La leyenda de Terramar

I am a huge fan of the Earthsea books and have been since the 1970s. I was so excited to hear the books were being adapted into a mini-series, particularly now with the CGI possibilities out there. To say this was a huge disappointment is the understatement of my year. Unlike some, my dismay is not because they changed the story from the books - screen adaptations do that all the time, sometimes to an extreme degree like here. But for that kind of adaptation to be good, you still need good casting, good writing, good acting, and good direction. There was none of that here.

Even my husband, who is not a fan of the books, didn't want to keep watching it (we tuned out after about 45 minutes and then looked in twice more for about two minutes each), purely because the script was so wooden (oh, for the lyricism of Le Guin's original prose!) and the line reading by the actors was so poor - it was like watching a high school play without a breakout star. They took what was a subtle, UNIQUE (the operative word to the max) series of books and made it grotesquely derivative - heartbreaking, given how truly original Le Guin's world was. She had no Sauron or Voldemort equivalent in her books (think about it, you fans of the books) - her whole point was there is only the evil that men do. In her Earthsea, no one is completely evil but everyone is capable of evil acts (even Ged). But obviously Hollywood can only deal with external, black and white conflicts - and so it had to invent a big bad villain (with only a glancing association with an original Le Guin character). I started out very nervous about this, because Ged was cast with blond curly hair - but I couldn't have possibly imagined how profoundly awful it would be.

Please, everyone who is reading and writing these comments - don't blame Le Guin. This mini-series has virtually NOTHING to do with her books.

To be fair, "The Legend of Earthsea" isn't horrible. It crisply adapts Le Guin's powerful novels in a way that is adequate for a Sci-Fi Movie-of-The-Week. However, it clearly lacks the power of Sci-Fi's more hyped projects, like "Children of Dune" or "Battlestar Galataca". Thus, the results are stacked somewhere between adequate and mediocre.

The main problem with the production lies in that the show's producers evidently see the relation between Le Guin's Earthsea and the landmarks of fantastical fiction that followed it. Most notably, the Rourke School of Wizardry obviously draws a connection to Harry Potter's Hogwarts. (Take note, the first Earthsea book was written in 1968, so there is hardly a chance Le Guin is infringing on any actual Rowling territory). Immediately picking up on this, the movie depicts Jasper, the school rival of the protagonist Ged, as a carbon copy of Draco Malfoy - the blonde aristocrat with a constantly snobbish demeanor. This just isn't how it went in the original novel. In Leguin's "A Wizard of Earthsea", Jasper was one of Ged's friend who eventually outgrew the young wizard, eventually picking on Ged in order to appease the older crowd he hung out with. But "Legend of Earthsea" clearly makes Jasper out to be a clear-cut foil instead of a three dimensional character.

Other changes include making the barbaric Kargs more or less the stereotypical "evil kingdom", complete with an evil king with plans of . . . yes . .. world domination. He actually says "All of Earthsea will be mine!" Please. To paraphrase Le Guin, she wrote about "real people with real problems in imaginary places". The movie clearly undercuts such intentions, making a story that is only devoid of Le Guin's social statements on race and gender roles. In addition, the many original insights that haunted Le Guin's passages only lingers weakly in the frames of this soon-to-be-forgotten bumble.

**

I had read Ursula K. LeGuin's response to some statements made by the director and I expected it to be bad. What I saw was horrendous. This is, to my mind, one of the best fantasy series ever written. This adaptation of it only resembles it in the location it was set and the names of the characters.

I have seen a couple of posts to which I must respond:

1) Comparing this to other works such as Dune and The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant miss the mark. While both of those series were great, A Wizard of Earthsea precedes them. Moreover, the best of the series was the last two books, unlike most other most similar series (was it Frank Herbert that said "every good trilogy is five books, at least"?

2) Changing the race of the characters misses an integral part of the statement made by the author. I know she hates it when people read meanings into her works, but given that the book was written in the middle of racial unrest in the '60s a statement was made, intended or otherwise. The "good guys" were the dark skinned peoples and the "bad guys" were the tall, blond white peoples (yes, I know it's no where near that simple, but the basic idea stands).

Let's get one thing straight right away, I haven't read the books! so those who have may not agree with me.

When I first picked this thing up I read the back cover and it talked about comparing it to the lord of the rings and harry potter, well they shouldn't have, when I first started watching this I kept looking for strange unfamiliar and mythical animals but none were apparent, it also starts out very slowly but then again it's almost 3 hours long so it can take it's time (which it does). After about 2 hours I realized that this is by no means in the same league as harry potter or the lord of the rings because it has no budget, at least nothing up to the likes of a Hollywood movie. But unlike other movies I've seen, that squander their budget on low quality CGI that makes the whole thing unwatchable and laughable, this movie instead focused it's budget on creating sets and costumes that are nicely done and detailed, and in those few scenes where they actually do have CGI, it's at least passingly decent.

The story isn't too compelling but enough so to maybe keep your attention for all 3 hours of it, but many ends are left open that leave you pondering later... uh why was that again?. I want to stress again, I haven't read the book, I hear this movie butchers them, but as a film unto it's own it still delivers an OK story.

Acting is around par for most involved, expect as much as you normally would from a made-for-TV movie.

All in all a decent movie to kill a lot of extra time with, even though there are a lot of other better alternatives out there.

Legends of Earthsea has a quality cast and acting -- though a cast that was largely south Asian or middle eastern might have been truer to the original story -- and also does nice things with settings, sets, and computer graphics, and could be an enjoyable TV movie in its own right, if the viewer were not aware of and comparing it to the original story.

The great shortcoming is the script and storyline, which has mangled the first two books of the Earthsea trilogy -- one of the greatest pieces of writing in the fantasy genre by one of the greatest fantasy and science fiction writers -- into a very mediocre, formulaic fantasy production with a story that bears only a passing resemblance to the original. The story suffers from a peripheral character, the Kargad king, being blown into a major character to provide a central villain, all but destroying the nuance and social complexity of antagonism in the original stories. The original stories have a strong theme of growth through the lifecourse of the central character, Ged. Collapsing the stories together and shortening the time frame has required a number of story changes which weaken this central theme. A number of changes have been made with respect to Atuan that play into a sappy, very unsatisfactory ending.

If you want cheap entertainment this is a good movie. If you want truly great stories, and fantasy reading that offers insight into your everyday life and commentary on the world, read the books instead: A Wizard of Earthsea, Tombs of Atuan, The Farthest Shore, by Ursula LeGuin. The later Tehanu continues the story of Ged, but is, IMO, less deserving of praise.