I've been involved in a love affair with the Darren Shan saga since I was about 13. My mum took me to see a family friend and her sons; one of the sons thrust a book in my face and asked "have you read this?" It was a slim black book with "Cirque du Freak" in old-style circus writing emblazoned across the cover; from the first page I was hooked. I devoured all twelve books as they came out and though the finale was a disappointment, I still knew it was love. Even today I regularly pick them up and blaze through them.
They were practically made to be turned into a movie - dark, exciting, full of twists and turns and short enough that several books could be one movie. So when I heard that a Cirque du Freak movie was in production, I was unbearably excited. I followed the development religiously, and as details emerged I became increasingly concerned. Set in America instead of Ireland? John C Reilly as my one true fictional love, Mr Crepsley? Still, he looks okay, and Americanisation can't screw it up too badly. And it's got Willem Dafoe as Gavner, I'm sure he'll be good. And even though Debbie has been replaced by the mysterious Rebecca, it's got Murlough. He's pretty much as easy a character as you can get. Tunnels of Blood is one of my favourite of the twelve. They can't mess it up, it's impossible.
So I saw it today.
And I'm fuming.
They couldn't have made it worse if they tried.
First off, it was a complete deviation from the storyline. Now I can understand skipping most of the dull Vampire's Assistant part; we don't want to see Darren moping about drinking blood for an hour. Sam Grest was never an important character. R.V. was though, and he was entirely absent.
But Tunnels of Blood. The tunnels were absent, as was the blood - many stab wounds, but no blood. The whole thing took place in the Cirque and in the old theatre. Murlough was neutered, and also called Murlaugh for some reason - he was barely insane, and certainly wasn't a threat in the same way he was in the book. Yes, the showdowns with Crepsley were flashy and extravagant, but they sure as hell weren't exciting.
The Cirque itself was a bit of a mishmash: Cormac is now a woman. Mr Tall is Ken Watanabe. I hope they plan to make Evanna Asian too. It looked the part, but sure as hell wasn't right.
The writers committed the worst sin: they told, instead of showed. We don't need to hear a voiceover saying "I am obsessed with spiders. Steve is obsessed with vampires." Just show us that! Clumsy.
Speaking of Steve, his character was neutered and blooded. Instead of slowly becoming a twisted, revenge-obsessed wreck of a vampire hunter, he was turned into a vampaneze straight away, complete with purple eyes (why?). Darren, meanwhile, was fairly faithful - the narrator in the books was never the most interesting character, and that was pretty evident here. I don't have a problem with Darren's portrayal, though I fail to understand why it was necessary to bring him back to his family (then promptly make them forget it ever happened).
The actual conflict for Tunnels - the kidnapping of Evra and Debbie - was unnecessarily changed. Evra wasn't involved, leading me to wonder why, exactly, they bothered with his character. Debbie was replaced by love interest Rebecca, who was painfully irritating - not that Debbie was much better of course, but at least she didn't make monkey noises.
Back to Evra: this guy was the only thing I was entirely happy with. His characterisation was perfect and Patrick Fugit really looked the part. Once again though I don't understand why they put so much effort into making Evra
good only to give him a much smaller part than he deserves.
I will admit that I was shocked at how much I enjoyed John C Reilly as Crepsley. While he doesn't actually look the part, he did a good job of giving Mr Crepsley the cynical, sardonic edge that was everpresent in the novels. By the end he really had made me believe in his portrayal. He was never going to be my image of Larten, but he did a good job with what he had to work with.
His scar was okay, though three of them (in a style far too reminiscent of the vampaneze mark) rather than one, and it was implied that Murlough had caused them rather than Evanna. Uncool.
By far one of the low points was Gavner. Now, I like Willem Dafoe. I thought he could be quite good. Gavner Purl is a grizzled, scarred Vampire General; however, in this movie he was a skinny clown-man with a paedo moustache and bright red lipstick. Wonderful. The vampires will just let any old fool into their inner circle, apparently.
And now for the worst sin of all: Mr Tiny. Now, Mr Tiny is explicitly described in the book, unlike so many other characters: a small, chubby man with glasses, grey hair and yellow welly boots. Not a giant fat bald bullfrog of a man. And definitely not a direct meddler, but a manipulator. Movie Tiny had a much more active role; he was no longer just an observer. He directly worked to make events happen his way, recruiting Steve into the vampaneze and trying to recruit Darren. No, having Mr Crepsley saying "you've favoured the vampaneze for a century" is not a good way to show that Mr Tiny is biased. By his very nature, he's unbiased. He simply wants destruction and war. He doesn't care who wins. His motivations in this film were completely skewed.
Darren Shan clearly put a lot of thought into his series, and it's clear he had very little input on what was done with his characters. It had a lot of potential, now wasted. I'll be very surprised if the next three get filmed. It's a shame, but if this movie is anything to go on, probably for the best.
:(
