KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Interesteg What makes it different from others?

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Valkyrguy While I found the beginning of this movie incredibly tedious and boring, by the end it has become philosophically intriguing. I really enjoyed the idea that life without death is not life at all, and that overcoming death also means overcoming life. Now, I don't care that this movie isn't about Ursula LeGuin's books. Her books are a hot mess I like to read for the fun of it, but the storyline isn't particularly well done. This movie at least gets that right. I think Ursula LeGuin should be honored that her half-baked ideas inspire artists of various kinds to adapt some of her works as source-material. I am particularly pleased that we get to have a glance at Tennar as an older, more mature woman, and Sparrowhawk as a wise man instead of the firebrand we all know and love, but this story isn't about them, it's about a new set of challenges with new characters. Sparrowhawk just assists in restoring the world, but the spotlight is no longer him.

Irishchatter I really liked the film but I wouldn't consider this my favorite. The reason is because the storyline was lacking in most parts and the main villain looked more of a goth girl then an actual manic villain. Actually he looks so much like the singer Cher or even the Demon from Deathnote a bit haha! Seriously the drawers should've had more imagination then that! The soundtrack I think is the best throughout, its so medieval and interesting like. It reminds me of Game of Thrones but unfortunately the film didn't act as Game of Thrones otherwise I could've given it a 10 star. Its good anyway like I can listen to it all day long! The scenes where there is fields were very scenic and look very real. It made me feel like I wanna be in this film somehow except with all the violence and the enemies!

K B *I watched the English dubbed version of this so some aspects of this review might not apply to the original* I watched this thinking it was a Hayao Miyazaki film. Only after watching it I noticed it was his son's work, Goro.Unfortunately this is no Hayao work in any respect. The best term I can use to describe it is "flat". Really, from characters to settings, to plot, even colors, drawing quality or music score, this is a pale reflection of works like princess Mononoke or Nausica and Spirited Away. Why a famed studio chose to release such an unworked movie and a bad adaptation of a famous fantasy novel is beyond me. The film did a very poor job in capturing my attention, and it managed to extract very little sympathy for the characters and their adversities. Much of the plot seems naive at best and many supposedly sentimental scenes centered on inner conflict made me yawn. During the very lengthy song scene I had my eyes closed because there was nothing interesting to watch. The degree of elaboration and overall style in graphics reminded me of a very old Hayao Miyazaki's work for TV, Heidi done in 1974, not a very favorable similarity by today's standards. In all, this film fails to create an inhabited universe that the spectator will feel intrigued to explore or a credible plot that they may follow. It is watchable, and perhaps moderately entertaining but utterly forgettable. Too bad, another missed chance for great literature to find good representation on the big screen. If magic ever filled this world, it had disappeared long before Goro Miyazaki decided to depict it.This is what the author thinks about the film, very enlightening: http://www.ursulakleguin.com/GedoSenkiResponse.html

Roman Jones I just finished watching Studio Ghibli's "Tales From Earthsea" expecting to see, and I quote from JesuOtaku, 'Hands down the worst Ghibli movie ever."It starts out clunky - there's lots of expositing and breaking the "show don't tell rule", it's kinda slow, we don't see much of the world here, most people speak in whispers for no reason,the main character mugs at the camera a lot, and his sword looks humorously phallic.But... it's not a bad movie. Not at all. And definitely not at all the worst Ghibli film. I can name three others that are much much worse in terms of storytelling, editing, and overall craft. I have no problem following the story. I can remember all of the character's names. I genuinely cared about what was happening. The villain Cob is SCARY and COMPLETELY worth your time to watch it. I think the main reason people hate it is because A. It's directed by Miyazaki's son and not him, and B. It doesn't FEEL like a Ghibli film. It is obviously made by very different minds than those who made Nausicaa, Castle in the Sky, and Princess Mononoke. And you know what? That's okay!The movie reminds me of the classic 1970's-early 90's fantasy genres. Ladyhawke, Dragonheart, Krull, and Highlander. All of those had lots of expositing (because they didn't have the budget for showing us the amazing lands they were talking about), plenty of mugging/overacting, whispering to make the scenes more dramatic and therefore cheesy, often slow at the beginnings, and had hilarious phallic or otherwise goofy props. They also all have really sugary morals at the end given to us in a speech, just like in Earthsea. And these movies hold a special nostalgic place in my heart. Animation can totally show us these worlds so the reason they aren't shown to us HAS to be a stylistic choice (or the budget was really that low, which is okay). Is this film a love letter to those fantasy movies? If so I can believe it. Tales From Earthsea isn't a terrible movie. Not at all. It's sweet, enjoyable, terrifying at times, and gave me a delicious plate of nostalgia.