I certainly remember the children eating part of the house from my childhood version of the tale. It implied a sense of greed, and the witch's attempted devouring of them was a sort of repercussion.
In this modern version, the children's suspicions could be verified (if not exacerbated) by the aunt's reaction to their eating parts of the house. In this version it is the actions of the children that set into action the negative results (i.e. their wandering through the woods). Their criticism of her eccentricity could spur just that in this edition.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Links to the main blog and the sub-blogs
Links to the main blogs of the other two groups
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(67)
- ► 04/05 - 04/12 (6)
- ► 03/29 - 04/05 (5)
- ► 03/22 - 03/29 (12)
- ► 03/15 - 03/22 (4)
- ► 03/08 - 03/15 (5)
- ► 02/22 - 03/01 (6)
- ► 02/01 - 02/08 (7)
- ► 01/25 - 02/01 (7)
- ▼ 01/18 - 01/25 (6)
- ► 01/11 - 01/18 (9)
This is a valid point that I forgot about until I read this post. However, I think the gingerbread house is a little too "fairy tale" for a Keene movie. This message about greed and consequences should be they made more realistic for this telling of the story. I'm thinking that a platter of candy or cookies (or something else that these kids would be drawn to, but is not necessarily good for them) should be placed inside the house. The Aunt could be saving them for somebody special, or just for herself, but either way, the children are forbidden from eating them. Of course, their greed wins and they eat whatever's on the platter.
ReplyDeleteAlso, in response to the rest of this group's version in general, I really like that you made the old woman part of the family and that H&G brought this upon themselves because of so much misunderstanding.