The Lathe of Heaven--again.

I just watched the 1980 PBS version.

I know this is considered by many fans to be the definitive, Ursula-K.-Le-Guin-endorsed version. And I did enjoy it as much as the remake, which I watched first.

But I'm sorry to say I'm still waiting for a film that can do the book justice. Both films, IMO, suffer from an over-simplification of the script and an over-reliance on melodrama in some scenes which were definitely not present in the book. George Orr is a whiner. Dr. Haber is decidedly more villainous than Le guin's character. And this Heather Lelache also lacks attitude.

The same problems I encountered in the remake are all here. So why does everyone love this version?

Sigh...looks like I'm going to be the black sheep in SF yet again. At this point I like the remake better. Both films deviate from the book in similar respects anyway; why shouldn't I prefer the version with a more believable sense of place? But I actually love the Star Wars prequels, so this estrangement from cult nerd-dom is nothing new to me.

Speaking of Star Wars...Bruce Davison as George Orr.

Come on now. Tell me that blonde bob and that whiny voice don't remind you of Luke Skywalker. In the A&E remake, on the other hand, George Orr's sulky emo ass reminded me of Hayden Christensen.

There's got to be a middle ground between Luke and Anakin Skywalker. Somewhere. The filmmakers just didn't find it.

At least we have the turtle aliens in this one. By the way, I also chuckled when the alien called him Jor Jor because...no, okay, we won't go there. :P  

Just read The Lathe of Heaven for the first time.

That...was incredible. :D Thank you again, Ursula K. Le Guin, for reaffirming my love of reading. Whenever I read a crap YA fantasy/sci-fi, I turn to one of your books and all is right with the world.

Now I've got to watch the two movies based on this book, one of which is apparently a cult classic and the other a made-for-TV disaster. I anticipate Solaris levels of fangirl rage.

Also, is it just me or or does Dr. Haber remind anyone else of a Dostoevsky character? 

Update on one Lathe of Heaven film, the A&E production from 2001:

Dare I say it? This movie is unfairly maligned by Le Guin purists such as myself. ;)

Yes, the dialogue and script are considerably dumbed-down from the source material, and the requisite happy ending is neither deserved nor properly explained, which results in Solaris-remake levels of confusion. This is the skeleton of Le Guin's book, little more than a visual trailer for the novel stitched together with beautiful images and a tense, surprisingly thrilling score.

Fantasia 2001: Lathe of Heaven? I'll take it.

As an adaptation, it mostly fails. But it's better than both Earthsea movies combined.

(Yes, that includes Miyazaki Junior's disaster. I love both these movies in all their crappy glory, by the way. They belong on my movie shelf of shame. ^_^)

As a cerebral science fiction piece, Lathe of Heaven is effective in its own right. Particularly noteworthy for me were the beautiful costumes and set pieces, along with the aforementioned music by Angelo Badalementi. I'm of two minds on the acting. It's solid, but the characters' personalities don't match those of their literary counterparts, so I found the film jarring.

Lukas Haas as George Orr:

What can I say? Anemic hottie. But he plays the part like a depressed Yagami Light, and captures none of the nuance of George Orr's character in the book.

Lisa Bonet as Heather Lelache is likewise gorgeous, but lacks the strength and delightful attitude of Le Guin's character. Her soft-spoken portrayal didn't convince me that I'm watching the same character from the book.

   James Caan gives a riveting performance as psychiatrist Dr. Haber. Whatever problems I encountered were on a script level. He manages to stay in character even when the dialogue dips into the ludicrous or outright villainous. Well played, Mr. Caan. Well played.

David Strathairn is also solid as Mannie. Why the filmmakers decided to replace Le Guin's aliens with this minor character is beyond me, but in the context of this film, he fits the role of mentor to George Orr. 

That's right: this film has NO aliens. It's clear the filmmakers don't understand the material. Without the aliens we don't have a satisfying resolution to George's problem. We don't know why his dreams have the power to change reality or how he learns to control them. I'll just pretend Mannie's an alien. 

All in all, more appealing and rewarding to my other senses, because the average filmgoer doesn't need the intellect anyway,  right? (I jest, of course.) A visual and auditory delight, though I understand why Le Guin hates it. Onward to the 1980 production, which I've heard is superior to this adaptation.

  

You can buy the awesome book here. The movie adaptations can be obtained here and here. I wish the film soundtrack was available but it seems like I'm out of luck there. :P