User reviews

I was beside myself with glee when I first heard of this movie. The book it is based on has been a book I have read and reread as well as given to children and adults alike over the years. So I was HORRIBLY disappointed at the changes made in this adaptation. Key elements left out, characterizations gutted, the mythos it was based on trivialized.

After such great adaptations as LotR, Narnia and the Potter books to see this classic ruined was a sad sight.

The books concepts depend on British folktales and legends (Arthurian based) and the movie seems to have tossed that aside in an attempt to woo American audiences. The family is changed, leaving out the close knit structure that is the basis of the story.

Don't see this movie. Don't let your kids see this movie. Do yourselves a favor and read the book.

Someday someone will make this movie with an eye to the source material.

If you saw the preview and thought "Pass", I would call you prudent. If you have been a fan of Susan Cooper's beloved book series since you were a kid, saw the preview and thought "Maybe it won't be as bad as it seems...", then I weep for your broken childhood love. If you were like me and thought "Even if it is cheesy, it might turn out to be fun", then I'm giving you a Get Out Of Jail Free card with this review. It is not enough that we must be subjected to one-dimensional characters, painfully predictable dialogue, hackneyed plot lines, cliché villains, headache-inducing camera work, and one of the worst climaxes ever recorded. No. Not by a long shot. The atrocity here runs deeper. Our intelligence is insulted, our tastes are ridiculed, and our freedom of choice turns on us and squeezes its fist around our throats. This film registers as a negative, a black hole, in the canon of cinematic creations. There were parts where I imagined the producers saying, "Just leave it that way. They'll never notice" or "You don't have to explain that, it'll fly right over their heads." I understand that the budget for this film was (gasp) a measly 20 million dollars, but lack of financial resources is NEVER, EVER an excuse to feed gold-plated crap to the masses. Christopher Eccleston fans may get a slight quiver of a laugh out of his (failed) quirky turn as The Rider, the wraith-like shape shifting ambassador of "The Dark". But in all seriousness, I think he may have just needed a few extra bucks for a down payment on an Aston Martin he might have had his eye on. Otherwise the acting is not even a subject to be brought up, since cardboard cutouts don't require much effort to portray. The special effects are where all the money went, and they're fairly decent. Though I refuse to count this as praise, any more than I would appreciate a smattering of whipped cream on the top of a rancid pile of stinking, eight-week old peach cobbler.

In any fantasy, there are rules that must be set and limitations where magic is to be found. Otherwise, the whole thing becomes a free-for-all that never holds any kind of credibility. I don't think I have the time or the energy to describe all of the problems, violations, and inconsistencies I saw occur within this film that barely topped two hours. It would be a real challenge for someone to sit down and try to catch them all. There was no respect for the genre here, just a seemingly voracious need to exploit the current fantasy craze. If after The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, and Harry Potter, the bigwigs in the studios think that this sort of thing can pass as acceptable, then the legacy of Story is over already. Yes, I am being overly dramatic, but at this point, it's too late to turn back. Time once lost is not recoverable, money once spent requires more labor to regain, and the wish to walk away from a story feeling like we've been entertained, had our minds and hearts opened, once dashed is hard pressed to be soothed back again from boundless feelings of deep discontent and a sense that we have been robbed. It breaks my heart, and I left this film genuinely livid.

To whoever made this movie: I congratulate you. The only redeeming factor in this poor excuse for a film is that it will be nearly impossible to produce any of the sequels. (Though I'm sure that won't stop you.) You have managed to destroy anything and everything that made the book wonderful and unique. To be able to something this awful with such great source material surely takes a great amount of planning and deliberation.

What, it was on accident? That is impressive.

Honestly, if you're not going to do it right, don't do it - screenwriters, directors, actors - was there anyone who felt the need to perhaps point out that this thing was a piece of crap? My father, who has never read the books, said the movie was awful, and I would dearly love the home address of the people who destroyed my favorite fantasy series.

If you're looking for Citizen Kane, or even Lord of the Rings: this isn't that. It's just a fun movie based off a great series of books. Go into it with low expectations and be pleasantly surprised.

If you read the book, skip the movie. If you did not read the book, still skip the movie. I saw this with a group in which some of us had read the book and some of us had not. Everybody disliked it.

The story was confusing, disjointed, and eventually pointless. Even if you had read the book, it appeared that the screenwriter was taking scenes from Harry Potter, scenes from the Fifth Element, and a few scenes from Cooper's original novels then patching them together. This led to an incoherent story line.

The biggest question is what were they thinking when they disregarded the story contained in the book? In an episode of "all things considered" on NPR, screenwriter John Hodge asserted that he was trying to distance this movie from Harry Potter. If so, he failed miserably because the massive changes made this look more like a bad Harry Potter knock-off than a separate film. From the NPR interviews, it appears that Ms. Cooper had little or no input in the film. I suspect that the filmmakers were trying to make a Harry Potter-like film out of Susan Cooper's story so they could avoid copyright infringement. Unfortunately, they were trying to fit a square peg into the round hole and it did not work.

I took my 13 year old son to see it, personally I liked it much better than the latest Potter movie. The Potter series is now fully adrift without a rudder.

I'm a big fan of the Dark is Rising series. They overdid it with special effects in the way only Hollywood can do. When one special effect is good, then 100 must be better??? I could just see the producer saying, "we really need to spice that bit up a bit, throw in some more Hitchcockian Crows!" Not really in this case no, is the answer and too much is really just too much. Still they did manage to capture some of the quiet majesty, and a bit of fun. I thought the movie as a movie for the pre-teen set was actually not bad, for an action fantasy flick. Not the greatest but then not terrible either.

Then again perhaps Susan Cooper's fine work deserves better. I don't think you will see anymore of these made into movies, as the books are fun, but they follow a linear sequence in same way the Harry Potter series does. More like a series of somewhat disconnect adventures.

Although JK obviously borrowed more than a little from this series. Or perhaps it served as her inspiration.

That should just about sum it up, but I'll continue. There were about 3 things about Susan Cooper's magnificent book that were preserved in this movie: a couple of names (but certainly not all of them--where was the difficulty in letting his father be named "Roger" rather than changing it to "John"??), a rook feather in the snow, and... that's about it. Sorry, couldn't think of a third. From the color of the Rider's horse to the number (AND AGE) of Will's siblings, from the abilities of the Old Ones (Swords and crossbows? Really?) to the utter importance of the Walker (I wanted to scream)... nothing nothing nothing was safe from being altered, disregarded, obliterated, and out-and-out ignored. I wasted $7.50, but had to be sure that it was as awful as I feared. It was worse. The last time a superb book-turned-rubbish-movie angered me this much was when I was forced to see Jim Carrey prance around as Count Olaf, who should've been one of the greatest villains to scare the wits out of little kids everywhere.

I'd like to say I'm done with adaptations, but The Golden Compass is coming out, and that one looks like more than the gaffer actually read the bloody book.

After reading a whole bunch of these reviews, all I wanted was to find out if a)the movie is appropriate for my seven year old boy, and b)is it cheesy (ie. The Last Mimzy). I go to the movies with my son so we can enjoy a good story, laugh a little and lose ourselves in a good story/adventure/fantasy. I've never seen my son get "into" a movie like this one. He gave me the annoying play-by-play of what was going on every five minutes. That showed me that he was really enjoying and following it. I don't understand the critiques of this movie. Predictable? Maybe a little, but so are 95% of the movies out there. But the comments about it having bad acting and cheesy lines just weren't warranted. I was just as engrossed by this movie as my son and was pleasantly surprised that I could enjoy a kids movie as much as I did. I would place it somewhere between being better than Bridge To Tarabithia but just under Lord Of The Rings. If you're tired of Harry Potter (like me) but still want to go see an adventure/fantasy, give this one a shot.

The Seeker is based on a series of children's books that certainly showed potential to be a fantastic movie. It has good action scenes with good special effects and an interesting story. The bad thing is that the script feels weak, with a lack of depth and some plot holes. The film should have been longer due to how short it feels and that would have helped to further deepen the plot and its characters, since there is much more that needed to be expanded and explained. The Seeker is a fantasy film that may be ideal for children, but sadly it is a wasted opportunity that ends up resulting in a forgettable film. My final rating for this movie is a 6/10.

Awful, awful, awful - from screenplay to casting to effects. Should one be surprised considering the director announced in the past that he thought the books did not give good movie material and that he dislikes fantasy/children's movies to begin with? Did he pick them up in the end after all to ride the Harry Potter wave? Announcing at the same time that he changed the script from younger British boy to older American boy to avoid having yet another Harry... Well, Susan Cooper's book series the Rising of the Dark sequence was written long before Harry Potter and it has all the material for a good movie. If you like Britain. Its landscape and people. And history, as the background of the book is the King Arthur legend. Unfortunately, the original book has been butchered to the point that the story is unrecognizable. That does not necessarily make a movie bad, just different. However, in this case, as a result of the butchering, the story does not make sense, lacks any depth, and is a disappointment from A to Z which the director tries to hide by using cheap effects and repetitive and lame shooting angles. Save yourself the theater ticket fees and buy those wonderful books from Susan Cooper instead.

Movie adaptations of much-loved books can rarely satisfy the fans, but even making allowances for that, this is a deeply disappointing film. People not familiar with Susan Cooper's "Dark is Rising" cycle will find this simply another lackluster and occasionally bewildering teen fantasy film, while anyone who read and enjoyed Cooper's books would be well-advised to steer clear of the film altogether: it will simply make them angry.

The attraction of Cooper's books is that they are both mythologically and psychologically powerful. Her characters are well-drawn, complex and believable, and the story is deeply rooted in British mythology. The film has none of that: the mythological aspect has been entirely excised, and the psychology reduced to the lowest common-denominator of teen alienation. Even the quintessentially English character of the stories was apparently judged too threatening or complex for American audiences, so the protagonist has been Americanized and the setting reduced to some cutesy chocolate-box Hollywood vision of rural England.

Probably the only bright point of the movie is Alexander Ludwig, in the part of Will Stanton. He isn't Cooper's Will Stanton, but he turns in a respectable performance. In this, he's in marked contrast to the adult actors who seem mostly to have phoned in their work.

Granted, the script writer hasn't given any of them much to do. Ian McShane's Merriman, a pivotal character in the books, has been reduced to intoning portentously "... for you are the Seeker ..." at regularly-spaced intervals. Naturally, in a film that assumes that the audience must be spoon-fed, everything has to be telegraphed, repeatedly if necessary. It's not enough to have fancy visual effects and abrupt changes of season; someone has to actually announce that the characters are traveling in time. Apparently, the film-makers don't think the audience are going to be able to figure that one out for themselves. It's educational to contrast the subtlety and effectiveness with which Cooper reveals her world in the books with the kind of ham-fisted lay-it-on-with-a-trowel exposition that the makers of the film considered necessary.

The result is a rambling mess where the hero stumbles through his required tasks - all of which fall more or less into his lap without any great dramatic tension - until the predictable last-minute rout of the forces of darkness. Even someone with no prior exposure to Cooper's work is likely to find it dull. It can't be judged good or enjoyable by any standard.

Quite how the movie came to be such a travesty is difficult to say. The source material, had anyone associated with the movie bothered to read it, is compelling and well-structured, such that simply following the story faithfully (and preserving some of Cooper's dialog) would have made for a much better movie. In the hands of, for example, the BBC, it could have made an excellent mini-series. Screenwriter John Hodge must take much of the blame for his insipid and amateurish screenplay, yet his track record - including the excellently- written "Shallow Grave" and "Trainspotting" - makes me wonder if he contrived this disaster all himself, or if he was under pressure from director Cunningham (whose own resume might have led one to predict that he would make something like this) to dumb everything down for the benefit of some imaginary audience of American teenagers with single-digit IQs.

There's no reason to waste time on this film (I saw it on an airplane). If you know how to read, you'd be vastly better off spending the time and the money on the original books.

The Seeker is not only one of the worst films I have ever seen it is probably the worst movie of all time. PT Barnum said there is one fool born every minute so I ask why were they all involved in making this pile of utter crap? It doesn't matter if it had followed the book (it woefully doesn't) but it isn't a good movie in any respect at all. This was a money grabbing, farce of a movie, with terrible plotting, terrible casting and even worse directing.

It insulted, the readers of the books, children's intelligences worldwide and the movie industry in general. I wouldn't trust the writer nor the director to sit the right way on a toilet.

If you ever read Ian Fleming's work you'd know that the books and film stories are totally different but they manage to convey the ruthlessness, the style and epic quality of the books and add their own style of fun to generate the longest running successful sequels in history.

With the care and attention to detail put into the filming of the Lord of the Rings I honestly thought we were past the limitations that dogged fantasy films in older days but Fox proved us wrong, I can only surmise, that the financial and marketing people don't read, watch good movies or even have decent IQ's.

How is this for a financial idea: Susan Cooper wrote a 5 book masterpiece that works for kids and adults alike. If we cast it properly, plan out a set of films to bring the books that brought joy to millions out to billions we could if done properly be in the money for years to come and rule the Christmas films for the next 5 years. Hmm who do we get to produce it, screen-write it and direct it for us.

I know, how about we get a successful producer, can we get the one who did that massively acclaimed hit "Legally Blonde 2", a screenwriter who can't write for children and a director who admits he doesn't like the fantasy genre.

I'm trying to work out if movies qualify under the Sale of Goods Act here in Britain. Calling the film "The Dark is Rising" might just be considered as false advertising or at least an infringement of the trade descriptions act. I can then claim my money back and clear the way for everyone else to get theirs back too.

I haven't read the book it's based on but from other reviews, it seems as though the book has been butchered by Cunningham. Well, I can totally understand that because this movie is perhaps one of the most boring movies of 2007. It's pretty to look at though. The special effects, visuals etc are well done. The swirling camera-work is overdone. The screenplay is a mess and the characters are nothing noteworthy. The performances are miserable. Even Christopher Eccleston couldn't save this film. The reason why I ended up watching the whole thing is because I was at a friend's who rented it (she likes fantasy films) and I didn't want to be rude by walking out. I almost dozed off but managed to keep myself awake out of courtesy. Cunningham probably tried to cash in on the success of fantasy films like the Harry Potter series and the many fantasy films released in the last years but his product is a huge disappointment. Given the material he could have made something great but alas!

Rarely have I been so disappointed, I actually walked out of this film half way through, not caring how they end this debacle. With such a rich text to draw from, this movie could have been awesome, the plot is pathetic, the characterisation all wrong, the dialogue clichéd drivel, what were they thinking.

Why they had to change the setting away from Celtic countries & Saxon mythology I have no idea. The whole heart & soul is missing from the story.

Everyone involved in the production of this film should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, they've chipped away at a cherished bit of thousands of peoples childhood memories by squeezing out this arse-gravy onto celluloid.

Although this movie got a rather low review my boyfriend and I decided to go see it. I was expecting an OK, not too bad sort of movie, but I was quite surprised! This movie was very interesting and had a good story line (although certain things in the end were a little dumb.) But over all it was a really good movie with a good ending! I'd recommend seeing it. It sorta has the feeling of a Harry Potter/ Eragon/ movie, although it's not really anything like either of those. My sister and mom went and saw it as well, and they also enjoyed it. So don't listen to the people who say it sucks, it was a good movie, with a semi new idea! Fun movie to watch! :)

This is one book from the Dark is Rising series by Susan Cooper. One of my all time favourite series which I still turn to once a year to re-read even as an adult. And by the way the books are in no way similar to Harry Potter(and written years before HP)This absolute disaster of a movie has absolutely no bearing on the books. Avoid it at all costs. Read the books or even listen to the unabridged audio books which are done extremely well.

This fantastic film concerns on a young boy Will Stanton(Alexander Ludwig), he's the seventh son of a seven sons(Gregory Smith, among others) from Stanton parents(Wendy Crewson,John Hickey). Thanks a strange group(Ian McShane,Frances Conroy,Jim Piddock) Will aware in his fourteenth birthday that he's the last and powerful warrior who ought to fight against the forces of the dark led by the Rider(Christopher Eccleston). Meantime Will fall in love with a beautiful young girl named Maggie(Amelia Warner). Will Stanton must to seek a series of clues which lead to seven hidden shinning objects . The future of the mankind rests in his own powers as traveling back and forward throughout time.

This youth fantasy feature contains amazing adventures, emotion, imagination and impressive production values. It takes parts here and there from C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings and J.K Rowling's Harry Potter. Breathtaking ending confrontation between the dark and light forces with outstanding array of special effects and full of witchcraft and wizardry abound. It's lavishly produced about 45 million dollars though was a flop at the box office. Spectacular production design filmed on location in Romania and adding a luxurious cinematography by Joel Ransom. Emotive and stirring musical score by Christophe Beck. The tale is based on Susan Cooper novel and screenplay by John Hodge(Transporting). The motion picture picture is regularly paced by David L Cunningham but contains some flaws and gaps. Cunningham is a good director as TV movie(Little house on the prairie,The path to P/1) as cinema(To end all wars, After).

Like many it seems I dreamt of seeing The Dark is Rising on the big screen. Such depth, such scope. With such a true adaptation of the narnia classic already achieved I couldn't wait to view the trailer.... Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Is this really based on Susan Coopers book? What I remember as a powerful novel, full of magic, good versus evil and suspense bears no resemblance to the movie. What a waste of time and effort.

I can't believe for one moment that Susan Cooper has authorised this movie which is supposed to be based on her book. I just hope that people new to this series will want to read the books if the first taste they have is this abysmal looking film.

It seems the studio which produced this film have come up with the golden goose egg of formulas for those too stupid to appreciate the myths and legends in the book. Of course they would change his name from Jack to Jaqueline and get rid of the bean stalk for a rocket to the stars. Oh and not to forgot replacing the giant with a basketball player. But hey all in the name of making a quick buck.....