Wrinkle in Time movie trailer

[Traab]

Its right here. Speaking for myself, im not too sure about this. Its pretty clearly an adaptation of the book, not strictly speaking the book itself. Going by the trailer itself as one example, megs father seems to play more of a role in things. Or at least has more of a presence. But there is a lot of familiar mixed in with the different so it may turn out ok. This series was one of the first young adult series I read growing up so it has a secure place in my heart, even though its both been decades since I read them, and the later books went weirdly religious.

[Legato Endless]

Given the historical controversy that followed the director's work with Selma I'd imagine extensive creative liberties will be taken here. It's definitely benefiting from the higher budget than the 2000s home video had. The casting is all very modern for good (more racial diversity) and ill (the parents and some of the witches are all rather younger than one would expect).

Too early to really make much of it. But yes, if this manages to greenlight sequels I'd imagine various aspects of the later books will be radically changed.

[Tiri]

megs father seems to play more of a role in things. Or at least has more of a presence.

That's probably just the result of someone deciding that there wasn't enough of the usual parent-related drama in the story.

[Traab]

That's probably just the result of someone deciding that there wasn't enough of the usual parent-related drama in the story.

It might also be because it would be hard to really establish the plot of saving him if he is long gone before the movie even starts and nobody knows if he ran away or was kidnapped or what. Iirc, and I may not, most of the info about dad we get in the book is meg thinking about it. Not in conversations or anything. So adding in a few good scenes to establish him as someone the audience wants to see rescued would probably be a smart idea.

[Gnoman]

I really don't know about this. It has been a very long time since I read the book, but I seem to remember this being my first introduction to some philosophical and scientific concepts that would be difficult to get across in a film. That, and I remember the main character doing a lot of mental tricks to evade the Big Bad's control that would be even harder to do.

[Traab]

I really don't know about this. It has been a very long time since I read the book, but I seem to remember this being my first introduction to some philosophical and scientific concepts that would be difficult to get across in a film. That, and I remember the main character doing a lot of mental tricks to evade the Big Bad's control that would be even harder to do.

I bet they speak out loud instead of thinking during those scenes. Would make things easier. And yeah, the story does have some heavy concepts for a young adult series.

[BWR]

If I hadn't been aware what this was a trailer for I'm pretty sure I would not have guessed correctly. Granted, it's been some years since I read the books so I have no doubt forgotten some details, but this seems, how should I put it, bigger and more aggressive than I remember.

[Kitten Champion]

It's an okay teaser trailer, but it seems more about "look, we have these actors you know in it" than anything else. I'm also in the it's been a while group, so I'm kinda lacking for an immediate reaction to what I saw.

I've also found Disney's recent YA-oriented genre movies to be a pretty mixed bag overall, lot of money on the screen but nothing terribly memorable coming out of it.

[Tiri]

It might also be because it would be hard to really establish the plot of saving him if he is long gone before the movie even starts and nobody knows if he ran away or was kidnapped or what. Iirc, and I may not, most of the info about dad we get in the book is meg thinking about it. Not in conversations or anything. So adding in a few good scenes to establish him as someone the audience wants to see rescued would probably be a smart idea.

I don't know about that. The whole portion of the plot related to saving her father was pretty secondary to the plot about the Dark Thing and IT for a large part of the book if I can remember it correctly, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to simply weave it in later.

I just wouldn't like the story to be changed so that the whole thing revolves around saving her father right from the start, since there are already enough stories around nowadays filled with parent-related angst.

[HasSIn]

As someone who has never heard of the book(s?), from the trailer it felt like I was watching Tomorrowland 2.0.

[Leewei]

I recently re-read the books with my daughter. They haven't aged very well in a few ways.

1) Lack of modern communication technology really makes the books feel dated.

2) Manners used in adult-child interactions, especially the protocols used by children when addressing adults, really feel old.

3) The portrayal of (our world's) science and scientists in the books, while sympathetic, ranges from offbeat to outright bizarre.

[Blackhawk748]

I recently re-read the books with my daughter. They haven't aged very well in a few ways.

1) Lack of modern communication technology really makes the books feel dated.

2) Manners used in adult-child interactions, especially the protocols used by children when addressing adults, really feel old.

3) The portrayal of (our world's) science and scientists in the books, while sympathetic, ranges from offbeat to outright bizarre.

Isn't the book like 40 years old or something at this point? I mean, i vaguely remember it being a bit dated (ish) in the 90s.

[DomaDoma]

I daresay I'm a fan. The Missuses (if their species ever had a name, I don't remember it) are better off for not being not-centaurs, definitely.

Camazotz? Superb. I guess these days, it comes off less as a metaphor for Communism and more as yet another iteration of Ward Cleaver, Archvillain, but eh. Either way.

Really hope (and frankly expect) that Meg's glasses aren't the huge social crisis they were in the original, and that her family exi...

...uh, wait, are we missing Charles Wallace?

*rewatches* Phew, no. But Calvin seems to have switched places with him in terms of exposure. As far as the trailer is concerned, anyway. Let's hope the movie is different.

I question Mrs. Whatsit being played by Oprah Winfrey, but as I didn't realize it was Oprah until the credits, I'll hold out hope. A mismatch, sure, but it beats the pants off Rosie O'Donnell as Ole Golly. If it's acquired a bunch of New Age: Vague Edition conceits in accordance with that casting choice, I won't see it. But if not, I totally will.

[Blackhawk748]

Camazotz? Superb. I guess these days, it comes off less as a metaphor for Communism and more as yet another iteration of Ward Cleaver, Archvillain, but eh. Either way.

I question Mrs. Whatsit being played by Oprah Winfrey, but as I didn't realize it was Oprah until the credits, I'll hold out hope. A mismatch, sure, but it beats the pants off Rosie O'Donnell as Ole Golly. If it's acquired a bunch of New Age: Vague Edition conceits in accordance with that casting choice, I won't see it. But if not, I totally will.

Im in the same boat here. Theres certain metaphors in the book for a reason, and id rather they don't change them that radically. Plus im getting rather sick of seeing "50's style family unit: A threat to all of existence"

[DomaDoma]

I think that, if Camazotz were something that the 2010s considers to be a very good thing, it would be truer to the spirit of the thing. Trouble is, not much of what this decade smiles on is uniform and child-appropriate at the same time. An elite after-school program, maybe. Every gymnast in perfect synchronicity on their fifty evenly-spaced balance beams. But all in all, that scene is so iconic that I think they made the right choice.

[Blackhawk748]

I think that, if Camazotz were something that the 2010s considers to be a very good thing, it would be truer to the spirit of the thing. Trouble is, not much of what this decade smiles on is uniform and child-appropriate at the same time. An elite after-school program, maybe. Every gymnast in perfect synchronicity on their fifty evenly-spaced balance beams. But all in all, that scene is so iconic that I think they made the right choice.

I guess it largely matter how it goes down. After all i only got like 20 seconds of it, so maybe they arent demonizing it.

[Traab]

Im in the same boat here. Theres certain metaphors in the book for a reason, and id rather they don't change them that radically. Plus im getting rather sick of seeing "50's style family unit: A threat to all of existence"

I mean, its less the 50s style family and more the disturbingly unnatural sameness of literally everything thats supposed to be so threatening. Its the uncanny valley effect of, "This isnt natural, this isnt right, something is WRONG here" They could have the same group dressed in current clothes with the kids all standing there with identical iphones in hand playing candy crush with identical moves and it would be just as disturbing. Bouncing a ball in unison is just something visible enough to stick out. It could have been jump rope for that matter. Or kids riding bikes pedaling at the exact same time.

[Vogie]

Going by the trailer itself as one example, megs father seems to play more of a role in things. Or at least has more of a presence.

His presence does bookend the story, so it may be sampling images of him from both the beginning and end of the movie.

Then again, after watching Spiderman: Homecoming (which has a pair of awesome clips in the trailer that were designed by the marketing team only and thus never appeared in the movie), those could be put in just to introduce the reason behind the plot.

[zimmerwald1915]

It could have been jump rope for that matter.

As I recall, in the book it was jump rope. Or more precisely, every girl had a jump rope, every boy had a bouncing ball.

Which makes me wonder: does Camazotz lose some of its wrongness by not showing this inculcation of strict gender roles at young ages?

[Leewei]

Isn't the book like 40 years old or something at this point? I mean, i vaguely remember it being a bit dated (ish) in the 90s.

Its original publication date shows as 1963, making the book 54 years old. The movie will need to alter a lot of the mundane details to allow modern audiences to connect to the characters.

Interestingly, I found Meg's use of love to free Charles Wallace from IT to be very similar to Harry Potter's breaking of Voldemort's influence. Both stories use the "power of love" to save the day, but do it fairly believably.

[dps]

the parents and some of the witches are all rather younger than one would expect

Well, the actor and actress playing the parents were born in 1980 and 1983, so they're easily old enough to have a 13 year old daughter, tbh I would have pictured them a bit older Can't say how old (or old-looking) I'd expect the witches to be, but I'd have guessed more Elizabeth Montgomery in Bewitched than Margaret Hamilton in The Wizard of Oz (though IRL Margaret Hamilton was only a few years older in 1939 than Elizabeth Montgomery was in 1964, and by the time Bewitched finished its run, Montgomery was actually older than Hamilton had been when The Wizard of Oz was filmed).

Having said that, I do find the casting choices a bit strange.

It's been 40-some years since I read the original book (and I haven't read the rest of the series; in fact, until about a year ago or so I didn't know that there were more books), so my memory of it is a bit hazy, other than remembering that I enjoyed it quite a bit.

[Traab]

Iirc, arent the three mrs what/which/whatevers kind of like gandalf in that they start off disguised as frumpy older women, but their "true forms" are a fair bit more spectacular/spirits of power? So them appearing as they do in the trailer would make sense if its post grand reveal. The withered old beggar woman begging for food turns out to be a beautiful fairy godmother etc etc etc.

[dps]

Iirc, arent the three mrs what/which/whatevers kind of like gandalf in that they start off disguised as frumpy older women, but their "true forms" are a fair bit more spectacular/spirits of power? So them appearing as they do in the trailer would make sense if its post grand reveal. The withered old beggar woman begging for food turns out to be a beautiful fairy godmother etc etc etc.

I don't even remember if they had physical bodies in their true forms.

[Traab]

I don't even remember if they had physical bodies in their true forms.

Werent they centaurs or something strange like that?

[theNater]

Werent they centaurs or something strange like that?

No. One of them turned into a centaur for a while, but it's explicit that the centaur form isn't really them any more than the human form is. I think the intended implication is that they don't have a corporeal form by default.

Spoiler: What They Actually Are

Show

Y'know, being angels and all.

[Tiri]

I thought they were dead stars.