Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My first look in the trailer seeing a beautiful girl playing Meg said to me 'these people don't get it'. It takes more than a pair of glasses to make a beautiful girl into a Meg girl.
How often does a truly unattractive person get cast in a role like this? In Love Potion No. 9, they made Sandra Bullock look geeky and homely, but in reality we know she is neither. Disney tried to do the same with Storm Reid in this movie. In movies and TV, you probably have more cases of ugly characters in books being portrayed by attractive actors/actresses than the other way around. Even Peter Dinklage in Game of Thrones is better looking than the way his character is described in the books.
I thought the casting decision for Meg was a good one. Storm is a cute girl but not overly cute. I think it would be more of an issue had they cast a Zendaya or Yara Shahidi lookalike in the role. Storm was perfect.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 03-13-2018 at 03:39 PM..
I was specifically talking about Oprah and Mindy Kaling's characters, since those are the characters who you said ruined the movie by not being white. What specifically about their characters' ethnicity ruined the movie?
In the book, Meg did NOT have red hair. It was Calvin O'Keefe who was the redhead with freckles.
No, didn't read the book. You have to expect a certain amount of license with going from a book to as movie. How is the father morally culpable with Charles Wallace being taken over by the IT? He didn't have anything to do with that. He STILL didn't have anything to apologize for in the movie. He was not at any moral fault in the movie.
The change they made from the book (and the 2003 movie):
In the book, his experiment essentially blows up in his face, so to speak. He was the second person in the government experiment (the first was never seen again), and he hoped to go to Mars, but he immediately wound up right in Camazotz before he knew what happened to him.
In this movie, the door opens and he goes on a galavanting happy romp through a whole host of planets, giving no thought to the family he left behind, until he finally gets to Camazotz and gets nabbed. So in the end he first begs forgiveness to Meg and then begs forgiveness all over again to his wife.
If the writer and the director did not write in anything for him to beg forgiveness about, then why did they write him begging forgiveness...twice? My point is: The intention was to have the father beg forgiveness in this movie, which had been unnecessary in the book.
Last edited by Ralph_Kirk; 03-14-2018 at 07:43 PM..
And, yes, a major plot point of the book was that the Father was culpable - he made the hard choice to leave Charles Wallace behind on Camazotz, and Meg hated him for that - a fair amount of the plot line is Meg, helped by Aunt Beast, learning to forgive her father for not being as strong and perfect as she had thought he was. The Father can't save Charles - only Meg can save him.
That part I bolded is why the father was not culpable in the book. In the book (and in the 2003 movie), the father fought hard for Charles Wallace, but was fully beaten. Meg had to learn that her father was not culpable.
In this movie, he merely makes a snap decision to leave Charles Wallace behind with hardly a struggle at all.
Quote:
And the poster above is right. L'Engle was a strong Christian and her book reflects new testament expressions of battles between good and evil. The 3 Ladies were Angels, we learn. So if the movie didn't portray this, it doesn't at all correctly interpret the book.
Actually, the three witches were stars who had sacrificed their light in combat with the Darkness.
The novel has themes which are compatible with Christianity and isn't incompatible with Christianity, so a lot of Christians have convinced themselves that it's a "Christian novel." CS Lewis's "The Last Battle" is a Christian novel. "A Wrinkle in Time" isn't a Christian novel. It's compatible with a number of religions.
Taking the main character, a red-headed white girl and turning her biracial and making the mother black. There was no need for that, expect because Oprah was involved, they had to make the cast be diverse. Why not make Mr. Murry black instead? Showing the audience a married black man? Oh wait, that would offend black women to see a black man married to a white woman.
The races of the cast are irrelevant. They could have done that and still made a good movie--except for stretching for whatever they were stretching for (perhaps as many as three different points) making Charles Wallace an adopted Filipino possibly gay characters.
My wife asked me a hypothetical question over dinner tonight. She asked me if I'd be willing to turn white now, at my age, with my background.
I thought about that for a moment and concluded: No, because I'd ultimately have to hang around black people--without being fully accepted--because I'd be too aware of reality to hang around people spouting nonsense such I've quoted above and pretend it was righteous thinking.
Well, that will be the case no matter what. Look at all of the people who went spastic over the casting of Rue in the Hunger Games. She was described as being Black in the novel, the author has said she intended her to be "African American" in interviews, yet people were offended when she ended up being, well, African American in the movie.
The simple solution is to not see movies based on books you've read. That is, if you find yourself easily offended by filmmakers who cannot step between your ears and project an exact replica of what you see while reading a book.
And all the lead characters of "Starship Troopers" were originally written as Filipinos.
I'm a Christian. Folks can't appreciate the message of light triumphing over darkness,
That was the message of the book. Not so much this movie.
For instance, if you'll recall in this movie, when they first glimpsed the Darkness, the witches were determined to stay away from it. They only faced the need to enter the Darkness because Dr Murry was trapped there.
In the book, the entire intent from the beginning was to combat the Darkness. The witches themselves had sacrificed in the battle against the Darkness, which had gone on for eons all over the universe. The kids were enlisted from the start for that battle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
