posted
I felt that their "artistic license" with Prince Caspian left much to be desired. I didn't see anything outright that looked wrong (it did seem to me to show some sort of battle, which i don't remember one in the book) but i'm not sure that i have confidence that it'l be a good enough movie to see in theaters.
Posts: 467 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My little girl actually wants to see the movie which is rare so it might be a chance for us to actually see a movie in the theatre. Usually, we can only go to cartoons with princesses.
For the battle, the only thing I can think of is the whole slavery part- there wasn't really a battle then, but they could add a few fights. I am assuming the whispering to Edward (with the ghosty lady) about being a king is the island of dreams/nightmares. I was a little disappointed at the lack of dragons in the preview.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
I don't remember the book much, other than loving it. How come there is so much focus on Edmund and Lucy? Are the others not in it?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ecthalion: I felt that their "artistic license" with Prince Caspian left much to be desired. I didn't see anything outright that looked wrong (it did seem to me to show some sort of battle, which i don't remember one in the book) but i'm not sure that i have confidence that it'l be a good enough movie to see in theaters.
There are battles, they're just not shown explicitly. Instead they are discussed in retrospect, by the narrator. That would not work for a movie; you can't very well have the characters sit about and discuss how they lost the battle today. So showing it is the right option for a movie.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I don't remember the book much, other than loving it. How come there is so much focus on Edmund and Lucy? Are the others not in it?
In Prince Caspian, Aslan told Peter and Susan that they were too old to go back to Narnia.
Posts: 339 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
They showed Peter and Susan at around 1:50, but my guess is we'll only see them in flashbacks (which also may explain the battle scene). Peter and Susan don't travel to Narnia in this book. Instead, Lucy and Edmund travel in the company of their priggish cousin Eustace (at whose house they're staying at the beginning). You only see him briefly in the trailer, but he plays a very large role in the book.
I agree with Ecthalion that Prince Caspian was a weak effort. I have hopes for Dawn Treader, but the dialogue in the trailer (what little there was of it) did seem rather stilted. But, as Scott says, it does look pretty.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was not overly pleased with Prince Caspian, nor did I despise it. I am glad they decided to go ahead with this one, as it was my favorite of the books and I feel it will make the best movie.
And no, the other children are not in it... in fact, this will be the last one for Edmund and Lucy as well.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jim-Me: I was not overly pleased with Prince Caspian, nor did I despise it.
I despised it. The trailer for Dawn Treader didn't look too bad, but I shall venture forth with expectations of disaster.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just want them to get to The Magician's Nephew already. That's all I'm interested in at this point.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ecthalion: I felt that their "artistic license" with Prince Caspian left much to be desired. I didn't see anything outright that looked wrong (it did seem to me to show some sort of battle, which i don't remember one in the book) but i'm not sure that i have confidence that it'l be a good enough movie to see in theaters.
There are battles, they're just not shown explicitly. Instead they are discussed in retrospect, by the narrator. That would not work for a movie; you can't very well have the characters sit about and discuss how they lost the battle today. So showing it is the right option for a movie.
I am aware of the battles that would have had to take place for the Caspian to be in the situation they were in. The invasion of the castle and the "love story" between Susan and Caspian and the confrontation of the witch and Peter all were not in the book and took up much more screen time than should have been allowed. In general i do not think that the Narnia books make for good cinema, but i do not like when things are added (or in some cases taken from) to movie versions of books.
Posts: 467 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Maybe I'm getting jaded, but the CGI of the painting looked kind of sub-par. The rest of it is pretty enough, though. I'll probably end up seeing it... Eventually.
My most striking memory of the Caspian movie was "We've well established that shield-bashing is your enemy's favorite tactic; maybe you should keep the helmet on, genius?"
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love combat in movies like these. Nobody ever dies for virtue of not wearing a helmet to look ~*dashing*~, and while all lethal attacks with sharp objects is ~*dashing*~ly diverted, everyone always ends up being able to easily plant fists and feet and shields into each other for ~*dashing*~ly dramatic flying back and crap.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw the preview in front of Toy Story 3, and couldn't help but be excited about it. Despite an undying attachment to the books, I haven't been bothered by the *ahem* artistic licenses taken with the movies, and I'm sure I'll enjoy Dawn Treader just as much as the first two.
That being said, I'm really curious how it will translate to film. Dawn Treader was always been the most episodic of the books. It has a few good character-based plot threads that run through it, but that's not the sort of conflict that carries a blockbuster movie. (Not to say there aren't exciting conflicts in the book, just that they get resolved as quickly as they crop up, which deflates the sense that anything major is at stake.)
I wonder if I'm the only one that's hoping to see The Horse and His Boy on the screen...even though I'm sure that, if they're going to skip any of the books, that will be the one.
Posts: 47 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I wonder if I'm the only one that's hoping to see The Horse and His Boy on the screen...even though I'm sure that, if they're going to skip any of the books, that will be the one.
This was solidly my third favorite of the series, behind TMN and TLWW, so I will probably get a little excited about it if it ever gets made.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: I love combat in movies like these. Nobody ever dies for virtue of not wearing a helmet to look ~*dashing*~, and while all lethal attacks with sharp objects is ~*dashing*~ly diverted, everyone always ends up being able to easily plant fists and feet and shields into each other for ~*dashing*~ly dramatic flying back and crap.
I read this and seethed a bit all over again.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looks pretty sweet. Stop thinking about the book and think of the movies as adventure movies where people go adventuring.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Having just watched it from Redbox, I cannot say I'm surprised not to've found a thread about the film itself. Very bearable is the best I can describe it, and as for the changes made from the book...
posted
I remember the BBC Narnia series from the late 80s - I was four and it was the most amazing thing I had ever seen. And now I can see that the whole production was pretty lousy. But, if you're a little kid with a big imagination, I can attest that the quality of these stories can shine through all the rubbish anyone can throw at them.
So a lot of the littlies watching these films probably saw the story they should have been watching - not what was actually on the screen. Which is good.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loved this series of books as kid...and enjoyed the first movie for what it was...but the second movie was just plain terrible...bad acting, bad pacing, bad casting, bad camera work, bad bad bad. It has been awhile so I might have one too many bads in there...but man...I'm kinda shocked I made all the way through!
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There were a few things I really liked about Dawn Treader - the aesthetics of the sea at the end of the world were pretty fantastic, and I thought the little actor who was Eustace was just great.
But, again, why the battle? And, what, did the chick who played the White Witch somehow wrangle a contract that required them to write her into every single movie?
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dawn Treader was a beautiful movie in terms of cinematography. It was a disaster in times of plot.
Spoiler warning for Dawn Treader/HP 7
I think part of the problem is the nature of the story of Dawn Treader. It's, in some ways, similar to the first half of Deathly Hallows: it's more of a master's journey, about overcoming everyday banal evil than a hero journey with learning & set-backs leading to a large triumph. That makes it a lot harder to film.
Then are other issues, like the Lone Islands being built up like Gondor and a complete misunderstanding on the part of the director of Aslan fixing Eustace.
As a sea adventure story it was fine, but it also didn't have anything to set it apart from other sea adventures.
Posts: 100 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
