Rating: C-
A Wrinkle in Time, published in 1962 by Madeleine L'Engle, is a favorite childhood book of mine that I also read a couple times as a young adult. I related to Meg. We both had glasses and braces--first reading this book in elementary--and we both felt really stupid, out of place, separated, and different. Add to the fact that the book has deep symbolism and that I was literally obsessing over Star Trek and Star Wars at the time, with the books science fiction/fantasy elements it was an instant love.
The images this book presents run deep. The bouncing balls. The mind control of IT. The battle between light and dark. Many hours I spent contemplating these deep meanings in the schoolyard. And the idea of a tesseract was so deeply intriguing.
When I heard that Disney was making an updated film to A Wrinkle in Time, I was both excited and nervous. When reports started coming out that the movie simply glosses over Camazotz, the planet in which IT resides, I couldn't bring myself to see the movie in the theater. How would Disney handle the books religious themes? In which there are plenty. How would they handle what is truly presented in the darkness? The movie was going to be all girl power, so what about Charles Wallace and Calvin? Will their importance be sidelined?
Finally, with the idea that Disney movies will be leaving Netflix, I wanted to see the movie without having to pay beyond the monthly subscription. (I still haven't signed up for Disney+, and I'm not currently planning to do so.) In the last week I listened to A Wrinkle in Time, the book, to bring it to full remembrance. And then I watched the movie.
In short: Disney's A Wrinkle in Time deserved to flop.
Way too much time is spent on the exposition. Wasted time. Meg is turned into a bully when trying to defend herself. She is described in the novel as being troublesome, but I don't remember if it's fully explained. In the book Meg feels stupid, though told by Charles and her mother that she is special, she's not one thing or another. She has potential. The movie constantly attacks Meg's self worth outwardly, whereas in the book it's more of an inward battle.
More time is wasted on how "weird" and otherworldly the movie is. The book mentions things that are different, explaining the different visuals, which in a movie is dragged on instead of getting to the point. Time that the kids could have spent on a proper Camazotz. There's no winged centaurs, opting for a new creation.
Oh, how deep do I want to get into this? To sum it up. In the movie Camazotz is a planet of different faces, constantly morphing. Wasted time showing adventure elements. The bouncing balls not depicting the boy who fell out of rhythm, and what that later meant. The man with the red eyes in the book is chilling, and seeing Calvin, Charles, and Meg fight against him with logic is empowering to their characters. Charles Wallace, who in the book is told to beware of his pride, is shown as weak in the movie while quickly being taken over. In the book he loses himself to IT, daring to go "in" while boldly thinking he could come out, and all for a meal. This isn't a quick give in as he's previously tested and succeeds. Calvin, who is brilliant in the book with the gift of communication, feeling odd though having found a way to fit in, is diminished in the movie to a pretty boy that girls can get jealous over, though he is still a nice character.
And the planet changing from one thing to the next in the movie is a mess. The beach scene with color, everyone playing, the man with red eyes being over the top. Notice how no one is in sync in this scene? There's no pulsing to a controlled beat? Completely erased. There's other scenes that completely miss the mark as well. I get shortening time. Visual vs printed page. But the whole final brain sequence was just . . . -_-;;.
The main core religious elements are removed. The Mrs. are no longer described as guardian angles, messengers who are ancient stars. In the book scripture is read in a profound moment, which is sacrificed for other quotes. The book mentions both Jesus and Buddha, whereas Disney only mentions Buddha. Madeleine L'Engle is more courageous than Disney by mentioning contrasting religions in a positive light. Also, Camazotz is chilling. Themes of sameness over the individual is gone. Are you willing to sacrifice liberty for security? Erased. What we end up with in the movie is a Hodge-podge of feel good memes.
What it comes down to is the book is far better and richer than the movie.
MPAA: rated PG for thematic elements and some peril.
No comments:
Post a Comment