Speaking of Geek Culture...

[cathyr19355]

Last night esrblog and I went to see "The Last Mimzy" with some friends. In case you haven't heard of it, it's based on a classic SF story from the 1940s by Henry Kuttner and C. L. Moore (a husband-wife team writing under the pseudonym "Lewis Padgett"). The moviemakers updated the tale to the early 21st century and tweaked the plot to produce a plausible happy ending (the original story is kind of dark, in the same way that "Childhood's End" is kind of dark. (If you'd like a synopsis of the original story, go here.)

Otherwise, the movie is very faithful to the storytelling style of the original. The movie manages to be intelligent and realistic in the way it treats the central characters. Chris O'Neil and Rhiannon Leigh Wryn, the boy and girl who are the central characters are amazing actors, but the adults are well cast also. Particular standouts among the adults include Rainn Wilson as the boy's science teacher and Michael Clarke Duncan as the local Homeland Security officer (yes, Homeland Security; it all makes sense in context).

To say more, I'd have to resort to spoilers, and I don't want to do that, because I think people should see this movie with as few preconceptions as possible. Don't let the fact that it's being plugged as a family movie deter you (as if any of my readers would). Just go see "The Last Mimzy." It's simple fun, without zombies, obscenity, or tragedy--and you can take your young kids/siblings/nieces and nephews with you.

Comments

[metalfatigue]

"Faithful to the storytelling style of the original"? What does that mean in the context of radically different media? Would you say Respighi's "Fountains of Rome" is faithful to the architectural style of the original?

Anyway, it sure isn't faithful to the plot of the original.

Bah.

Belated warning

[metalfatigue]

I suppose you might not hover over the link above long enough to see the popup that says "SPOILERS!" (For that matter, you might have a non-standards-compliant browser that doesn't show you the "title=" attribute of the link at all. Get Firefox.)

As for Cathy's suggestion that people should see the movie with as few preconceptions as possible…try to free yourself of the preconception that it has anything to do with the Padgett story on which it is ostensibly based. It might then be possible to like the movie; I'll never know.

Re: Belated warning

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

As I said both in response to your other comment and in my original post, the plot *is* different. And I'm glad of that, because I didn't like the original story (which I read right after seeing the movie) nearly as well. On the other hand, it's also incorrect to say that it has "nothing" to do with the Padgett story.

[metalfatigue]

The more you insist that it is connected to the original story, the harder it is for me to appreciate it on its own merits, or even to allow grudgingly that it might have some on which to be appreciated.

As for not liking the original story…de gustibus and all that, I guess.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

Are you familiar with the term "McGuffin?" (Not sure if that's how to spell it, though). It describes the relationship between the two (such as it is) pretty well; they use the same McGuffin. The other resemblances are more of motifs than anything else, and I can't get into them without spewing spoilers.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

I am not familiar with Resphighi's work, so I cannot answer your question as framed. What I can do is try to do a better job of explaining what I meant by the remark that you are currently shredding. ;-)

What I meant was that "The Last Mimzy" handled the whole theme of "children acquiring and using highly advanced technical knowledge" with the same kind of respect for the characters, and the same respect for the audience's willing suspension of disbelief, as the original.

And as for the plot, I said in my original post that they changed the plot. If you've read the original, you doubtless understand why--the original would have made a very dull movie, because in movie terms so little happens.

[metalfatigue]

[T]he original would have made a very dull movie….

Absolutely true.

*sigh* Perhaps I could have enjoyed it if I didn't know that it was supposed to be connected to a classic SF short by one of my favorite classic SF "authors." As it is, I am unable to evaluate it without reference to the story, and it's nothing like the story, and therefore I am not going to see it because I would hate it, no matter how good a movie it might be on its own terms.

I will say this: I respect them enormously for changing the name. That was the right thing to do. I am sure that that will enable some people to enjoy the movie in a manner unconnected to the story. It's just insufficient for me to do so.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

You're entitled not to want to see the movie, and to feel that it somehow impinged on a story you respect in its own terms. There are very few stories about which I would feel so strongly about an adaptation/change/homage/borrowing, but I respect the fact that you clearly do so.

As it was, we probably wouldn't have gone to see the movie without knowing of the connection. I had been very unimpressed by the trailer, and esrblog had no interest until he was told by a friend that the Padgett story had inspired it.

[metalfatigue]

BTW, Ottorino Respighi was an Impressionist composer; I was making a point about the incommensurability of different media, somewhat after Steve Martin's famous line "Talking about music is like dancing about architecture."

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

I'm enough of an English minor that I believe that comparisons can, to some extent, be made between media, but I'm too tired to want to try to debate the point here and now. :-)