The Power of One

Rating:
Summary: If you haven't read the book. . .
Review: this is an entertaining film. I'd recommend it for people looking for a "overcoming adversity" story. It's better for younger students than the book would be, too, since the violence is toned down. Like most books made into movies, however, this film is so different from the book that they are almost two stories with the same title set in South Africa.

I like using the movie when I teach the book, only because students are so unhappy with the movie and we can select the book scenes that SHOULD have been filmed instead.

Rating:
Summary: doesn't match the book
Review: I first saw this film on TV at the age of 15 and at the time, I thought that it was fantastic. I think that I felt this way because I knew "absoludle" nothing about apartheid (and because I had yet to read the novel "The Power of One"). A few years later, i was given the opportunity to read the novel by Bryce Courtenay for summer reading at school. After reading the novel, I was blown away. It made the movie seem trite and I ended up feeling upset at the changes that the filmmakers made. One of the worst errors: In the book Peekay has no real love interest. The girl inserted in the movie served to take the place of Peekay's Jewish best friend Morrie; the film would have been a million times better showing that relationship rather than Peekay's relationship with this girl that seemed to have no basis in the original plot (to make matters worse, she was really annoying in the movie). In addition to this adjustment, the filmmakers stopped the movie early, not totally completing Peekay's power of one journey.

My opinion of the film has changed since reading the novel. I think that this would be a great film for people to see if they HAVE NOT read the book, but if they have it will just be a disappointment.

So you must be wondering why I gave this film 3 stars instead of 1. Well, #1 despite the filmmaker's total disregard for Courtenay's original plot, there was a fantastic African performance towards the middle of the film that matches exactly how I saw it in my mind while reading the book. #2 Morgan Freeman played a great Geel Piet and #3 Without this movie, I would have never given the book a chance and for that I am very greatful.

If you've read the book don't bother with the movie.
If you haven't, rent/watch the movie and then BUY the book instead.

Rating:
Summary: Beautiful depiction, but extra additions unnecessary
Review: I love this movie as I loved the book, but one far outstrips the other. The book does a better job of presenting Peekay from the inside out, as books generally tend to do. The progression of Peekay's age seems to go along much easier than the jumpier version in the movie. I was disturbed at a few liberties that were taken in the movie, however. For example, I see no reason for the introduction of an Afrikaneer love interest. Rather than strengthening the story, it only dilutes it, taking emphasis away from Peekay's goals and what really matters to him. In the book, his interest in women stems largely from wet dreams and general adolescent angst rather than actual encounters. They also decided to cut out so much from the end, such as the "grizzly" work at the mines and what really happens to "The Judge".
Overall, the movie is definitely worth a look, but do yourself a great service and read the incredible work of literature by Bryce Courtenay that inspired it.

Rating:
Summary: A very good movie...
Review: ...but oh SO SO pale compared to the book. The movie screwed with near everything I, and most others I'm sure, held sacred in the book and consider crucial the the story. Everything from the details of Peekays relationship with doc, to his mother, his grandpa, Morrie (replaced by some broad to give the movie a romantic fling), and the events that take place during Peekays life. Was very hard to watch the movie knowing there would be people everywhere doing the same, but unlike me, taking the story in in this most corrupt state it has been replicated as. To the defense of the director and writers, filming the book as it should be would en dup being atleast a 4 hour movie, but personally I would have MUCH rathered it be that way.

Do yourself a HUGE favor, and read the book. Tehn after if you want to be dissapointed, watch the movie. The movie is good if you hold the ignorance of never reading the book; so if your a lazy sob and have no desire to engage in the power of one as it really is, just do that, but otherwise you'll thank me if you read the book.

Rating:
Summary: New Read The Book When You Can Watch The Movie!
Review: A perfect case of why read the book if you can watch the movie? All of the reviewers the gave this movie low marks read the book first. Never, never do this. Watch the movie, be moved by the experience and then read the book. There will be far less disappointment that way.

One of the greatest movies no one has heard of. I have seen it multiple times and it is a triumph of the human spirit. You will wish the movie went on for another few hours. Freeman was excellent as was Dorf, clearly his greatest moment. You will not regret watching this movie, if you did not read the book first.

Rating:
Summary: that was the best
Review: I thought that it was one of the best movies i ever saw anywhere, and it was the best movie i ever saw in school of course. Whoever choose the actor's to play all the different P.K.s was really good. when he was a little boy you couldn't help but cry when he lost his loved ones. he was so brave about it too!! when he was that middle age he was so energetice when he taught the prisioners how to sing. when he was like 18ish, he was heartmelting! he knew exactly what he wanted in life and he went for it even when it seemed impossible. i would give this movie 1000 stars with a medal. at first i thought i was going to watch another

Rating:
Summary: A CORRUPTED VERSION OF THE BOOK
Review: This is my second review of The Power of One. The first was of the wonderful book. I have just viewed the film - the 1992 video taping of the 1992 film starring Morgan Freeman as Geel Piet.
The screen writer for the film has corrupted many aspects of Courtenay's story. I am surprised that Courtenay allowed it. Some of the major changes made for the film: Peekay is not "Peekay" as in the book. He is "P.K." - the initials of his name. P.K.'s mother dies before he is 5. His nanny moves away. His grandpa never lived with him. Grandpa sends "Doc" to care for P.K. The tender, wonderful relationship between Doc and P.K. never fully develops. Doc goes back to Germany as soon as he is released from prison and is never heard from again. P.K. falls in love with Maria, a girl he set eyes on for the first time while he is boxing. Maria, a girlfriend who does not exist in the book, becomes a heroine and a martyr. P.K.'s nemesis, who was the boarding school "judge" in the book, is a sadistic military police officer in the film. He meets his death during a street fight with P.K. But it is not P.K. who kills him. He is killed by a Kaffir - one of many denigrated Blacks that P.K. has befriended and helped. Except for Geel Piet, all the heartwarming friendships that P.K. developed in the book are missing in the movie.
The redeeming feature about the film is that emphasis is placed on the evils created by racism and apartheid, and that P.K. fulfills his sense of moral obligation and sincere desire to help the oppressed. The power of one can make all the difference.
Perhaps I would have judged the movie differently had I not read the book. But the book is far superior. If you have not read it, please do...all 519 pages. You will be moved to tears...tears of laughter, tears of sadness. You will feel the power of one.

Rating:
Summary: Book Was Better
Review: I found that the script of this movie was a bad attempt at condensing the characters and storyline of the wonderful into a 1 and a half hour movie.

Rating:
Summary: One of the Better films of the 90's
Review: John Avildsen could be considered the most interesting director of his generation if only for the huge range of quality among his films and the fact these differences seem to have little correlation with his level of experience. His best films include Joe (one of his first efforts), Rocky (several years later), and this film (late in his career). Mixed in between these high points are some moderate successes (Lean on Me and Save the Tiger) and some total dogs (Neighbors, The Karate Kid, WW and the Dixie Dance Kings, and Rocky V). It is hard to believe that it was same person, you either have to credit Avildsen with the "courage" to take on even the most hopeless of scripts or with such financial desperation that he had to take anything that came his way.
With Avildsen the "courage" angle (willing to attempt something without fear of failure and able to bounce back after failure) is the more likely, since courage is the recurring theme of most of his films: the solitary individual pitted against the oppressive and dehumanizing forces of the "status quo".
This is certainly true of "The Power of One". Bryce Courteney's book had that same theme and the film adaptation preserved it. Critics of the adaptation (and lovers of the book) complain that this is about the only thing that Avildsen preserved. While they are technically correct, their complaints are rather silly because the book(s) were basically un-filmable (at least commercially) and film is a different medium making comparison illogical anyway. While all adaptations contain many elements of a story, there will be omissions and changes-particularly with a novel like Courteney's. Those who complain that this adaptation was incomplete and inaccurate probably complained that "Clueless" was an inaccurate adaptation of Jane Austin's "Emma". The point is that a movie is a movie and a book is a book. Actually this film was a blending of Courteney's story with Stephen Covey's "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" with the main character having to move from dependence to independence (private victory) before he can become effectively interdependent (public victory) and influence others. As someone said earlier, "The Power Of One", despite ending with a statement proposing a bland union of absolute conviction, is not expansive but rather interior in its meaning. And this is indeed the paradox of art, when experiencing something the details are rapidly subsumed (as in subjective).
This is a more political story than the novel but the political elements are superficial and simplistic. And the premise of a white boy leading a whole race of people to their salvation is a bit over the top, an unnecessary and forced way of extending Courteney's individual inner power to a collective unity. But such is the nature of film, where pacing considerations and time constraints make reliance on stereotypes necessary to economically convey a message. And in a sweeping historical story like this there is no way to provide a great deal of depth to the characters. But Avildsen does a good job with his main character, a consistent style of frequent reaction shots of PK remind the viewer that the film is entirely his point-of-view and his impressions as he grows up. The solitary individual pitted against an oppressive power structure, his "power of one" being an ability to experience personal tragedy/inhumanity and yet retain his humanness, a child who does learns to not let fear restrict the experience of living.
What makes the film good is that while Avildsen's political message is heavy-handed and stereotyped, he makes good use of the time this buys him for other story elements. Some have asked why Fay Masterson's "Maria" character was added to the screenplay (Maria was not in Courteney's novel). This was a special subtle touch by Avildsen. Masterson is as perfect looking as Nicole Kidman but somehow much more real. Two of the best visual scenes in the film revolve around her character. The first is PK's initial glimpse of Maria in the audience at his championship fight (homage to Rocky's search for Adrian in the crowd). It is visually amazing-Masterson has an angelic glow in this shot which makes PK's instant enthrallment and improbable pursuit seem quite believable. And Masterson handles the subtle acting requirements of this difficult role extremely well, representing those Afrikaners who were able to overcome their childhood indoctrination, see their racist institutions for what they were, and work for change. The other key scene is Maria's funeral where Avildsen shows her father's sudden grasp of what a special person she was, and special for the very qualities he tried to suppress in her while she was still alive. This scene could have been clumsy and silly but Avildsen stages it with such subtlety that we accept that her father has been inspired to work for reform. Film is such a powerful medium because when done correctly it can visually tell a story in a few seconds more convincingly than in a hundred pages of text.
Bottom line this is not a perfect movie nor is it an accurate adaptation of the book. It is a very entertaining film more "inspired" by the book than adapted from it. It has great visuals of the veldt and has wonderful African music. The historical subject is worth telling and the individual themes of justice, hope, and courage offer a very positive message.

Rating:
Summary: Good movie, just can't beat the book
Review: I would recommend this movie to someone who hasn't read the book because it is very touching and it offers a good insight into the real life drama that happened and is still happening today. However, if you have read the book...I think that this movie is absolutely terrible as a follow-up. There is so much more in the book and so much more action and so many more twists and turns. If I were to recommend something, please read this book...the movie has nothing on it.