kittynumbers In my opinion, the movie is not horrible, nor is it completely off from the books. It is a good movie that ou can really get into, even if you only started watching it in the middle.I, and many others, would have been much, much happier if they had stayed true to the books, but in some cases, i like the movie's changes.since saying which are good and which were bad is a spoiler, i will not say, but there are moments that you'll find yourself going back to the books and wondering which you like better, thought of course, the book will always be Best. :)

ridiculionius 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.

David Daniel Ball The Wizard of Earthsea entered my life while I was an adolescent, lonely and missing direction. The text provides a moral obstacle course in a fantasy setting which sidesteps the silly moralising of much fantasy literature. I waited twenty five years to watch this, and at the age of forty, I'm very disappointed.A lot of money has gone into this, and it will be many years before another attempt is made. The essential trade offs between mediums have been made, but some decisions seem extraordinary and unnecessary. The white actors in black roles. The naming change of the principal character. The storyline.The first story, detailing the finding of some wisdom by Ged, between his home and the release of the shadow from Roke should have been the limit of this film. Instead, the need to include the beautiful Kreuk led the production to try to tell the first three stories at once. The failure of the production stems from the inability of the producer to limit the production.

kenner-3 The vibrancy and beauty of the Earthsea books is lost on this script. While the author has made a valiant attempt to combine the plots of the first two books of LeGuin's deservedly famous Earthsea series the changes he has made have weakened the story and diminished the character development. Some of the acting in the first few scenes is appalling bad, but stick with it as it gets better as it rolls along. If you are a special effects fan then you will be disappointed. Some of the SFX are rather crude and jarring. So if like me you are a fan of the books put your memory on hold and enjoy this charming unpretentious little tale which reproduces elements of the books and occasionally some of the dialogue. A lesser work but charming none the less.