Stardust Movie
| Resolution | Size | Download | ||
|
1920x800 | 10357.1 MiB | 1080p | |
|
1280x528 | 6718.53 MiB | 720p | |
|
608x256 | 700.03 MiB | divx | |
|
320x144 | 495.71 MiB | ipod | |
Storyline
TAGLINES
This summer a star falls. The chase begins.
"Stardust," based on the best-selling novel by Neil Gaiman illustrated by Charles Vess, takes audiences on an adventure that begins in a village in England and ends up in a magical world. A young man named Tristan (Charlie Cox) tries to win the heart of village beauty Victoria (Sienna Miller) by promising to bring her a falling star. His journey takes him beyond the walls of his village to a mysterious and forbidden land.
When Tristan finds the star, he is stunned to discover that it is, not a lump of meteoric rock, but an angry, injured girl named Yvaine (Claire Danes) – who has no desire to be dragged across the world and presented to anyone’s girlfriend. But Tristan is not the only one seeking the star. A dying king’s (Peter O’Toole) four sons – not to mention the ghosts of their three dead brothers – all need the star as they vie for the throne. Three evil witches, led by the murderous Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) seek the star’s heart to make them young again.
Tristan and Yvaine are forced to flee together, encountering the captain of a flying pirate ship (Robert De Niro) and a shady trader named Ferdy the Fence (Ricky Gervais) along the way. As they travel Tristan discovers the meaning of true love, but does not realise he’s leading Yvaine into even more danger...
| Charlie Cox | Tristran |
| Claire Danes | Yvaine |
| Robert De Niro | Captain Shakespeare |
| Sienna Miller | Victoria |
| Michelle Pfeiffer | Lamia |
| Jason Flemyng | Primus |
| Ben Barnes | Young Dunstan Thorne |
| Mark Burns | New Bishop |
| Adam Buxton | Sextmus |
| Henry Cavill | Humphrey |
| Jake Curran | Bernard |
| Elwin 'Chopper' David | Pirate |
| Frank Ellis | Mr. Monday |
| Rupert Everett | Secondus |
| Dexter Fletcher | Skinny Pirate |
| Matthew Vaughn |
8.10 out of 10 (21813 votes)
Visitor Reviews
What is wrong with me???
posted on 28 Aug 2009I don't know, i tried 3 times to understand this movie, but i figured there is nothing to understand. I don't like concept of SF/Fairy tale. While whole universe and history of world seems interesting, the main story(fairytale) is not as much as interesting. Whole thing about witches, princes, princess doesn't belong to this universe. So i don't think that this is bad movie, but it wasn't what i expected.At least only thing that paid of is Robert De Niro and his brilliant performance (i think that everybody knows on what scene i am talking about):)So i give it 5/10 for those who know what they expect of this movie - go and see it, however i am not in that group...
Fantasy adaption that works !
posted on 28 Aug 2009After my huge disappointment with "Golden Compass" I spontaneously decided to give this one a try. I didn't get disappointed. Though "Stardust" only takes two hours it makes excellent use of every second. Great storytelling (also thanks to the novel by Gaiman), well done cinematography, effective music, good acting and the long breath you need to tell fantasy like this.In my point of view especially the first hour was a fabulous experience. In comparison to "Golden Compass" I think that "Stardust" director Matthew Vaughn did right what Chris Weitz did wrong. Though "Stardust" works with typical and familiar fable schemes it feels fresh. The story never shies away from making unconventional use of these schemes.In a short: so for those who wonder how good fantasy might look like on the big screen 2007 I'd just say: here you go ! Good piece of cinema !
Excellent fantasy film, a must see.
posted on 28 Aug 2009I loved this film. Firstly, with the main set of actors being British, it brings a sense of realism into this fantasy story. With most films, American actors often come across badly, see through, and fake.But with Brits, they're more believable. That's why I think this film works. Danes does well in the part, her accent is very good, and she comes across well, Cox in his first major roll is excellent, and that goes for the rest of the Brit cast. Pheiffer is terrible I thought, her accent jumps a lot, and she's as wooden as ever, she has zero charisma and zero charm. The only reason I think they cast her is to make more American audiences see the film, as if DeNiro wasn't enough. A British actress would have been much better. As for DeNiro, I thought he was excellent, very funny in his roll. And as for the film as a whole, excellent, great soundtrack, storyline was good, and a lovely ending.
Major Disappointment
posted on 26 Aug 2009Stardust really failed to impress me. The premise is good, and thus the movie should have been miles better than it actually was. I can't think of what I disliked most about this movie. The throwaway characters, the seven ghosts lurking in the background who served no purpose, other than to provide an unfunny lame running commentary throughout or the supposedly 'funny' scenes. I think that it is probably the terribly predictable ending which annoyed me the most. The only redeeming features of this movie are the beautiful scenery, and as usual, the great performances by Michelle Pfeiffer & Robert DeNiro. The film dragged on for an unnecessary 128 minutes, and failed to hold my interest. It really is a painfully average film, that by no stretch of the imagination, deserves to be hailed a 'classic'. It is certainly not a film, that in 20 years, people will still be talking about, which in my book, is what I consider a classic to be.Stardust : 5/10
just terrible
posted on 24 Aug 2009so like i dragged 5 friends out to see this movie opening night based off of internet buzz and name (Neil Gaiman/Matthew Vaughn), i go to one movie all summer, what was i thinking. i mean, i paid for this crap, yet saw the Simpsons movie for free! i feel so bad, this flick sucked! we all knew little of the movie other than the terrible print ads that made the film look like an upcoming fall TV show, but based on the promise that this was based off of a Neil Gaiman graphic novel and directed by the guy who did Layer Cake, and reviews that touted it as a spirited romantic comedy fantasy similar to the Princess Bride, we were all unduly interested.out and out this movie Stardust sucked. while it started off promisingly with an unpredictable plot trajectory, by the time Claire Danes appears, everything starts to go down hill. first off, her acting is mediocre, (i was like Angela!), as does most of the acting in the film, and there was no chemistry between her or Charlie Cox who plays the hero Tristan or whatever, who at no point has the gravitas to come across as at all heroic, not even by the end battle scene. while the dialogue is not particularly bad, every scene is directed in a style where it's like the director and cast are all in on the joke and they're all winking at the audience. now while some people in the audience i was with ate the jokes up like pigs at the slop, by the time Robert Dinero appeared as the closeted gay pirate, the whole film just lost it completely. every gay stereotype comes out in dinero's hammy performance, and here's the joke! they got tough guy Dinero to act like a queen and ham it up and put on women's clothing, oh how clever, aha ha ha! by this point the film was just stupid and insulting, and downright homophobic in it's regurgitation of queer stereotypes. what was Robin Williams not available? anyways, by the time the whole thing comes stumbling to a conclusion, everything is so corny, hokey, and cheeseball, i was left wondering, where was the actual adventure? or the action? all i remember was some walking around and fuzzy overdone cgi. and choppy editing. there was nothing memorable or special like say, the princess bride, which this was striving so hard to be. this ain't even Legend. this ain't even Krull. leaving the film, i could see how this story could have worked as a graphic novel, and i could see how it could have possibly worked as a film adaptation had the filmmakers and director Vaughn spent more time playing straight and telling the story and directing his actors, and less time winking at the audience and assuming that it's still fashionable to be all postmodern and break the 4th wall in every scene.finally, i must say, Charlie Cox is no leading man, contrary to some predictions, he will not become a big star. the kid can't act, and the hairy chest is a deal breaker.
Unpleasant claptrap
posted on 24 Aug 2009Although I'm giving it a generous 4 out of 10 for the good cast and acting, this is the biggest pile of shite I've clapped eyes on since time immemorial. There are major tonal problems: at one end of the scale we have a general air of frivolity, with Robert de Niro dancing around in a dress pretending to be gay (which is just offensive for all involved) and Mark Williams hamming it up as a goat-person, whilst at the other end of the scale a man's limbs are broken by voodoo, and various animals slaughtered and their entrails used to predict the future. It's the same mixture of casual violence and stylized frivolity that annoyed me in "Layer Cake" by the same director. The film is just endless sound and fury signifying nothing - it's extremely overscored, and there are endless unnecessary pans of dramatic scenery and mountainous vistas in a clear attempt to leach a sense of grandeur from the Lord Of The Rings films. After 2 hours of this unpleasant claptrap, the film ends and Take That come on over the credits. Money back, please.
Best parents film since Hook..
posted on 20 Aug 2009There are films that truly capture the imagination of a child, whatever age the child and there are adults that have long since lost that child-like wonder and no longer understand these films or that world. Then unfortunately, there are films made by these people - think "Company of Wolves", "Chitty, chitty bang bang", "Hook", that are meant to be children's movies but are really what some parents think should be good children's movies.Stardust falls in this category. Despite the special effects and high powered cast, it fails to evoke any sense of magic. I didn't buy into the fantastic world though I wanted to. Laziness, lack of attention to details, inconsistencies and too many self-indulgent moments (not as bad as Hook I admit), none of them fatal in themselves but put together make for a boring mess.Think of the children - and avoid...
Fantasy Filled Adventure
posted on 18 Aug 2009A wonderful fantasy film following the usual format of the genre. Boy meets girl, falls in love with a lot of extra fantasy filled action in between. Although the film is quite slow to start once the action begins the film has you 'ooing' and 'awwing' as well as the comedy elements such as the gay pirate! Not only is this a family film, but a film which people of all ages (and both genders i must add) will enjoy.It has action, comedy, witches, magic and everything you would expect from such a film. My only criticism of the film are a few of the goofs which i picked up on. Nevertheless, a great, entertaining film and one which i think i could watch many times and not get bored of.
A very much worth seeing
posted on 16 Aug 2009Very nice movie, that's what first occurred to me when i was watching it; nice fairy story line, something you need to watch once in a while to cheer yourself up, good visual effects, and the tempo is almost never down, so you don't get to feel bored during watching it, no anti climax which is also good. On the bad side, the story was too big to be fitted in 2 hours movie, so some parts i felt like they were jumped upon. It reminded me so much of Eragon, just not boring at all (yes i found Eragon extremely boring and useless), but hope you get what i mean, it's that kind of movies with fairies and imagination which you'd like and smile after watching it. I hardly recommend it to almost any movie fan. Merry Christmas everyone.
Quality fun.
posted on 08 Aug 2009To be honest, I didn't expect this movie to be as good as it turned out to be. No way this movie seemed like one deserving its current 8 out of 10 rating on here. This seemed to me like just another fluffy 'light'-Lord of the Rings children movie. But even though this movie borrows heavily from other movies, it remains a good and certainly fun quality production.Best choice the movie made, was that it was one that didn't took itself as seriously. You obviously have to take this movie with a grain of salt. It knows it is ridicules in parts and it doesn't try to hide this but rather even exploit it further. This is mostly what makes the movie so fun to watch. Because of this you also tend to forgive this movie from 'borrowing' elements or entire sequences from other movies. Fact that his movie doesn't take itself as serious can also be seen in the delicious over-the-top roles from Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer roles.Because the movie needs to be taken with a grain of salt, also the humor works out the best. The humor within this movie feels non-forced, even though it got put in- and planned out all deliberately into the movie. It knows to remain fresh and it doesn't overly try to make you laugh. It's often more subtle and not something you would expect from a genre movie such as this.It's mostly the fun level and atmosphere of this movie that makes it such a good one to watch. Because lets be fair, if this movie purely had to rely on its story, this would had been a rather weak and simple movie to watch. It's quite formulaic stuff all and of course the way the story progresses is rather predictable. I also don't know if this is really a kids movie. Even though the movie got obviously targeted towards this audience, I strongly feel that it are the adults who will mostly enjoy watching this. The humor and overall story is too mature for that.Also the diverse wide range of characters makes this movie a real fun one to watch. Most characters are really over-the-top and are often being played by some fine big name actors. Besides the earlier mentioned Michelle Pfeiffer and Robert De Niro, the movie also features Sienna Miller, Ian McKellen, Peter O'Toole, Mark Strong, Rupert Everett, Claire Danes, Nathaniel Parker, Dexter Fletcher and Ricky Gervais among others. Most of them are well known respected British actors, which also already gives the movie a certain atmosphere. But it needs to be said, with all the many different characters in the movie it at times feels that most actors looked as if they were making a movie on their own. The movie doesn't always feel like a coherent one.Also the pacing isn't always right and the movie gave the feeling that it also could had been easily 15 minutes shorter. It on the other hand is a fine looking and constructed movie, even though it doesn't feature the best special effects around but this sort of feels suiting for the movie and its entire atmosphere.Highly recommendable and in this case believe the hype!8/10
Great story not overshadowed by its special effects
posted on 04 Aug 2009This movie was an unexpected delight for me. We bought tickets, not knowing much about the movie. It was the only show that was playing at the time we wanted to go to the theater for a last-minute decision to see a movie. Don't read those dry synopses...they don't adequately portray this well-done film. This is quite a magical movie that blows away any other titles that I've seen. The story and special effects far surpass titles like Peter Pan. "Stardust" captivates and excites, and it holds the undivided attention of both children and adults. There is adult (not dirty) humor, examples being the blue-colored blood (hence "blueblood")of a killed prince, the 97 year old wall-bouncer and the goat turned into an innkeeper named Billy by a witch. Lots of laughter! Lots of beauty! Keep your ears open for the hidden humor, as well as the poignant. The plot is that of a fallen star who is sought by evil and good characters and their inner-weaving scenarios. There is excitement, non-stop movement with superb scene-pacing and great characters acted well. Recommend! It's a keeper! My sons, age 14 and 9, loved it, as did our 19 year old neighbor. Boys and girls, men and women! Yes, the row of guys in the rear enjoyed it immensely. More than a family film--it's a royal treat!
A modern pantomime but without the wooden scenery or acting
posted on 04 Aug 2009Having tried (and failed) to get my Better Half interested in the brilliant "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy, I was somewhat surprised that she wanted to see this so badly. A number of our work colleagues had recommended it which is normally enough for us to catch a bus into town and head for the cinema but having missed it, she wasn't about to let the DVD go the same way. Feeling very much like an English version of "The Princess Bride", it is a fantasy adventure with its tongue firmly in cheek but for those of us who prefer serious fantasy films, "Stardust" might not satisfy those die-hard fans missing Peter Jackson's genius.The film introduces us to Tristan (Charlie Cox), a young man living in the English village of Wall which, unknown to most, borders a magical world called Stormhold. Watching a falling star with the object of his affection Victoria (Sienna Miller), Tristan promises to bring the star back to her to prove his love for her and sets off into Stormhold to bring it back. But unknowingly for him, the star is actually a beautiful woman called Yvaine (Claire Danes) whose life is in mortal danger. Pursued by an evil witch (Michelle Pfeffier) and a villainous prince (Mark Strong), Tristan finds that achieving the impossible is really quite difficult.Essentially, that's the plot in a nutshell but what I neglected to mention is that the story allows for a seemingly endless list of cameos that nearly puts "Ocean's 13" to shame. Ricky Gervais, Peter O'Toole, Rupert Everett, Dexter Fletcher, Mark Williams, Adam Buxton, David Walliams - admittedly, not all of them are household names but this is one of those films where you'll recognise (or think you recognise) almost every character in the film. Sadly, the biggest cameo is also the most unusual and the biggest let-down - Robert De Niro as Captain Shakespeare didn't really feel part of the story at all and, personally, was a bit of a disappointment. But what makes "Stardust" work is that it covers all the bases for a decent family movie. It lacks the visceral brutality of "Lord Of The Rings" but makes up for it with plenty of comic touches such as the collection of ghosts commentating on proceedings. There are one or two moments to scare them as well but that's why we hide behind the sofa, isn't it? "Stardust" isn't perfect - the whole thing feels disjointed like it's merely a collection of scenes with different characters. In essence, this is a million-dollar pantomime complete with stereotypical villains and plenty of broo-ha-ha and if that's what you're looking then you probably couldn't do better. However, I will hold my hands up and confess that I am a serious fan of fantasy. I don't go to conventions and I don't believe that early Eighties nonsense like "Red Sonja" are genre highlights. I just want a film that feels authentic and believable and in all honesty, the only films to do that are... you've guessed it, "Lord Of The Rings". A tad unfair, perhaps because "Stardust" plays the same game with different rules. This is a fantasy film for those who don't like fantasy, for those who haven't the time or patience to cope with more weightier material. This is a film, then, for my Better Half.
Stardust Surefire Sleeper Hit
posted on 02 Aug 2009So it's lurking way down the chart at the box office... So it's not flying at you from every angle in the form of trailers, TV spots, pop-up ads or street posters... So it's not one of the worlds most famous fantasy novels... But blimey it's a good film! Fast paced, snappy dialogue, exquisite setting, tongue in cheek humour, solid acting and, of course, the ever radiant Claire Danes. Layer all of that icing on top of the cake that is an uncommonly original story and it truly is amazing that more people aren't turning up in droves.I'm assuming that everybody has seen Superbad and the Bourne Ultimatum by now. Assuming that, I strongly suggest skipping spots 3-7 on the top ten list and heading straight for this "diamond in the rough" at number 8. Take your girlfriend, go with your mates, see it with your family; I doubt there is a man alive out there who would not find something to love in this movie.
Lackluster fare a la "THE PRINCESS BRIDE" ; Pfeiffer steals the show
posted on 31 Jul 2009STARDUST (2007) ** Charlie Cox, Claire Danes, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert DeNiro, Sienna Miller, Peter O' Toole, Jason Flemyng, Sarah Alexander, Joanna Scanlan, Ricky Gervais (Narrator: Ian McKellen) Spotty adaptation of Neil Gaiman's novel by filmmaker Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman tweaking the fairy telling genre with a young man (vanilla bland Cox) who attempts to retrieve a falling star for his beloved (Miller) but winds up with a young woman (Danes, channeling Gwyneth Paltrow), who indeed is the star but is more trouble than she is worth when a coven of witches desire her heart to replenish their youth and evil ways. A grim Grimm fairy tale with a contemporary flair not unlike "THE PRINCESS BRIDE" but without its simplistic charms, the film tries way too hard and in spite of a gamely fierce turn by Pfeiffer as the lead witch, it sputters by its lackluster ending.
Fun fantasy action movie.
posted on 29 Jul 2009Liked the movie very much; has a bit of a slow start but once the action starts it's very enjoyable. Lots of action, great special effects and it's got some humor as well. If you like fantasy movies you'll enjoy this one. My hubby wasn't a big fan but our 11 year old daughter loved it as did her 16 year old cousin. Great for kids although some scenes might be a little scary for younger children. Robert DeNiro is great although the role is not quite what I'm use to seeing him in and Michelle Pffeifer is great as well. I think this might be one to add to your DVD collection once it's available; especially if you are a fan of fantasy movies.
Provides more fun than all of the summer blockbusters put together
posted on 29 Jul 2009The 14 year-old in me is immensely happy that they're now able to make really good looking fantasy movies, and that they're all the rage, what with Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia making loads of cash at the box office. This year will see (and already has seen) several more, most notably The Golden Compass, which has the most exciting trailer I've seen this year. Stardust, based on a novel by Neil Gaiman, showed up in theaters this week with little more than a peep. I saw no previews for it, only a couple of commercials. The critical reaction is kind of blah. I wouldn't even have seen it if not for the fact that I have to wait on a friend to see The Bourne Ultimatum, and that nothing else interesting opened this weekend. Well, if you'll forgive the horrible pun, the stars must have been rightly aligned, because I went to see Stardust, and I loved it. It's not a huge movie like Lord of the Rings. The plot line is your very basic fantasy quest (the hero sets out to look for a fallen star) filled with obstacles. But within that basic outline, the story is lively and imaginative. It's simply aiming to be a lot of fun, and a charming little romance. And it succeeds wonderfully. There were a lot of big films this summer, but none of them were nearly as fun as this one. There's a lot going on, but the story is told well and is almost entirely coherent. It isn't a masterpiece, but it definitely can occupy the same kind of ground that something like The Princess Bride has (though I don't like it quite as much as the earlier film). A lot of fun to be had here if you're a fan of the genre.
Solid entertainment
posted on 27 Jul 2009This film is about a young man embarking an adventure through a fantasy world, fighting against cold blooded princes and evil witches."Stardust" has an imaginative and relatively complicated storyline. Fortunately it is well told, so it is easy to understand. The progression of Yvaine and Tristan is convincing. I like the imaginative and well decorated sets, and the costumes are also nice. The ideas of dead princes appearing in black and white is funny, it gives a lighter atmosphere to the otherwise tight action sequence. It is interesting that Michelle Pfeiffer chooses to do another evil character after her role in Hairspray. It is also interesting to see that all the actors use the British accent in the film, despite the mostly American cast. The only complaint I have is the ending, the final star trick should have been done earlier! "Stardust" provides solid entertainment.
Wit and humour above all else
posted on 23 Jul 2009Recognizing that different elements in a movie will appeal to different people, I consider wit and humour the prime attraction for me in Stardust.While the trailer of Stardust will no doubt bring to mind movies like Princess Bride, it is not quite a pure romance. Right from the beginning, it does not present the heroine with an elegant, romantic aura as you see in Robin Wright. Claire Danes at the start of the movie is loud, rude, impatient and limping! The charm comes later but towards the end, she is just as captivating as Robin Wright, if not more. But let me back up a little bit first.The star in Stardust is Danes, in the form of a young woman so long as she reminds in a magical realm outside our normal world, the trespassing into which will turn her into stone (albeit a piece of gem). She (as a piece of gem) is thrown by a devious old king played by Peter O'Toole as the final test as to who among his seven sons will succeed him. Talking about wit and humour, these seven sons provide a rich source. Some are already dead and appear as black-and-white ghosts at the beginning while others join their rank as the story unfolds. The most prominent two are played by Mark Strong and Rupert Everett.Another plot line centers around love-sick Tristran (Charlie Cox) who promises to venture out of the normal world to bring his love Victoria (Sienna Miller) the falling star they see, within seven days, to win her hand in marriage. It doesn't take a veteran moviegoer to see that Trintran is another delightful source of humour for the movie makers.Completing the interwoven (but not complicated) plot is several-hundred-year-old witch Lamia and her two sisters' quest to attain perpetual youth from the heart of the fallen star. By drawing lots, which are in fact internal organs of an animal just cut open, Lamia wins with the heart (over the sisters' kidney and liver) and gets the chance to swallow the last magical portion they had, which restores her youth temporarily. This quest generates a lot of laughs, some quite as crude as the above-mentioned lot-drawing but mostly not. Michelle Pfeiffer must be complimented for allowing herself the look of a grotesque old hag, although she does get to look beautiful during the middle portion of the movie.From those three interwoven plots, you get a ride of merriment throughout the entire movie. Granted that these are not Woody Allen type sophisticated humour, they are usually quite decent and funny. Must be mentioned is a little side-plot with Robert De Niro playing the captain of an airship. This is the funny De Niro, something like what you see in "Analyze this".There are of course all these other things that complete a fantasy adventure movie – special effects, combats, vehicle chase scenes and all the rest of them. But what about romance? Be rest assured that you'll have that too. This comes in the unlikely-odd-couple variety, which often gives more satisfaction, when it blossoms, than the standard boy-meets-girl routine. As to Claire Danes, one critic holds that she is miscast, citing Gwyneth Paltrow as a better choice. I found myself agreeing with him in the first half of the movie, until it comes to Danes' soliloquies to a mouse that is Tristran. That scene changes my mind, unequivocally. Claire Danes for Stardust, nobody else.
Does Stardust work for everyone?
posted on 23 Jul 2009I saw this movie last night and I thought it was very good in some ways. There were some things that I was impressed with and some were not impressed with. On the one hand Michelle Pfeiffer, one of Hollywoods best known actresses, gave a tremendous performance as the evil queen. Don't get me wrong this was a very good movie. The special effects were excellent, the costumes were good. One thing that I was not expecting was seeing Robert DeNiro cross dressing. That did not paint a very good mental picture for me. I like Bobby DeNiro, but could have casted someone else for that role. We are introduced to the man who will be playing young Prince Caspian in the upcoming Disney/Walden Media film The Chronicles of Narnia:Prince Caspain. Overall, Stardust did not bite the dust.
Charmingly flawed; just don't expect the novel.
posted on 28 Aug 2009Barring a largely inappropriate soundtrack, rather tedious tracking shots and some poor choices in CGI, this is the summer's most charming movie.And I do mean charming. This movie doesn't ooze charm - it tickles the cockles of your heart with it, though. Claire Danes and Charlie Cox as the protagonists Yvaine and Tristan are entirely appropriately cast, and by the end of the movie you will fall pretty much in love. The rest of the cast perform admirably, with especial kudos to Robert Di Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer.Just don't expect the book. Vaughn has made some pretty drastic changes stylistically. Just think of it as an adaptation, with its own unique charm, and you'll enjoy it just as much, if not more so, as I did.