posted
I do believe this may be the best adaptation of children's literature Walden Media has ever done.
Forget the misleading trailer. The film is faithful to the book in every way that counts.
In fact, the only real differences are that the story's been updated from the 1970s the present day, and we see very brief snippets of Jess & Leslie's dreams of Terabithia.
Everything that matters, that made the book a classic is there. Intact, note-perfect performed, beautifully filmed.
Including, it should be noted, the extremely depressing climax.
My brother (who had not read the book) took my little nephew to see it...and it's really not a film for very young children.
I blame that misleading trailer.
Still, it's a film well worth seeing.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the heads up Puffy. I see what you mean about the trailer being misleading. I had to wonder if I had forgotten a major part of the book.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My in-laws went to see this movie today, wanting a little bit of the Chronicles of Narnia fun that the trailer alluded.
They were not pleased.
Not that they didn't enjoy the film, but... well, my mother in-law doesn't exactly appreciate unhappy endings.
Posts: 494 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Puffy. I'd been planning on not going, due entirely to the trailer. I still am not going due to my impending move, and now I can be bitter about missing a good movie. Thanks a lot.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the review...I'll let my students know the movie doesn't butcher the book. (Most of them said they weren't going to see it because they hated the trailer.)
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
THe movie is fantastic. I saw it last night, and I really liked it. It follows the book almost exactly, the direction is great, there is a good movement and tension, and the actors are great. It's a wonderful movie, and I have read out two copies of the book.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read the book on Friday. My sister (who writes young adult fiction) was horrified that I hadn't read it, and basically ordered me to go and read it.
Crying on the CTA is embarrassing.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some of the reviews of this film are puzzling. While those that feel betrayed by the misleading ad campaign are understandable, I don't get the ones that object to the other things:
"Why did Paterson choose to ruin her story? Why did the film makers ruin the movie? The grown-ups in the film have flaws and don't micromanage every moment of their children's lives, thus the film is saying all parents are distant. Anna is too pretty to be unpopular! Kreegah! Bundolo!" Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never read the book, didn't see the trailer, and I loved this movie. I'm going to find a copy of the book. I'm glad it turned out to be more than the Narnia-copycat fodder it looked like.
Some of it did strain credibility, though:
quote:Anna is too pretty to be unpopular!
If Anna = Leslie, then this is actually a pretty valid complaint. The real world dictates: if the new girl is blonde and pretty (and exceedingly fashionable) and the daughter of successful novelists, she's going to be popular first. The popularity may fade if her peculiarities override her cool-factor, but the odds are greatly against her being an outcast from the outset. This was a big enough bump that it drew me out of the story for a brief moment.
The pacing could also have used some work; I spent the first 30-50 minutes wondering what the point of the movie was.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The blond and athletic thing I can easily see, but I don't think her clothes met the fashions of the new school...nor did her parents seem to be the sort of writers kids would care about.
In fact, her being so pretty -and- rich -and- better at running than anyone -and- her quirks -and- becoming the teacher's favorite all at once could easily lead to intimidation, resentment, distancing, etc.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have seen attractive children ostracized regularly in middle school, if they are "too smart" or "weird." Especially if they don;t give a crap what anyone thinks of them.
I thought the movie was brilliant.
I was only squicked by the music teacher taking him to the museum alone. I donl;t think she would have been stupid enough to do that as a teacher in this day and age.
The most unreal aspect of the movie? The happy singing of sixties and Seventies songs. Nope, Not happening in middle school. If they are updating to modern times, they missed a few things.
Other than that, I loved it. And cried my eyes out.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Liz B: Thanks for the review...I'll let my students know the movie doesn't butcher the book. (Most of them said they weren't going to see it because they hated the trailer.)
That's where I was. Now I'm willing to see it. Thanks!
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Second and third grade is different than sixth or seventh grade. I just didn't buy it.
Might be a function of where you grew up. We definitely sang at least a few 60's and 70's songs in middle school, and middle school for me was...1996-1997. I remember thinking back on the lyrics we sang and thinking "holy smoke, we sang WHAT?"
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just can't bring myself to watch it. I'm sure it is a great movie...but I remember how I felt way back when I read the book.
I just hate it when authors/movie writers take what is a great story that I would read/watch over and over again and insert tragedy. There is enough of that in read life, I don't need more in my fiction.
Perhaps that is narrow minded of me, or just a weird quirk, but its just me I guess. I'm not saying a book can't be sad, I just don't like that to be the defining feature of the story (like it is in Terabithia, or Where the Red Fern Grows).
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was, no kidding, just now having this conversation with someone. And I paraphrased Paterson about Terebithia...yes, the book is sad, but it's ultimately hopeful.
Do we have to warn about spoilers in Ender's Game/ Shadow here? In any case, spoilers....
I think it's terribly sad in Ender's Shadow when the buggers are ultimately defeated and Bean whispers "Absalom, Absalom, would I could have died for you" to the crew. I cry and cry whenever I read that part. I guess it's the humanity of it that I like, and that I like in certain other sad books.
But I'm 100% with you on the dog books, Lupus. I refuse to read dog books and see dog movies. Sounder, Where the Red Fern Grows, Old Yeller, even The Yearling (it's a deer, but the same idea)...I'm just not going to do it!!!! Can't make me!!! It's kind of like how I don't have to eat cooked carrots anymore now that I'm a grownup.
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Second and third grade is different than sixth or seventh grade. I just didn't buy it.
Might be a function of where you grew up. We definitely sang at least a few 60's and 70's songs in middle school, and middle school for me was...1996-1997. I remember thinking back on the lyrics we sang and thinking "holy smoke, we sang WHAT?"
Yeah, I know what you mean. Come to think of it, I think the middle/high school acapella groups sang a bunch of songs like that as well.
posted
It is not that the songs are not sung. That was not my reality issue. It was the soporific effect of the singing, and how even the cool kids were singing. I just don;t see that. Fifth graders, yes, but the sixth and seventh graders in music class(which is different from chorus), no way. Not where I teach, right now, in 2007.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: It is not that the songs are not sung. That was not my reality issue. It was the soporific effect of the singing, and how even the cool kids were singing. I just don;t see that. Fifth graders, yes, but the sixth and seventh graders in music class(which is different from chorus), no way. Not where I teach, right now, in 2007.
Good point.
Question, though: are these supposed to be middle schoolers? They seem way, way too young to be even 7th graders; the mixture of young giants and underdeveloped beansprouts is missing.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do not mean to be argumentative here, it is just my experience with music class, and was a problem for me(the only one basically) in the movie. I realize everyone has a different experience, this just didn't work for me.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good point, erosomniac. I do not remember how old the kids were in the book. It is a book for fourth/fifth graders. So maybe they are supposed to be that age. They seemed more sixth, than fifth, to me. And they often hire older actors to play younger kids.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Good point, erosomniac. I do not remember how old the kids were in the book. It is a book for fourth/fifth graders. So maybe they are supposed to be that age. They seemed more sixth, than fifth, to me. And they often hire older actors to play younger kids.
It also occurs to me that by the time you hit 7th/8th or even 5th/6th grade, tolerance for make-believe is incredibly low, especially in the modern world. The "hurry up and grow up" factor is so strong that kids are abandoning their toys earlier and earlier in favor of other things.
I remember that after 3rd or 4th grade, I stopped bringing my toys to school and would only play with my Legos, action figures, transformers, etc. with my door closed or when no one else was home, because I was deeply ashamed of being looked at like a little kid, even in front of my parents/little brother. In discussing this with other people my age, I held onto my toys and make-believe much longer than most of them did.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I played pretend for a very long time. I wonder if there is a correlation between people who pretend into their early teens, and those who love reading fantasy as adults? I think it would be an interesting study.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: I played pretend for a very long time. I wonder if there is a correlation between people who pretend into their early teens, and those who love reading fantasy as adults? I think it would be an interesting study.
In the sense that I still play immersive fantasy RPGs, I've never really stopped playing pretend, and I'm almost 23.
I'd imagine that there's a significant positive correlation between playing pretend longer and reading any sort of immersive fiction, speculative or otherwise.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lupus: I just hate it when authors/movie writers take what is a great story that I would read/watch over and over again and insert tragedy. There is enough of that in read life, I don't need more in my fiction.
Paterson wrote Bridge to Terabithia at least partially as a way of dealing with the grief she felt when her real-life son's best friend died in a freak accident.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jesse and Leslie are 11-12 in the book. I don't think the film gave them a definite age or grade...though one could tell the young actors were growing as filming proceeded.
It's clear in both the book and the movie that Leslie is a fantasy fiction junkie...and Jesse's artistic talent finds expression through her imagination.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Forget the misleading trailer. The film is faithful to the book in every way that counts.
Good to know. I will probably see it now. Because of the trailer, I wasn't going to.
I'm slightly disappointed to hear about it being taken out of the 70's, though. I grew up on Free to Be You and Me and was looking forward to the singing. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Liz B: But I'm 100% with you on the dog books, Lupus. I refuse to read dog books and see dog movies. Sounder, Where the Red Fern Grows, Old Yeller, even The Yearling (it's a deer, but the same idea)...I'm just not going to do it!!!! Can't make me!!! It's kind of like how I don't have to eat cooked carrots anymore now that I'm a grownup.
I agree. All I can think of is WHY is it in so many books that the dog has to DIE in order to symbolize a child coming of age! It drives me completely insane! Especially when the boy has to actuallY SHOOT his dog (or the deer) Why for once can't the dogs, if they must die die of old age after a happy life instead of being killed by rabies or other tretorous (Sp) things! GRAH!
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing to consider is that the movie doesn't appear to be set in absolute 'modern' times. Yes, it's new, but not brand new.
Also, it is set in a small rural area. This isn't your typical inner city school, nor is it your typical middle-sized town school, nor is it you generic suburban school.
The class sizes seems small, and the community somewhat homogenous. That makes it easier for kids. When there are no huge well-defined school groups (nerds, jocks, goths, punks, EMO, etc...) it is easier to fit in. It is easier to take part, because you don't have a huge group of peers judging you. Also, I think the teacher was well liked not just by the central male character, but by all the students. That also makes it easier for 'cool' kids to take part.
In a class you like, with a teacher you like, that is universally liked by the other kids, there isn't the peer pressure not to conform.
I saw the movie yesterday, and I liked it, but in a sense, books have spoiled movies for me. Even when I see movies based on books I have NOT read, I still sense the lack of depth and poor development in them. It is like they barely skim the surface of character, emotion, and meaning. And on those rare occassions when a movie is sufficiently focused to bring out that depth, it is truly a delicious experience.
As far as the movie being sad, I think it is important that kids experience that. Much better to experience it in a movie or a book, because that allows them sort of a practice session for real life. Living in books and movies, if they are good, is by extension a means of living and experiencing life.
I think all our interaction in the modern world have become far too superfical. We experience but we never feel. I think this creates a tremendous sense of being alone in a crowd. You have lots of friendly people around you, but deep intense emotional friendships are non-existant.
I like this movie very much; it was a sad and pleasant experience... if you know what I mean.
Well, someone's posted all 18 segments of Free to Be You and Me on YouTube, last I checked.
You couldn't have told me that BEFORE I bought the DVD? (I also have the tape, and my mom still has the record. But I've had those since before YouTube existed. )
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The class sizes seems small, and the community somewhat homogenous. That makes it easier for kids."
I disagree. I think we humans have a way of redrawing the lines of cool, no matter how homogeneous the group.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
Wow. I almost cried. I had read the book when I was maybe 13, and remembered the pain of the girl's death. I really didn't think something this dark would make a good movie, but it wasn't bad at all.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
