![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fajrdrakoYou may have noticed that I love, absolutely love, Christopher Eccleston as Claude in Heroes. Not as much as I loved him as the Doctor, but hey, nothing could match that. And there's a new episode tonight - great! Last week distressed me by not featuring Claude and Peter at all. This week, I live in hope.
But I keep seeing news items about Eccleston's role in "The Dark is Rising". And I keep trying to feel confident about this, but really, every item I hear makes it harder to fight my dismay.
First of all - and I think this may be heresy, considering how many people recommended this book to me - I didn't much like The Dark is Rising. It was... not terrible. But it didn't match the standards of Diana Wynne Jones for British fantasy. Considering the recommendations I'd heard, it disappointed me.
Secondly, it is clear they have made a lot of changes to the characters and updates to the themes - making the main characters Americans, for example. The updates might make me like the story more. But it annoys me. Why adapt a book as a movie if you're going to change everything? Why not just make an original fantasy movie about American kids in Cornwall? (Er... it was Cornwall, wasn't it?)
Thirdly, this does not bode well for Eccleston having a long tenure on Heroes, which is too bad, since I like Claude so very much.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 12:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 02:28 am (UTC)How? The power of ruthless cinematography.
Why? Because they want to make lots and lots of money, and that means aiming for the big American market, and they don't think Americans want to watch anything but Americans. It isn't true, but they aren't about to disprove their own theories by trying anything different.
As for WTF - It's a crime against literature, that's what it is!
no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 06:25 am (UTC)And yes, you've exactly identifed the main problem: totally disregarding the intention of the source works. Just who do they think is going to watch it? Do they not remember the uproar over The Wizard of Earthsea? If that had been done properly, they would have minted it. As it was, everyone avoided that abortion like the plague.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 10:27 am (UTC)Over here, it's especially pernicious: we are expected to swallow US versions of our own history and literature. It's very rare that the reverse happens: a delightful ITV adaptation of Pollyanna, the most faithful yet - but set in pre-WW1 England.
no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 01:44 pm (UTC)There is an irony to that I'll have to think about.
Luckily for Canada, Americans tend to totally ignore our culture and history, so they don't touch it to distort it. An infamous line from an American senator when the Free Trade talks were going on: someone said the Canadians were concerned about the effect on Free Trade on Canadian culture and he said, "What Canadian culture?" Which sort of summed up the whole problem....
It's often said that you can tell a Canadian from an American by asking who won the war of 1812. Though I suppose Canadians and Americans would give the same answer: "We did!"
no subject
Date: 2007-02-20 12:29 pm (UTC)Sadly, they learned that stupidity sells. Just look at the movies out there. Sometimes I'm embarrassed to be watching the trailers!
Even if there is that element to the movie-going audience, they won't be bothering with those movies anyway. They'll be watching Rocky XXXIV.
Or worse. Exactly.
Do they not remember the uproar over The Wizard of Earthsea?
I don't think so. They aren't famous for long memories.