Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×
JulyDiaz

Episode 187 - Beautiful Creatures

Recommended Posts

 

According to the caster wiki, the main drawback seems to be: "They will become sociopathic, no longer having empathy and remorse, and are incapable of love. They are taken over by negative emotions. Ridley says going Dark changes the way you feel about people. When a Dark Caster turns Dark, they sense the feelings they had, the things they loved, but those feelings are distant. They can fight the sociopathy, but can't successfully grow out of it."

 

So...I guess your personality shifts dramatically when you turn dark?

We get a bit of that with her sister. Apparently she was an innocent and nice girl like Lena but when the dark hits her she just kills that drunk guy for fun, and she also murders that cop. So clearly has no regards for human life and it is something for her to play with. So much like Star Wars, you go to the dark side and get a better ascetic and kill people willy-nilly.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Oof, guys, I'm about halfway through with the episode and it's abundantly clear that none of you have ever spent any time in the South. And, no, Atlanta doesn't count. The accents aren't as terrible as you're making them out to be, towns like that really do exist, and I actually know people who had to participate in a Civil War re-enactments for school credit.

 

A couple of mid-episode corrections:

 

One of the guests (I'm sorry, I didn't catch which one) seemed incredulous that we should view Ethan as a good guy because he's a smart ass to his ex-girlfriend. That's fine, but it's also overlooking the fact that she tells him that the books he reads will send him "straight to Hell." I think it's also safe to assume this is the way she has always been and that she didn't just become a hardcore Bible-Thumper over the Summer. And considering she won't read To Kill a Mockingbird because it's a "banned book," I think she's being sincere and not just telling him he will go to Hell because she's angry at him. I mean, I don't know about you, but I think I'd rather not date people who think the things that give me joy in life are sinful.

 

Also, someone said that they would have liked the movie about Ridley's character. I'm paraphrasing, but it was something like "a good girl struggling against becoming evil." I'm sorry, but isn't that exactly what this movie is about? Ridley is the consequence Lena is trying to avoid. That's, like, the whole movie.

 

I think it would really help to see the metaphors at play in this movie. There are, what I consider to be, clever choices being made.

 

The reason the movie tales place in the South isn't just because, "Gee, this has never been done before" but because a small, superstitious town in the South is the closest analog modern America has to 17th Century New England. The townsfolk reaction to Macon and Lena are essentially the equivalent of the Salem Witch Trials. It's a way to present the same sort of prejudice while keeping the characters contemporary.

 

As Religion - or at least religiosity - plays a major role in the movie, it is important to see who that plays against the overall narrative. Lena's struggle is that her family lines has been cursed by the actions of an ancestor long ago. Because of this curse, she feels like she doesn't have any agency over her life and it is used by the other characters in the movie to leverage control of her destiny. In other words, Lena's journey is an allegory for original sin. Lena's ancestor doing the "forbidden curse" is analogous to Eve eating the "forbidden fruit" - a story that has been used since its inception to keep woman down. In the movie, she is told that she has no choice in her fate. That because of who she is and who her ancestors were, she is predestined to be "evil." In the end, however, through her own actions, she "reclaims" her own identity and agency. She chooses not to be good or evil, but a balance of both. And of course this is important as it relates to the South.

 

You see, Lena and Macon both represent the South as well - it's past and possible future. I mean, you don't just choose the name "Macon" when you could have just as easily named in Chad, or something. By choosing this as his name, the writer is making some kind of statement. Macon represents the Old South. This also explains his accent as being more over the top. He is purposefully affecting the speech of the landed gentry class of former plantation owners. I mean, he literally owns most of the land in Gatlin. Unfortunately, like people who glorify the antebellum South, he still tends to think backward rather than forward. This is clear in the scene where he unironically asks Lena to play piano or fetch tea for Ethan and himself. However, as his infatuation with Google suggests, and like the South itself, he is making an attempt to change with the times - albeit, at a glacial pace. He is a formerly Dark Caster living as a Light Caster. He is a man with a dark past trying to be good. And he is making this choice out of love and hope for the future.

 

Lena represents the South as it currently stands - a state indecisive purgatory. The question is: can she be a positive force for the future, or will she be bogged down by the demons of the past? People are quick to prejudge the South as a bunch of Bible-Thumping, backward facing rubes, but that's an unfair generalization. Ignorance is everywhere. Not just the South. Ultimately, this movie's solution is to make like Kylo Ren kill the past. This is why Macon has to die. Yes, he was trying to change, but his way of thinking has no place in the future. Lena on the other hand, through her own choices, has achieved a state of balance. She can be good and bad. That is, the South can be good, but it also has to come to terms with it's own darkness as well.

 

Whether or not people enjoy this movie or not really doesn't bother me - it's not like I think it's like the greatest thing ever. However, if you're not getting this out of the movie, then I'm afraid you're missing movie's primary message.

 

(I may have more to write about this later. :)/>/> )

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
According to the caster wiki, the main drawback seems to be: "They will become sociopathic, no longer having empathy and remorse, and are incapable of love. They are taken over by negative emotions. Ridley says going Dark changes the way you feel about people. When a Dark Caster turns Dark, they sense the feelings they had, the things they loved, but those feelings are distant. They can fight the sociopathy, but can't successfully grow out of it." So...I guess your personality shifts dramatically when you turn dark?

 

I mean, yeah. That's the whole irony with Lena's ancestor. She turns to the Dark to save the love of her life, but because she has to sacrifice her soul to do it, she immediately kills him anyway.

 

This movie is partially about accepting death as a part of life. Much like how we see, or - more to the point - don't see Ethan's father. He can't accept his wife died and it is tearing up - not only his life - but the life of his son. Essentially, paralleling Lena's journey. That is, the actions of a descendent having consequences on the present.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Someone on the episode* also asked why we have to follow Ethan's story, and wondered why the story wasn't told from Lena's point of view. I would say that it's the same reason Twilight is told from Bella's point of view and not Edward's. In most paranormal romances - although, admittedly, maybe not all - the non-supernatural character is going to be your POV character. They are the reader/audience surrogate. As each new mystery of this strange new world unfolds for them, it unfolds for us. Even Harry Potter wasn't raised a wizard. In the first few books, he's essentially a Muggle with magic powers. This allows him to convey the appropriate awe and wonder at the fantastical things that are going on around him. Otherwise, it would just be him going, "I rode a broom today - big whoop." Or, "We planted Mandrakes in Herbology. Snooze. I hate school." The point is, if the POV character is supernatural, then it makes absolutely no sense for them to be constantly thinking about - what would be to them - their mundane world and existence.

 

 

 

*I'm so sorry I'm not properly attributing these quotes. I feel like it's rude. I will be happy to edit and do so if anyone can tell me who said what.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Someone on the episode* also asked why we have to follow Ethan's story, and wondered why the story wasn't told from Lena's point of view. I would say that it's the same reason Twilight is told from Bella's point of view and not Edward's. In most paranormal romances - although, admittedly, maybe not all - the non-supernatural character is going to be your POV character. They are the reader/audience surrogate. As each new mystery of this strange new world unfolds for them, it unfolds for us. Even Harry Potter wasn't raised a wizard. In the first few books, he's essentially a Muggle with magic powers. This allows him to convey the appropriate awe and wonder at the fantastical things that are going on around him. Otherwise, it would just be him going, "I rode a broom today - big whoop." Or, "We planted Mandrakes in Herbology. Snooze. I hate school." The point is, if the POV character is supernatural, then it makes absolutely no sense for them to be constantly thinking about - what would be to them - their mundane world and existence.

 

 

 

*I'm so sorry I'm not properly attributing these quotes. I feel like it's rude. I will be happy to edit and do so if anyone can tell me who said what.

*It was one of the women but now I feel bad that I don't know their voices well enough to attribute the quote.

 

But I would argue that, while you are correct in being the POV from the "muggle" is a good way to enter this world, this particular movie really has us in both worlds enough that you could have it in Lena's POV and you would still be mystified by the magic. Cause like Jason had asked if this was a "Twilight for boys" and Paul answered no, which leads me to that point that we don't need to be in Ethan's POV at all, because the girls that are reading this book and watching this movie then aren't wanting to be in the POV of someone falling in love with magic, but the one to hold the magic and the power.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

*It was one of the women but now I feel bad that I don't know their voices well enough to attribute the quote.

 

But I would argue that, while you are correct in being the POV from the "muggle" is a good way to enter this world, this particular movie really has us in both worlds enough that you could have it in Lena's POV and you would still be mystified by the magic. Cause like Jason had asked if this was a "Twilight for boys" and Paul answered no, which leads me to that point that we don't need to be in Ethan's POV at all, because the girls that are reading this book and watching this movie then aren't wanting to be in the POV of someone falling in love with magic, but the one to hold the magic and the power.

 

I’m just saying, traditionally, that’s not the case. I’m sure there is one, but I can’t think of a single instance of a paranormal romance that is told from the perspective of the paranormal creature trying to be with a normal person. And if there is one, I’m not surprised I’ve never heard of it. We relate to the “Muggle” while we long for the extraordinary. If we see the movie from her POV, and still include the romance aspect, then it’s her learning about a boring human and her describing his reactions of her powers - which would dilute their impact.

 

For example:

 

Ethan’s POV: All at once, the sun went dark. I could taste lightning in the air. The hairs on the back of my arm stood on end. My tongue felt dry and heavy. Her eyes flashed. There was a crackle of thunder. Then the sky opened up and I was drenched.

 

Lena’s POV: Ethan kept telling me I could break the curse, but what did he know? He didn’t know what it’s like to be a Caster: to be a Duchannes. How could he? To shut him up, I cast a spell to make it rain on him. He looked annoyed.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Someone on the episode* also asked why we have to follow Ethan's story, and wondered why the story wasn't told from Lena's point of view. I would say that it's the same reason Twilight is told from Bella's point of view and not Edward's. In most paranormal romances - although, admittedly, maybe not all - the non-supernatural character is going to be your POV character. They are the reader/audience surrogate. As each new mystery of this strange new world unfolds for them, it unfolds for us. Even Harry Potter wasn't raised a wizard. In the first few books, he's essentially a Muggle with magic powers. This allows him to convey the appropriate awe and wonder at the fantastical things that are going on around him. Otherwise, it would just be him going, "I rode a broom today - big whoop." Or, "We planted Mandrakes in Herbology. Snooze. I hate school." The point is, if the POV character is supernatural, then it makes absolutely no sense for them to be constantly thinking about - what would be to them - their mundane world and existence.

 

The movie pulls a weird POV switch somewhere along the way, though. By the end we're seeing a lot of events that only Lena would be privy to (especially the brainwashing part); it's clearly not Ethan's story anymore. So why was he the narrator, again?

 

I think Harry Potter is pretty consistent about sticking to Harry's POV.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

The movie pulls a weird POV switch somewhere along the way, though. By the end we're seeing a lot of events that only Lena would be privy to (especially the brainwashing part); it's clearly not Ethan's story anymore. So why was he the narrator, again?

 

I think Harry Potter is pretty consistent about sticking to Harry's POV.

 

Honestly, I have a few ways to explain that away, but I'm sure you're not going to like them :)/>

 

From purely a story standpoint, Lena takes over as our POV character after she has accepted her fate and made her sacrifice (i.e. giving up Ethan). Because of this it, it makes sense to follow that storyline though. And, quite frankly, as I stated above, Ethan experiencing her world as the outsider from a claustrophobic world is far more interesting than her experience as an insider. His imbalance as he tries to negotiate his love for her while absorbing this whole new world is the conflict that propels the plot forward. It forces both him and the audience to ask questions. (Why am I having these dreams? Who is this woman? What is a Caster? What can we do? etc.) The story from her point of view would just be a series of statements. Or at the very least, statements that would lead to questions, which that would lead to clunky(er?) exposition wherein she attempts to explain herself...to herself? (My name is Lena Duchannes, I'm a Caster. What's a Caster? Well, a Caster magical person, sort of like a witch...") Of course, this would be a lot easier if the story wasn't told First Person, but we're living in a YA World, and in the YA World, First Person is King.

 

Which leads me to the more boring, technical reason for this change of perspective. Ultimately, this is an adaptation of a book where Ethan is the narrator. It wouldn't really make sense for them to change that for the movie. It would be like going to see Twilight and suddenly Edward is the narrator. Logistically, that would mean a ton of changes. Additionally, in the movie, as well as the book, Ethan gets taken off of the table at the end. In the movie, he is ensorcelled to forget Lena and in the book Sarafine murders him (Google it!). Now, in the book, when he (*spoilers*) ceases to be murdered, you can have a character fill him in on everything he has missed. It might even work moderately well. But can you imagine how that would play in a movie? Lena takes away his memory and then the screen goes black. After a couple of seconds, he opens his eyes and Lena is sitting on the edge of his bed. She then proceeds to explain to him everything that has happened while he was out of commission. So while it's kind of clunky, considering the "telling not showing" alternative, I think it's forgivable. It also allows her to be the hero instead of him. She doesn't claim herself because he's there cheering her on, she does it for herself.

 

Basically, think of it this way. What’s more interesting: learning through discovery or lecture?

 

And, yes, they could have done this or that or whatever differently and it would have been better. Everything can be improved with a re-write. I'm just saying, for what it is, it's not that bad. Try the YA movie City of Bones where the two love interests find out that they are brother and sister and continue to have the hots for each other anyway.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The reason the movie tales place in the South isn't just because, "Gee, this has never been done before" but because a small, superstitious town in the South is the closest analog modern America has to 17th Century New England.

The difference being that the Puritans practiced the true doctrines of Christ as outlined by John Calvin, whereas everyone else is a mere heretic.

 

(sarcasm, just in case my last name didn't give it away).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The difference being that the Puritans practiced the true doctrines of Christ as outlined by John Calvin, whereas everyone else is a mere heretic.

 

(sarcasm, just in case my last name didn't give it away).

 

Lol - I got you :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Which leads me to the more boring, technical reason for this change of perspective. Ultimately, this is an adaptation of a book where Ethan is the narrator. It wouldn't really make sense for them to change that for the movie. It would be like going to see Twilight and suddenly Edward is the narrator. Just, logistically, that would mean a ton of changes. Additionally, in the movie, as well as the book, Ethan gets taken off of the table at the end. In the movie, he is ensorcelled to forget Lena and in the book Sarafina murders him (Google it!). Now, in the book, when he (*spoilers*) ceases to be murdered, you can have a character fill him in on everything he has missed. It might even work moderately well. But can you imagine how that would play in a movie? Lena takes away his memory and then the screen goes black. After a couple of seconds, he opens his eyes and Lena is sitting on the edge of his bed. She then proceeds to explain to him everything that has happened while he was out of commission. So while it's kind of clunky, considering the "telling not showing" alternative, I think it's forgivable. It also allows her to be the hero instead of him. She doesn't claim herself because he's there cheering her on, she does it for herself.

 

That actually makes some sense. It may be there was no way to stay true to the book's setup while still making it cinematically effective. Or perhaps there was, but it would have required a heavy re-thinking of the script.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I just finished the episode and I really can't say that I'm completely sold that this was a HDTGM worthy movie. For me, it's solidly three stars - which as they point out - puts it in a realm of being neither good enough nor bad enough. Although, I suspect I liked it more than most :)/>

 

I am utterly shocked that no one brought up the scene where Macon forced Ethan to recite his bleak future for him - culminating with his gruesome suicide. It is an utterly heartbreaking moment. If you don't empathize with his character after that scene, I don't know what to tell you. I would argue that this movie is worth watching for that scene and the scene where Lena makes him forget (and Viola Davis’ subsequent reaction).

 

Speaking of which...

 

It's awesome that Lena makes Ethan forget about her, but while they were together, they were a pretty high profile couple in a very small town. It's also clear, since Amma still remembers that they were together, that Lena's spell is kind of single target affair. I would have loved it had the movie followed Ethan to school over the next few weeks as he gets increasingly frustrated by all the people asking him about the strange girl he hardly knows and insisting that he dated her for, like, three months.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I just finished the episode and I really can't say that I'm completely sold that this was a HDTGM worthy movie. For me, it's solidly three stars - which as they point out - puts it in a realm of being neither good enough nor bad enough. Although, I suspect I liked it more than most :)

 

I think this movie is "not good," but generally on the high end for HDTGM entries. There is maybe a decent teen romance story in here that's swallowed up by all the vague, nonsensical fantasy gobbledygook.

 

It's awesome that Lena makes Ethan forget about her, but while they were together, they were a pretty high profile couple in a very small town. It's also clear, since Amma still remembers that they were together, that Lena's spell is kind of single target affair. I would have loved it had the movie followed Ethan to school over the next few weeks as he gets increasingly frustrated by all the people asking him about the strange girl he hardly knows and insisting that he dated her for, like, three months.

 

I also wondered about this. She made Ethan forget, but did the spell also make everyone else (besides Viola Davis) forget? Because if not, he's going to figure out pretty quickly that something fishy is going on.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

I think this movie is "not good," but generally on the high end for HDTGM entries. There is maybe a decent teen romance story in here that's swallowed up by all the vague, nonsensical fantasy gobbledygook.

 

That’s kind of what I mean. I feel like this falls into the Dragonheart territory. I get that people’s mileage may vary, but imho, I feel like there are other YA movies that are way worse and way crazier.

 

I also feel like the vibe is really negative on this one and I’m really not sure what it’s done to deserve that. And quite honestly, it’s making me a little protective. I prefer to celebrate the disaster, not kick people when they’re down.

Share this post


Link to post

 

That’s kind of what I mean. I feel like this falls into the Dragonheart territory. I get that people’s mileage may vary, but imho, I feel like there are other YA movies that are way worse and way crazier.

 

I also feel like the vibe is really negative on this one and I’m really not sure what it’s done to deserve that. And quite honestly, it’s making me a little protective. I prefer to celebrate the disaster, not kick people when they’re down.

This for sure. I didn't like this but its just a mess more than anything else. It's at once too long but also too short. It's not notably bad though. I will remember my reaction to it being released and bombing more than I'll remember the movie itself.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

That’s kind of what I mean. I feel like this falls into the Dragonheart territory. I get that people’s mileage may vary, but imho, I feel like there are other YA movies that are way worse and way crazier.

 

There are some HDTGMs that I don't think are actually "bad" movies in the strictest sense. TimeCop, Bloodsport, and most of the Fast & Furious movies, for example. They ain't winning any Oscars, but they basically accomplish what they want to accomplish.

 

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow will be a real test, since I remember thinking that movie was pretty good. It has mostly positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I wonder what the reasoning was for picking that, besides the fact that it was a box office failure?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
That’s kind of what I mean. I feel like this falls into the Dragonheart territory. I get that people’s mileage may vary, but imho, I feel like there are other YA movies that are way worse and way crazier.

 

I also feel like the vibe is really negative on this one and I’m really not sure what it’s done to deserve that. And quite honestly, it’s making me a little protective. I prefer to celebrate the disaster, not kick people when they’re down.

 

Three words: young Han Solo

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Three words: young Han Solo

I went into this movie thinking it was weird how all the adults were really famous, respected actors but none of the kids ever did anything notable after this movie. When I got to Alden, I realized I had seen several of his movies and couldn't place him in any of them. Then I saw he was Han Solo.

 

I wouldn't say it depressed me but, it wasn't a great feeling.

Share this post


Link to post

Re: Harry Potter and the Sorting into Houses

 

Every character belongs in the exact house to which they were assigned. Honestly, there really shouldn't be an argument about whether Cedric belongs in Hufflepuff or Hermione should really be in Ravenclaw (REPRESENT!). At the end of Chamber of Secrets, Harry is dismayed to discover that the Sorting Hat only placed him in Gryffindor because he asked it not to sort him into Slytherin. Dumbledore reassures him by saying, "It is not our abilities that show us what we truly are. It is our choices."

 

The Sorting Hat doesn't chose your House for you, it just acts as a facilitator so you can make the decision for yourself. For some people, like Malfoy, this is an easy decision. For others, it takes more time and doesn't always make sense - at least, not on the surface.

 

And, I'm sorry to say, this is why can't really game Pottermore either. :) If you are basing your answers exclusively on "I think this answer is what will get me into this House" then you are doing it exactly right. Your choosing your own House.

 

I would also like to give a recommendation for the Jim Dale read Harry Potter audiobooks. They are fantastic!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Guys... It took me 3 go'rounds to watch this movie and the final one took. I actually really liked it. Sure, it's Twilihungerpotter, but I thought it was kind of sweet. I love that she erased his memory and I love that it came back to him right at the very end. It has some legendary actors and it had a lot of potential that paid off sometimes and not other times. I think some of the reactions of characters to things that were happening were not naturally acted, but If I had watched this as a teen I would have probably loved it.

 

Forgive me if what I'm about to talk about was in the podcast - I have listened to it, but that was a few viewings of this movie ago:

What I really want to understand is the curse. What is it exactly and how does it work?

The curse is the infliction of good or bad witchy-ness upon a female caster?

ALL female casters have to deal with this, or just Lena and her maternal family?

Was the woman who's man died in the Civil War the first Caster?

 

As I understood Lena's explanation to Y. Han, all female casters may or may not have the dark inflicted upon them on their 16 birthday, while the male caster's can choose which side to live on. So if that is correct every female caster has to have someone they love die?? It seemed like their "true love" had to die in order not to become dark, but they changed the rules at the end when Macon dies instead.

 

This whole operation is tenuous and seemingly a moving target.

 

On another note, do we really get any information on why we shouldn't join the dark side? They have cooler cars, dresses and seem to get to make out with whomever they want. Sure you don't always get invited to Thanksgiving, but the trade off seems trivial.

I ask this question to myself a lot when it comes to movies and religion trying to warn people away from the dark life. Chanting, dancing, spells, cooking, baking, singing, cats, you get to work outside, I imagine you have flexible hours... and of course sexy AF outfits... The fact that this doesn't have as much lure for people in narratives boggles the mind.

giphy.gif

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

It's awesome that Lena makes Ethan forget about her, but while they were together, they were a pretty high profile couple in a very small town. It's also clear, since Amma still remembers that they were together, that Lena's spell is kind of single target affair. I would have loved it had the movie followed Ethan to school over the next few weeks as he gets increasingly frustrated by all the people asking him about the strange girl he hardly knows and insisting that he dated her for, like, three months.

 

Yes! Wouldn't people ask him about this constantly? Or since Amma is magic too - maybe she's like Fry and the brains and she's the only one who remembers?

Jeez... 2 Futurama references in mere minutes.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Forgive me if what I'm about to talk about was in the podcast - I have listened to it, but that was a few viewings of this movie ago:

What I really want to understand is the curse. What is it exactly and how does it work?

The curse is the infliction of good or bad witchy-ness upon a female caster?

ALL female casters have to deal with this, or just Lena and her maternal family?

Was the woman who's man died in the Civil War the first Caster?

 

As I understood Lena's explanation to Y. Han, all female casters may or may not have the dark inflicted upon them on their 16 birthday, while the male caster's can choose which side to live on. So if that is correct every female caster has to have someone they love die?? It seemed like their "true love" had to die in order not to become dark, but they changed the rules at the end when Macon dies instead.

 

As I understand it the curse is on Lena’s maternal side and yes the curse turns them Dark. There was nothing in the movie that suggested Genevieve (the lady hologram from the Civil War) was the first caster.

 

No, the curse isn’t on all female casters. On the 16th birthday of a female caster, while the moon is out, they are “claimed” light or dark, based on Their true nature. So say if a female caster *wanted* to be light while having a dark nature, she would be forcibly claimed dark. For male casters they can choose to be light or dark and they can flip flop throughout their lives.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Hi...me again. In case anyone was wondering, the Daily Beast wrote an embarrassingly laudatory article (link at the bottom) about the differences between the film and book. It has jogged a few of my memories. Here are some of the highlights.

 

1. While Alden Ehrenreich (Tetro) was perfectly cast to play the charismatic—yet endearingly dorky at times—Southerner Ethan, he has higher aspirations in the movie version than in the book, from being just a sophomore basketball jock longing to meet an atypical girl to being a junior applying to every college to break free from Gatlin.

 

I really agree with the change here. In the book, Ethan doesn’t really have a lot going on. He’s just kind of a dude. I love his love of literature, right down to his Allen Ginsburg glasses.

 

allen-ginsberg-9311994-2-402.jpg

 

3. There’s little time to waste in this relatively short film, so Ethan mentions on a couple of occasions that his father is grieving from the death of his wife and is hiding in his study. But the father’s physical presence is completely omitted in the film; in the book, he is a constant dark reminder of Ethan’s upsetting home life.

 

As I’ve said before, I think not showing his father was a good call. Seeing his wreck of a father wouldn’t have really accomplished anything other than depress the audience. I think his absence in the movie effectively conveys his dereliction as a father.

 

4. Perhaps a little too cliché for the movie, Lena Duchannes—beautifully portrayed by the mature-beyond-her-years Alice Englert (Ginger & Rosa)—drives a retro pale yellow Mercedes Benz instead of the signature black hearse she steers in the book. However, she does not downplay the amount of dark clothes and black eyeliner that are characteristic of her Caster ways. All witches have to be at least a little Goth, right?

 

LOL! I had forgot about this! This would have been TERRIBLE! It would have been straight out of Wacky Races.

 

10. The implications of Lena’s choice in becoming a light or dark Caster vary from the novel to the film. On-screen, going dark means Lena will become a starkly powerful evil witch. In the book, if she becomes dark, every light witch will die, and vice versa. Why would she care if the dark witches died? Well, as innocent as he may be, her beloved dream-sucking uncle would be a part of that lot.

 

This is a tough call. On the one hand, this definitely raises the stakes and I think it would have been an interesting dilemma; however, in order for this to have any impact, this would have meant less time devoted to Ethan and Lena’s relationship and more time devoted to family dynamics. Honestly, while I think the book’s version is more interesting, it probably wouldn’t have worked in a two hour film. I think they made a decision and ran with it.

 

Some other differences:

 

• Macon was an Incubus - a creature that feeds off the dreams of Mortals. His alignment is only vaguely Dark, but it’s enough that if Lena chooses the light, he will die.

 

• Link (Ethan’s friend) doesn’t kill anyone. Sarafine stabs Ethan. Lena uses the Book of Moons to resurrect him, but the cost is Macon’s life.

 

• Ethan and Lena spend a lot of the novel speaking to each other telepathically.

 

• The book doesn’t reveal that Link’s mother is Sarafine until the very end.

 

• Lena doesn’t mindwipe Ethan.

 

• Ridley doesn’t bewitch Link into killing Ethan.

 

• The movie doesn’t end with Ethan leaving town. It ends with the Dark Casters disappearing and an ominous hint about... Lena’s 17th Birthday!

 

I don’t know, I’m pretty glad that I’m already on record as not only saying that not the movie better than the book, but that anything “good” in the movie isn’t present in the book.

 

Here’s the link to the Daily Beast article: https://www.thedailybeast.com/beautiful-creatures-14-notable-differences-from-the-book-to-the-screen

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Yes! Wouldn't people ask him about this constantly? Or since Amma is magic too - maybe she's like Fry and the brains and she's the only one who remembers?

Jeez... 2 Futurama references in mere minutes.

 

I’m not sure how much “magic” Amma was. She could speak with the dead, but is that magic or a natural gift she was born with? She was a keeper as well, but it seemed like that position came with only the key to the library?

 

I would be fine with Futurama references in all your posts for no raisin.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

As I understand it the curse is on Lena’s maternal side and yes the curse turns them Dark. There was nothing in the movie that suggested Genevieve (the lady hologram from the Civil War) was the first caster.

 

No, the curse isn’t on all female casters. On the 16th birthday of a female caster, while the moon is out, they are “claimed” light or dark, based on Their true nature. So say if a female caster *wanted* to be light while having a dark nature, she would be forcibly claimed dark. For male casters they can choose to be light or dark and they can flip flop throughout their lives.

 

This is all true. I just wanted to clarify, (I think you meant to, Tom) this only applies to *Duchannes* women. All other female Casters are allowed to choose Light or Dark at will.

Share this post


Link to post

×