Others say...

"As a stand-alone, mediocre. As an adaptation, horrid"
First, I will reiterate that if you are a fan of Susan Cooper's novel, avoid this film unless you want a huge disappointment. First, the filmmakers chose to leave out all references to British mythology which were so central to the novel. Second, they made multiple unnecessary changes to the characters and plot, such as making the main character American rather than English, as American kids *obviously* can't relate to a British character. (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)

Without reference to the book, this was sadly still mediocre kids' fare. There are several reasons that I thought this film failed as a stand-alone:

* Will, the main character, is a little brat.
OK, that wasn't very sympathetic, but he irritated me. He spends a large quantity of time whining that he doesn't want to be the Seeker, and throws a spectacularly destructive magical tantrum to which his mentor calmly responds "He's expressing himself." (Great lesson for the kiddies! If you want to express yourself, blow something up!) By the climax, he gets cocky and brags about his special status, which is just as annoying.

* The plot was ill-conceived.
By stripping out the mythology that was so important to the novel, the film also strips out anything that gave depth to the plot. The result is a simple treasure hunt, but one that doesn't have many clues ala National Treasure to keep you guessing. While going about his everyday business, Will just randomly sees a vision of a spiral pattern, then hunts around until he finds the Sign hidden in the vicinity. There are also some gaping holes in the plot. In one scene Will's little sister gets inadvertently introduced to his magical world, but never seems to question the experience or bring it up to other family members. Did Will use magic to make her forget? If he did, it wasn't shown in the movie.

* The climax was boring and ridiculous.
The final "battle" was a downright boring affair with lots of heavily stylized camera work and little action. The Big Bad Rider seemed strangely easily intimidated by a 14-year old boy and his bragging. I won't detail the final plot-twists for people who want to see the movie, but suffice to say that they left more unanswered questions that stretch suspended disbelief to the breaking point.

In sum, this movie played as a cheap, hole-ridden Harry Potter knock-off. This might be good movie to rent for kids roughly in the "tween" age range or a little younger, provided they like fantasy and haven't read the books. Some of the scenes may be a little scary for very young children. The over-simplified and unconvincing plot will likely put off older teens and adults. The Harry Potter franchise and some other recent films have upped the ante in making family fantasy films that are truly for the whole family - complex and interesting enough to entertain adults as well as children. I would argue that it has also raised expectations that book adaptations be reasonably faithful to the source material. The Seeker fails on both accounts.

"Good cinematography"
Whether or not you agree with the film's adaptation of the book series, The Seeker is a well-made piece of film art. I was impressed with the cinematography and the use of angles and lenses to heighten the feelings of the protagonist as he discovers his destiny and struggles with it. Lighting was also masterful in this film, as it should be in a film about the struggle between light and dark. The only qualm I had was with Christopher Eccleston: he gave a rather stilted performance as The Rider. If you are a great fan of the books, try to disengage your criticism and simply enjoy the film for its own art form.

"In some ways, better than Harry Potter; but overall just average"
Individual performances by the actors are pretty good here, though somehow the lead comes across as a little overdone and not believable at the end when the young Will Stanton realizes the origin of the sixth sign and takes a dramatic verbal stand against the Dark.

What is nice about this movie is the way it starts out with normal kids in a normal world and then introduces little elements of fantasy bit by bit into that normal world. The local character parts are nicely acted, though Ian McShane's character does not get much of a chance to really develop and is limited in range, which is really too bad given the power of McShane.

Where I suspect people will find this one loses them is in the final third of the movie, when suddenly some of the characters go through changes that are not well explained and the magical world intrudes on the regular world with a ferocity that demands more of an explanation at the end of the movie than is given. In other words, at the very end many people are likely to say, "Hey, wait a minute, how do we understand or how come no one is talking about X and Y?"

I wish they had done more with the Old People and toned down the ending.

Still, while it is not as slick as Harry Potter, the first third of the movie did a better job than HP of making us believe magic could exist hidden alongside everyday reality. It also does not have the corney stereotypes and kid humor of HP, something a viewer may or may not appreciate.

I wanted to like it more, but in fairness, it is a 3 star movie at best. Somehow the elements did not all come together on this one.

"The Seeker"
While there were a lot of interesting adaptations, some of the changes did not seem to serve the story. Will's move into the attic became a way to have his brothers pick on him instead of the treat that his brother Stephen provided for him. The brother who died before Stephen's birth became Will's twin who was stolen at birth. Other than that, I enjoyed how they tried to accomodate the book action to film.

"Breezes By"
David L. Cunningham does a good job with this film. While I'd heard of the book, it's not one I ever read. So my perspective will be quite different from those whose opinions are based on a comparison to the book. As a film, the visual elements are excellent with the floods, the signs and the spreading darkness over the world. Alexander Ludwig does a nice job as Will Stanton, a modern boy completely unprepared for the age-old struggle thrust upon him. Christopher Eccleston who was in The Others (Two-Disc Collector's Edition) & Gone in 60 Seconds has a long range from the bookish real-world character to the mythical Rider, a stretch that wasn't altogether successful for me. Frances Conroy who won a Golden Globe for TV's "Six Feet Under" plays Miss Greythorne as a bookish matron. Ian McShane who was nominated for an Emmy for TV's "Deadwood" in 2005 is perhaps the hardest to figure out as Merriman Lyon. His character seemed like it ought to have been more important, but somehow never quite got what it needed to make the point. Wendy Crewson, who I loved as Evelyn Danvers in The Covenant, plays Mary Stanton with a nice but brief touch. Amelia Warner who was in "Aeon Flux" makes an impression as the witch Maggie Barnes. The film breezes by and looks handsome. It comes across as a rushed Harry Potter. Overall, it's entertaining. Enjoy!