"It would be nice and fairly nearly true, to say that 'from that time forth, Eustace was a different boy.' To be strictly accurate, he began to be a different boy. He had relapses. There were still many days when he could be very tiresome. But most of those I shall not notice. The cure had begun."
This message, part of the heart and soul of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, is expressed fairly well in the film. The film took large liberties with the major, overarching plot, but the Christian themes, and especially Eustace's redemption, are well maintained throughout the movie. As a result, I like the movie adaptation.
A Wrinkle in Time is another of my favorite books. That book, and the series it is part of, does an excellent job of marrying the knowledge and truths obtained through science and those obtained through faith. Madeline L. Engle did a particularly good job in her novels of showing how faith and science are compatible, complimentary and necessary ways of arriving at truth. A major theme of A Wrinkle in Time is our individual worth, the gifts that God gives to us, and our responsibility to use those gifts in service of Him as we work to support good and light.
The movie of A Wrinkle in Time does an excellent job of being faithful, where possible, to the major plot points. It is an entertaining movie, and has excellent special effects. It is dazzling, and even teaches some good lessons. When I first watched the film, though, I had a deeply unsettling feeling about it. Though I couldn't quite put my finger on what was wrong, I knew it had something to do with the fact that those making the movie decided to remove all of the Christian features from the narrative. Unfortunately, it is not merely the fact they removed those features that ruins the film, but that in doing so, they turn the main message of the book on its head.
They might have been successful at expressing a partial message of the book in the film even while removing direct references to Christ (though I am skeptical doing so is possible), but they went further than that and actually ended up making the opposite point from what the book makes. Another author expresses how this happened much better than I can:
"Again, DuVernay comes so close. A message of self-acceptance is in so many ways profoundly good; Meg has, throughout the first part of the movie, a degree of self-rejection that’s frightening: she does not want to be who she is. Her desire to be otherwise means that re-materializing after she tessers is hard for her: she rejects her own being. To say yes to existing as oneself, distinct and different, is a crucial yes. That’s what she must learn, and she learns it as she learns that she loves and is loved by Charles Wallace.
"And her temptation is in fact also very effective: IT tempts her with being something other than herself. IT offers her the popular (and straight-haired, rather than natural-haired) mean-girl version of herself. And she passes the test: choosing to forgo that twisted power, and choosing to accept her own being. But this choice, self-acceptance, is shown as something that can only happen if one accepts that one is not distinct and different and created: you are only valuable if you find yourself to be part of the All, and to have being in yourself, rather than receiving it as a gift. It’s another kind of self-erasure, because it rejects the idea that you have limits.
"“You have everything you need in yourself,” a friend summarized it as we got ice cream after the movie. She paused. “Boy, that’s going to be a hard lesson for kids to unlearn.”
"The lyrics of the final song over the credits perfectly encapsulate this message: “Today I saw a rainbow in the rain / It told me I can do anything / If I believe in me,” Demi sings. And then the chant before the chorus: “I can, I can, I will, I will / I am, I am, no fear, no fear.” Learn to take on yourself the name of God, the I AM, and you have learned the lesson of the movie version.
"It is precisely the opposite of the message of the book. The wisdom here is precisely counter-wisdom. And this is why, while Jennifer Lee’s version of perennialism seems to mirror L’Engle’s, it does not."
It's interesting to me that in the process of attempting to remove Christ and God from the narrative of Wrinkle, they were unable to maintain the true message of the book. Perhaps there's a lesson here about the effects of attempting to segment our lives into spiritual and worldly spheres.
Maybe someday a movie version faithful to the heart and soul of Wrinkle will be made. Until that time, I think I'll stick to the book.
No comments:
Post a Comment