Review of A Wrinkle in Time (2018) by Shpostal — 09 Mar 2018

I'm a bit biased, having loved the book since I was in elementary school, as early as the third grade when my parents bought me my own copy because I loved the book. It was my first "novel" so to speak, even if it was geared somewhat toward younger readers.

Not that Madeleine L'Engel didn't propose some silly ideas in her book (defining the "Mrs.'" characters as former stars didn't make sense even when I first heard it, but it didn't take away from the overall imagery and storyline), but as usual Disney Studios have a way of sanitizing, omitting and ultimately ruining this adaptation a second time, after an even worse earlier version that was so bad I couldn't believe it.

We don't expect movie scripts unless they're bios or historical to follow to the letter the books they use for their movies, but this is ridiculous. There is no mention of the Murry twins, Sandy and Dennys, who would be in a book of their own later.

Charles Wallace was not adopted, and Meg's father disappeared as a part of a military experiment with several other scientists, and they were not part of NASA. Further details include the "Mrs.

" Whatsit, Who, and Which as young, and Whatsit a young first time whatever she is, which is the opposite of her book personality, very very old, as are the others. In fact, in the book, while Mrs.

Which is the strongest of the three, she barely if ever materializes completely, and then in a typical witch form. But Disney really blows it as their version of Meg and Charles Wallace are so far from the book characters it's maddening.

Meg was angry - smart, and much more impetuous in the book, and Charles Wallace was more vulnerable, and likable. The boy playing him does okay, but comes off as a young smartass most of the time.

The worst thing they did was screw around with Camazotz, a planet controlled by an evil entity called It. It didn't suddenly change backgrounds like the movie claims. The cul-de-sac with the automaton children did not convey the sinister behavior of It controlling their every breath and movement, along with the rest of the city where the kids had to go to find Meg and Charles Wallace's father.

The book had a far more sinister feel - all identical buildings that didn't fold up, then to apartment style buildings as they neared the city center, and finally the skycrapers, all identical, except for the monolithic CENTRAL Central Intelligence building, higher than any building on Earth and just as wide and deep.

Here is where the Man With The Red Eyes encountered them, not on a beach with a stupid Wizard of Oz reject who takes them to a single room instead of the great building. Believe me - the millions of us who loved the book I'm positive thought these plot aberrations were silly and distracted from the menace of the story.

Your kids might think it's okay, but I hate this movie. It fails every which way to convey the dangers of the book, removes the cold sinister feel of Camazotz, and falls woefully short of doing the classic book justice.

Maybe if some film company besides that lukewarm Disney could give it a go, but I doubt anybody will. Not even Chris Pine or Reese Witherspoon can save this dog.