Earthsea
Earthsea
NR | 13 December 2004 (USA)
Earthsea Trailers

A reckless youth is destined to become the greatest sorcerer that the mystical land of Earthsea has ever known...

Reviews
FeistyUpper

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

... View More
UnowPriceless

hyped garbage

... View More
Siflutter

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

... View More
Bob

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

... View More
alexandresobreira-12-509311

I was compelled to add this after reading several reviews: I think the scriptwriter knows about Ged's name inversion. He or the producers just thought that Sparrowhawk was not catchy enough or was too long. So they decided to reverse the order. Considering the writer had the gall to say that his adaptation reflected LeGuin's TRUE intentions (prompting her to write her reply - by the way, isn't the book's copyright hers? And so, shouldn't she have been able to veto anything based on it? I don't know how international copyright laws work on this. Now, on to my review. Well, I think that an adaptation of a book to film medium should follow the book. Actually, I'd like it to slavishly follow the book insofar as the medium allows. But I don't judge the adaptation for not doing that. I like the Lord of the Rings movies and they deviate from the books in several essential points, not the least of which is ignoring the fact that Tolkien creates his characters to be Aristotelian examples of superior men, even though LOTR is not a tragedy, but a comedy (technically speaking). In terms of adaptation of the books, this miniseries is awful, totally disgusting. The Godking of Awabath is changed into a warlord that wants to conquer the Archipelago, Kossil is his mistress, quite the young and attractive woman, who wants to gain the power to summon the nameless ones (who are a sort of black gremlins with bat wings ??), Tenar is chosen by the last high priestess of the tombs to take her place as keeper of the key to hold the nameless ones prisoners. By the way, it's one of them that is after Ged. The Iskyorh gebbeth becomes the archfiend of the whole trilogy and has a showdown with Ged at the Tombs of Atuan, where Ged incomprehensibly decides to release the nameless batgremlins and their evil upon the world. Nemerle does not die, but remain the leader of the resistance against the Kargs, who have conquered Roke with the help of Jasper ??? Also, poor Nemerle looks suspiciously like a Dumbledore... Should I go on? However, that's not the reason I'm rating it so low. What I really hated was the fact that not only were the actors terrible, even poor Isabella Rossellini and Danny Glover, because their roles were so bad, but the series is only a long series of clichés strung together. The whole Karg invasion plot is there so the film doesn't have to deal with the true issues of the first book, which is Ged's search for his own identity. The central issues of the other two books, namely, how once can gain freedom through trust and by looking beyond the bars of one's cage and acceptance of mortality as essential to life, are thoroughly ignored. The Archmage and the other wizards of Roke are reduced to a position of almost comic relief to the series (even worse, poor Vetch IS in fact treated as a comic relief character). So, we are down to a soppy, ridiculous adventure crafted for the so-called young adult public. By the way, I'm 50, but if I were a young adult I would feel very insulted by how imbecilic current day scriptwriters (especially Hollywood) think young adults are.

... View More
outbroker

Le Guin distanced herself from this garbage from the start. But barring an escape to the marvelous realm she created, no distance is far enough. I watched as much as I could, and that solely to answer one question: was the original too expensive to be done properly? Had to be, because there is no other excuse. I'm guessing the screenwriter was handed a synopsis, told to throw in a couple of babes, and hope that one-time viewers would support the project.Danny Glover must have signed on as a fan, been given a significant alas refundable front fee. Read the script. Vomited. But at least was secure in the knowledge few would watch it, and none would remember it.Do not buy this. Don't watch it, even if it's free. If you must watch it, demand payment yourself. Upfront. Refundable.Spend the hour reading, re-reading, or re!reading the book. Or listen to the audio book, which is great.

... View More
ridiculionius

Yes, I am asking you to forget the books, as wonderful as they are. If you put aside the fact that the director almost seems to parody the Earthsea books (for all the movie relates to them), the film is actually enjoyable. The acting was only mediocre, even with such greats as Danny Glover and Isabella Rosselini to carry it (definitely not their best performances), the script was only mediocre, and, as it's a made-for-TV movie, the special effects were wanting. But, all in all, if you push the books from your mind, it's not that bad.Two things did annoy me quite a bit, however. Number 1: the changing of the title character's name. In the books, his birth name is Duny, his secret name is Ged, and his use-name is Sparrowhawk. In the movie, his birth name and use-name is Ged, while Sparrowhawk becomes his secret name. Duny doesn't even come into the picture.Number 2: Tenar and Ged don't kiss in the "Tombs of Atuan". It isn't until "Tenahu", the final book in the series, where both characters have aged significantly (Ged is quite old, and Tenar has been widowed and has had children that have grown up), that they do so.Overall, however, the movie is not a masterpiece but is quite fun and magical. It's only very loosely based on the books, so don't expect something approved by Ursula LeGuin herself. But, if you're interested in something for a simple Friday night flick, it's definitely something to consider.

... View More
fandyllic

First I will admit, I did not watch the whole mini-series all the way through and jumped around bit after the first part because I was so disappointed. I will also add that I've read the books a few times, so my expectations were probably high, especially after Lord of the Rings.Before I give my comments on the mini-series, after reading the various comments from other viewers, I'm convinced the standards of viewers have dropped and the shallowness of the average viewer cannot be overestimated. There is no way this mini-series should rate above a 5 of 10.The acting was not bad, but I did get the sense that most of the cast was completely unfamiliar with the books and the stories. The whole series felt mundane and unoriginal. The fresh minimalism of the Earthsea series was lost in the typical fantasy treatment given to the stories. As a reader, I was also disappointed in the casting and the dramatic differences between the books and the mini-series.You could tell from the casting and the way situations were changed in the mini-series that the producers were trying for a younger audience used to Harry Potter and other highly derivative fantasy works (the J.K. Rowling fans will want to murder me, of course). The books could be considered slow by today's standards, but the had an undercurrent of sadness that made them more powerful. The aura of the books was completely lost in the mini-series. There was no sense of history like you feel when watching Lord of the Rings or some of the better fantasy movies (Dragonslayer, say).The 3 stars I give the mini-series comes from the generally good production values and the commitment to making a mini-series rather than trying to compress the whole series into 2 hours or so. I would have preferred that they had just made a 2 hour movie perhaps compressing the first two books, than the radical changes and alterations that were made for the mini-series. In short, it was a typical Hollywood-corrupted production that had so much promise only to be ruined. Overall though, the mini-series was a below average effort for such a promising story. The producers of the mini-series should have just said it was "inspired" by Earthsea and used a different name. A decent example of this type of thing is the recent Sci-Fi channel mini- series, "Tin Man". They didn't call it Oz anything and totally re-imagined Wizard of Oz. It wasn't great, but much better than Earthsea.One can only hope that the failure of the Earthsea mini-series won't close the door to future attempts to re-imagine the books on film. Lord of the Rings was famously messed up by a partial animated version, so there is always hope.

... View More