Wrinkle Reflections, continued
I sat down to watch the movie knowing
that it could never live up to the pictures my imagination had created,
but was surprised at how far it ended up straying from the story
that I remember. I was bothered by the portrayal of the three Mrs
W's, particularly Mrs Which. They really did not seem to measure
up to my memory of their personalities, much less their actions.
Because Madeleine and her work have meant so much to me over the
years, I was disturbed by how far the story deviated from the book,
and particularly from the descriptions in the book. Some of the
things that were changed in the movie (ie Meg's appearance, Camazotz)
are important, despite being minor details, to the overall themes
in the book.
All in all, I was disappointed by the movie, however, it certainly
does nothing to my feelings for the book, which remains a truly
wonderful piece of literature.
-AB
Last night, my whole family watched the movie together--with repidation,
after reading Madeleine's derogatory remarks about it in the online Newsweek
article. I've waited for forty years to see this movie.
My sixth-grade teacher read it (in 1964) to our class in installments,
as I did last year to my now eight-year-old son. Except for
the hour of added commercials, we loved it. Of course it couldn't
live up to the book--especially after being made as a miniseries
and being chopped up and put back together in its incarnation as
a two-hour movie.
And of course it wasn't perfect: the tension wasn't built as well
as possible leading up to the climactic scene where Meg rescues
Charles Wallace (although, with an hour of commercials, how can
you keep the tension going anyway? It's ridiculous to try
to stay involved with a plot when it's continually interrupted by
comic cellphone ads). The IT-controlled version of Charles
Wallace wasn't evil enough; and Meg's frustration with her father's
perceived inadequacies, her own, and with life in general were not
played up enough, except during the confusing dialogue between
her and her alter-ego, a scene which served as a major speed-bump
in propelling the story forward, and was therefore not useful.
And I do wish the writers had been more specific about the true
identity of IT, instead of focusing so much on the Prime Coordinator,
only a sardonic shadow of the chilling evil of IT in the book.
This emasculated IT had most of ITS inherent evil stripped away,
appearing as nothing but a mindless, writhing, snaking mass of intestine-like
guts hidden under a swimming pool (???), effectively making
IT into a non-character, instead of the true villain in the story.
That said, I thought the script was intelligent with some added
imaginative flair like the flowerstorm, the fireflower and the comic
Happy Medium, a modern-day Paul Lynde who almost stole the show.
And I thought the actors did a tremendous job. The casting
was excellent. All in all, it was a satisfying visual storytelling
of good vs. evil, with many liberties taken, of one of my all-time
favorite stories.
So who's going to tell us where or when we can buy a copy on DVD,
with behind-the-scenes info, deleted scenes, etc? It's not
addressed either on Madeleine L'Engle's site or on Disney's, as
far as I can tell.
-KB
Of course the movie could not live up to the imagination. I enjoyed it, but really disliked the music--found it distracting and melodramatic. I just kept hoping that it would encourage others to read the book. All in all, I thought the children were much better actors than the adults in the movie.
-KK
I have waited for many years for a movie to come about based on
the book, "A Wrinkle in Time". This is undoubtedly
my all time favorite book by my favorite author. I have read
and re-read the book since I was a child even up till now in my
adulthood. So I know everything in the book that happens and
have my own pre-conveived ideas about what everything should be
like. With that in mind I knew before watching this movie
that it would not be as good as both my imagination and the
book are. So here are my observations, good and bad, about
the movie.
CHARACTERS
Meg-while without glasses and undoubtedly more modern Meg is played
portrayed pretty well.
Calvin-not gawky enough, but still rougly accurate and a good actor
as well.
Charles Wallace-not played well, Charles Wallace is much more intelligent
in the book, the movie portrayed him as too childish and he also
looked too young.
Sandy & Dennis-the twins were way too young in the movie, they
did not fit the book in the least, I thought, they were also way
too rude, not a good fit.
Mrs. Murray-definitely the best fit of all, elegant, smart and caring.
Mr. Murray-again, a good fit, not much is put into his character
but generally a good fit, altough he never calls Meg by her real
nickname, but instead "Megsy"-ack!
PLOT
Tessering-this was undoubtedly the worst part of the movie, very
cheesy and not at all like it is described in the book, way too
much time was put into this in the movie for it to be this bad, thumbs
down for this cheesy effect.
Mrs. Who-very good! This is definitely the Mrs. Who I remember,
the only part I disliked was when she changed into her true form,
that was incredibly cheesy and badly done.
Mrs. Which & Whatsit-the other 2 were well played as well, not
seen much, but still good.
The Happy Medium-stupid, stupid, stupid, not even close to the book,
I won't even thouch this character.
It & Camezotz-very good characters on the planet Camezotz &
It is pretty believable, but the plot on this part of the movie
moves too fast once they enter "Central, Central Intelligence"
but the leading up to this point on the planet with the interactions
between the people and the kids are really good.
OVERALL-If I were to rate this in comparison with the book it wouldn't
even come close. But overall it was ok, on my own personal
scale of what I expected and what I got, from 1 to 10 I would give
it a 5.
-AR
At 56, and an adult, drawn into this lovely series, I want to say the movie was visually very satisfying. I felt that the people chosen to represent the book's characters were excellent. I really loved it. I hope it will be shown again soon. My only criticism is that it was started at 8 p.m. on a school night and ended at 11. That will have either prevented a part of the people who would want to see it from seeing it, or made them stay up later than they should, to be effective at school next day. I realize it's not a major issue but I felt that was bad planning on ABC's part. Please, since it is not in theaters, you need to get it viewable - say pay per view if not on regular TV channels. It's a keeper!
-GW