true in all of the forums is that the book far outshines the movie. Perhaps you could read the book sometime.
http://community.livejournal.com/authorblog/5880.html#cutid1
Reply