The next couple kind of go in a different direction and so my worry is that it will be like The Golden Compass when brought to film and not capable of telling the full story.
shareThe "Golden Compass" is a much better comparison, it's a dramatic story about a girl being booted out of her comfortable if imperfect life, and finding her courage.
It definitely has the potential to be a good movie, more so than "Golden Compass". It's a shorter, less complex, more true-to-real-life book, which means they won't have to eviscerate the source material to get the film down to two hours.
It's the follow up stories that concern me [SPOILERS!]
I think they can do the missing brother and the whole totalitarian system of control thing with the dimension hopping which takes them into some uncomfortable realities for short periods whilst the various "Mrs" figure out what human forms can't deal with and what tesseracts are and all the other larger science fiction elements which make up the story.
When it gets into angel territory though, I'm not so sure they can swing it. Not domestically nor abroad - I'm happy to be wrong but I just don't see it.
I think it will be a one-off classic children's science fiction which works because of a great first book but can't follow through to the same extent on the rest.
I could just be an old fuddy duddy though as I own a first edition of the original which I read when I was a younger person and only picked up the rest when I was quite a bit older and none of them made much sense to me. That first story though, as a child - evening its opening sentence - stuck with me forever.
I loved A Wrinkle in Time. Like you, I read it when I was a kid and it's stuck with me forever.
Also read the two sequels, and barely remember them. As I recall, the second was okay, and the third one lost me.
Just watched the trailer, and can't say I'm impressed. The costuming and sets (whether actual or CGI, and I'm not one who minds good CGI) are too bright, too colourful and over the top. In my mind's eye, it was much simpler.