Earthsea (2004)

Good movie but grossly overrated

Boring

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

WTF??!! I hope people who saw (and hated) this flick who have not read the books are not put off...Even though I have not read the books, even looking at the covers, they're better than this let down of a movie/series. I was really looking forward to it, despite a friend who told me this EarthSea version was truly heinous - I see what she means. Totally. And why my local video stores don't even carry it.I've seen the Japanese Anime version of EarthSea (which I loved though should have been longer) ... And that was better than this sorry attempt.Despite good acting efforts, effects, cinematography and action scenes, it was a big disappointment - devoid of any feeling or soul. It didn't stick true to what I already knew of the EarthSea saga. How in the Universe did they get this through Ursula Le Guin? Maybe they cast a spell on her? ... I hear she's denounced it. No wonder. Geb / Sparrowhawk's character was atrociously written, (not the actor's fault) ... like some immature, perpetually cranky, b!tchy lame a$$ Anakin Skywalker rip-off.However ... that said, the movie would have worked as an independent fantasy film / or mini series with different names and characters. EarthSea it is not.

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.

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.

Do not waste your time searching for similarities between this hack script and the excellent Earthsea Trilogy (now 6 books...) by Ursula Le Guin. The scriptwriters have taken a beautifully formed creature, stripped it of all its flesh, and broken the skeleton into small pieces. They have then selected a few small shards of bone from the original, around which they have woven a thin tissue of totally new skin to cover their abomination.We all know it is virtually impossible to condense a rich book satisfactorily into a film or TV format, but Lieberman and Scott have paid scant heed to Le Guin's original. Not even the characters' names have been respected and the roles they play are largely fresh fabrications.Some poor adaptations can be justified insofar as they are, in themselves, worth watching. I am afraid this is not even true of this series. It is entirely derivative (but not, unfortunately, from the books from which it has taken its title).