Gedo senki (2006) Reviews

• A wonderful vision, if not a faithful adaptation

  dancegethsemane2006-11-30

  I am a great fan of the LeGuin books, and when I learned that Studio Ghibli was going to be involved in making of the film I eagerly looked forward to its release. I hoped it would make up for the awful SciFi Channel-aired film. The good news in this outing is, there is genuine respect for the source material, even if it is not done genuine honor. The plot of the film is an amalgamation of elements of several of the Earthsea books, creating a new villain and having characters interact that indeed barely met in the books. While I could not help but feel disappointed by these changes, the film is still visually enjoyable to behold. It does not compare as favorably to Howl's Moving Castle, a story drastically altered from its own source material that still manages to stand on its own as a story. I could not help but think, as I watched the character Arren develop, why? Why, when there is such wonderful source material, that his introduction came across so muddled and poorly reasoned. I viewed the film with someone who had never read the books, and she really enjoyed it. Despite the film's shortcomings, you generally care for the cast by the end.

• Suffocated by its source material

  j30bell2007-08-03

  Films experiencing production hell are rarely as good as they might have been, no matter how good the director is (c.f. Gangs of New York and AI) and this one is no exception. Taken on its own terms, Tales of Earthsea is a competent, if not breathtaking, start for Miyazaki junior, and bears comparison to the lesser Gibli canon without scaling the heights of its major work. It is unfair to compare it to My Cousin Totoro, Spirited Away or Graveyard of the Fireflies; but it is also a shame for the fans of Earthsea. They didn't get a top director at the top of his game. The principal problem with the film is that it doesn't seem to know what to do with the books it is based on. Are they source material to be pillaged? Are they stories to be adapted? Are they concepts to be explored? In the end Miyazaki opts for a mix: the narrative structure is broadly based on the third novel (The Farthest Shore), with a significant sub-plots from both the first (The Wizard of Earthsea) and the fourth (Tehanu). Into the mix he throws some recognisable manga/anime formulae (the arch-enemy; the ronin henchmen; the violence) which cut across the major themes explored by the novels and alluded to by the film. If this all sounds like a disaster, it isn't exactly. The plot functions: evil wizard, through pride, upsets the balance of Earthsea forcing archmage, Sparrowhawk, in the company of a young prince, to do battle to restore the balance, destroy the evil and face down their own demons. Had Miyazaki been more ruthless all would probably have been well – for anime fans anyway. But there are too many blind alleys, lose ends and needless distractions – all nods to the books - which make the first half of the film in particular feel like a second rate brass band meandering painfully around a Brassed Off version of Adagio for Strings. The narcotic Hazia, for example, which dominates the beginning of the third story, is introduced early in the film and then simply abandoned. Later, Tenar's back-story fades into nothingness leaving the audience with a forcible impression of a producer impatiently looking at his watch. The whole effect is not homage, but distraction – and a film that it is at least 40minutes longer than it needed to be. Ursula LeGuin, who wrote the Earthsea novels, had suggested to (Hayao) Miyazaki that he create new story for Ged, uncluttered by her previous stories, set in the many years between the first two books. This would have made for a less ponderous film. Regarding the technical side of animation; it appears the younger Miyazaki was aiming for the dreamlike quality of animation so characteristic of his father's work. Again, he has some partial success in this regard, although it is undeniably more clunky than other Gibli titles. But a lot can be forgiven for his reliance on hand-drawn animation, and there are some moments of real beauty – windblown grasses, rocks on the seashore and chill sunsets. This, along with some strong characters and a much tighter second half, make Tales from Earthsea watchable film, if a slightly underwhelming one. But better than Disney. 6/10

• Like all Ghibli films, something worth watching

  kichiverde2006-08-01

  After watching this film I was pleased with the overall feel and look the production. Most notably I was impressed with the studio's visual creation of Earthsea. While the artistry and animation quality does not entirely measure up to other recent Ghibli studio films, I felt it did create a rich and colorful setting in which the story unfolds. A solid score also helps to shape the vibrant world that the movie conveys. However, I wouldn't consider all this to be a faithful representation of Ursula k. Le Guin's literary Earthsea, but rather something unique on to itself. One thing in particular that I think separates the film setting from that of the books' is the absence of the sea. I'm not saying its not there, just that it seems to mostly be in the background. As for the story I don't think it stands out as anything great. It was limited from the start. The movie like the book is a single episode in a much larger tale. In no way could it possibly encompass the magnitude of the Earthsea series, let alone the main events in The Farthest Shore. It would simply be too much to present in a canvass of its length. As a result It lacks the epic feel of Princess Mononoke or the closure that comes at the end of Spirited Away. In other respects though, the film borrows heavily from Ghibli's previous works, mainly with the characters. They are shadows of former Ghibli creations, but due to their interaction and set of circumstances they retain some originality. I might also add that they come off as serious, and are far removed from the playful personalities that give other Ghibli films their charm. This said they still manage to play out their given roles and drive the story forward. From beginning to end the film holds up in large part because the setting never loses its feel. I enjoyed this picture in spite of its flaws, again because of it's look and feel. For once I could see winged dragons clash and wizards face off in a Ghibli film. In my opinion Goro Miyazaki did a decent job bringing it all to life. At the same time, I hope he will learn from this experience and strive to do better next time. After my seeing Gedo Senki he has my support.

• A very solid debut from a man standing in a gigantic fatherly shadow.

  esquared-12007-05-22

  Better than I expected, a fantastic debut from Goro Miyazaki (son of Hayao Miyazaki) and a worthy addition to Ghibli's consistently brilliant catalog. It follows the prince Arren, as he runs from his kingdom and encounters a wizard named Ged. From here, he is drawn into a classic good versus evil battle. Goro Miyazaki's film bares a lot of similarities to his father's films, but lacks some of the whimsical nature that makes Hayao's movies so distinct. Tales from Earthsea is a more subdued film than films such as Spirited Away and Porco Rosso, and doesn't really hit the emotional or imaginative heights that Hayao Miyazaki's films do. But this isn't always a bad thing - It's simply Goro's style, and this element makes his film a more traditional, perhaps more sensible narrative. Goro has taken a somewhat conservative route with this film - visually and audibly it's classic Ghibli, full of lush environments and excellent animation. In terms of narrative, it carries classic Ghibli (particularly Miyazaki) hallmarks - epic battles of good and evil, cathartic journeys, and the hospitality and grace of ordinary people - but it also has more of a traditional narrative. Good and evil are, unlike many his father's films, clearly defined, and the events of the film lack the extravagance (and imagination) of Hayao's films. It's a wise move - rather than try to re-invent the wheel, Goro has made a wonderfully solid and cohesive film. To simply compare Goro Miyazaki (and his film) to his father is unfair and sells a great movie short - he has obviously inherited a tremendous flair for storytelling, and with Ghibli's animation team behind him, has created a fantastic debut film. There's another Miyazaki in town - and i can't wait to see where he goes next.

• Ghibli Fantasy Lacks the Magic Touch

  Mabkid2007-07-31

  Although I am a fan of most Ghibli productions and Ursula Le Guinn's fantasy series, I could not help but feel disappointed at Ghibli's latest production. Ghibli Studios has long been hailed as the Disney of the East, led by Miyazaki Hayao's leadership and captivating masterpieces (Totoro, Laputa, Nasuica, etc.). Even the more serious works by Takahata Isao had strong messages underlying every story (Pon Poko, Omoide Poro Poro, etc.). Miyazaki Goro's debut is a novice's work-in-progress and an apprentice's workshop exercise, at best. The rearranging of Earthsea's storyline was interesting to figure out, but filled with flaws. The theme of Book 1 "A Wizard of Earthsea" was applied to a different character (Arren), whose prior mistake in life was not clarified well in terms of motive. Reference was made to Book 2 "The Tombs of Atuan" but without any hints that lend itself to proper character development (Tenar). Book 3 "The Farthest Shore" served as the drive for the main story but some major themes and fascinating western lands of the dragons were left out. Book 4 "Tehanu" serves a different purpose in the Earthsea series, especially for Ged, and so that theme was also not properly presented. In addition, the depiction and explanation of one of the main Book 4 characters, Therru, was lacking and so most audiences might be confused by the eventual ending of the Ghibli adaptation. However, Miyazaki Goro should be applauded at least for trying to adapt this legendary work into such a compact amalgamation. Comparisons to the books aside, as an animated movie, the real problem with this production is that it fails to really capture the audience. Miyazaki Hayao had a sense of touch when it came to building mystery and creating curiosity among the audience regarding the storyline, while offering good pacing with action and character/story development. Even Takahata Isao's slower more serious stories had deep nostalgia built into his moralistic messages. Gedo Senki failed to capture the audience by building enough mystery, hence interest in the development of the story, or offering purposeful action scenes, or enriching the dialogue well enough to deliver a deep philosophical message behind the now already unoriginal existential questions for living. But, simply as a stand alone story, it falls flat. If these were done well, the story rearrangement from the original would add on to make Miyazaki Goro a genius. Still, there is some value to this film. The music and song lyrics (Japanese version, at least) captured the essence of the original themes best. Fans of Earthsea and Ghibli, however, may get a kick from either trying to figure out the storyline rearrangement or identifying Ghibli icons that have shown up in past works. Other than that, it would seem like just a sub-par animated movie for TV.