Less Random Entry

[beandelphiki]

Has anyone here (who's read the Redwall books) seen the Redwall TV show?

Have you read The Rats of NIMH? Well, in that case, have you seen the animated version of it? (I can't remember if that was a TV series or not.)

And how incredibly disappointing did you find it? Really.

I thoroughly dislike this newish trend of taking children's classics and dumbing them down to unbelievable levels. I watched some of The Rats on TV at my grandparents, and just generally thought it was a waste of airspace. Not only did it seem a bit dumbed down, the voices were annoying. Why should the mice automatically have high voices? It irritated me that they'd even try to make a TV show (TV movie?) out of The Rats, because so much would be lost. It's just not a book that translates to that medium.

But what bothers me the most about both of these shows is the animation...by default, the style is too "cute." Particularly for The Rats. In my mind, as a child, that book was a very serious story, gritty even, so the animation just makes me flinch. "Oooh, look, here's a cute little show for children!" How COULD you destroy that book that way?!? I'm thinking of all the kids who are going to grow up with that show as their mental definition of The Rats. It happened to me with The Wizard of Oz.

Those books actually have something to say, they are actually books that will promote a fertile imagination, and they are being turned into fodder for mindless sheep. Sound bites. Kids, staring, drooling..."Hey, mom, this show sucks. When's Pinky and the Brain on?"

Goddamn it, will money-hungry producers just lay off corrupting the good material?

And lets not even get into the travesty that is Stuart Little, the movie....

Comments

[endogenousardor.livejournal.com]

The Rats of NIMH was, along with Stuart Little and Charlotte's Web, among my favorite stories.

The movie came out in 1982 and I remember how disappointed I was. The movie version of Stuart Little in 1999 was an even bigger travestiy.

Thank goodness they got Charlotte's Web right in 1973. The casting of Henry Gibson for Wilbur and of Paul Lynne for Templeton bordered on genius.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

1982...hmm, that's older than me! But they still play it on TV, so I think it still counts.

Charlotte's Web! Oh...my...god...I forgot that one. Yep, the movie was great.

Stuart Little...*shudder* I never went to see it, I was too shocked by the trailer. It bears no resemblance, why couldn't they have called it Poorly Animated Mouse?

[indicoyote.livejournal.com]

The animated Rats of NIMH wasn't awful, as I remember it.. (And Justin, mrrr.. My first crush, I do believe. ;o)) Not great, yeah, and they made it a bit overly-mystical. :oP But at least it certainly had better animation than the Redwall series, which I just keep flipping over when I see it on TV largely because the production values just seem so poor, I couldn't even attest to the plots.

But yes, the books were definitely muchmuchmuch better, but that's almost always the case for any book/movie pair. :oP

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

Hmm, hmmm.

I think I was mainly turned off by the animation. I really couldn't stand to watch it.

But I remember that what parts I watched, I really disliked.

Again, I think the biggest problem is you just can't translate the book to a show. I think it was far too internal.

[emptygirl.livejournal.com]

Wow, I had'nt thought of The Rats of NIHM for years..! I have seen the movie, and yeah, it did'nt really do the book much justice really. I think when one reads the book, (or I did anyway) they develop the whole story in their minds, and create their own imagery, much more in depth.."rough", and detailed than the movie could ever portray!

Really..

[emptygirl.livejournal.com]

..I did'nt really mean to say "really" twice like that.

*really.* ;P

Re: Really..

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

*grin*

Now I nevr would have noticed...

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

[danielray.livejournal.com]

i saw The Secret of NIMH well before i read the book, and as a stand-alone cartoon, i liked it well enough. Sure, there were Disneyfied moments, but it fit into a small category of cartoons that, despite their drawbacks, had complicated and rich enough stories to stick in my internal mythology.

The Secret of NIMH, Watership Down, the cartoons for The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, The Last Unicorn, The Phantom Tollbooth, The Dark Crystal (ok, not a cartoon, but in a similar category). Now, granted, I've re-watched some of these as an adult, and they are actually quite atrocious at many points, but the stories remain.

The book, Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, when I read it, was basically in a whole other category of existence from the cartoon. It actually took me a couple of read-throughs to get its own flow, since i had already been influenced by the movie.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

Oh, corrupted by the movie, I see...*grin*

Well, I saw the movie Harry Potter before I read the book, and I think I have less complaints than those who did it the other way around. *shrug* That probably has a lot to do with it.

[aerindipity.livejournal.com]

I completely agree. They're making Ender's Game into a movie, and I shudder to think what they'll do with it. I just can't picture them doing that book justice, because they'll want to make it a "kids movie" that will make big bucks.

I found it insulting when I was younger, too. In general, people expect children to be mindless, unintelligent beings who will go gaga over anything as long as it's animated and "cute" enough. Sure, when I was a kid, I didn't have the experience of the world that I do now, but I was still rational and intelligent. I despised being talked down to. People don't give children enough credit, and it sickens me.

Other books that were ruined by movie treatment: The Neverending Story. Alice in Wonderland. The Little Mermaid (Hans Christian Andersen's version was haunting and disturbing), Hunchback of Notre Dame... anything Disney, really. It's sad.

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

They're making Ender's Game into a movie?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

That was the book I read and immediately thought...there's just NO WAY they can make this a movie. If nothing else, it's not possible that they could find young enough kids that could give a credible impression of adult intelligence.

Now, the Disney movies...well...I'm not sure Hans Christian Anderson's version of The Little Mermaid was "kid friendly"...I've heard about the ending, and I'm not sure if, ethically, Disney is not right to make their movies the way they do (did, really, since that type is now out of vogue...)

I realize this kind of contradicts what I was saying before, but I think The Rats of NIMH, for example, was a book that kids got really get something out of, and there was no NEED, that I could see, for a movie. If there is a message to get from The Little Mermaid, kids can get it from the book.

BUT I think it is also valuable to have movies with the happy endings, because movies affect us in a different way than books do. More immediately, and on a more subconscious level. So I like that they make movies that are NOT following the original material, and are NOT disturbing, for kids. They have to get that material SOMEWHERE, though, right?

What bothers me is that there is no need for The Rats or Redwall to be dumbed down, and there is no feel-good message you can get from it without dumbing it down. There's no point to that. Kids can just read the book.

But to make a movie that is true to the Hans Christian Anderson version of The Little Mermaid I think would produce a movie that a lot of kids may not be able to handle.

I remember I was really freaked out by parts of Hunchback when I went to see it.

Did any of that make sense? I'm not sure I'm saying this the way I want to. I think there's a fine line between taking something and making it watchable for a different audience, and taking something and ruining it and making it stupid.

Oh, something I should clarify...

[beandelphiki.livejournal.com]

...lest you think I was the kind of child that was very easily frightened by movies.

When I saw Hunchback, there was one part in particular that I was freaked out by, that I thought could have stood for more "Disney-fying." There was a part were the, um, "bad guy" (don't remember the character's name) is singing about sin and temptation and waving around Esmerelda's (sp?) scarf.

I remember I sensed there was some dark hidden meaning there that I couldn't quite understand, and I was terrified. I recall the theatre being absolutely silent throughout that song.

I thought they really didn't need that, and I'm surprised they did.