posted
I thought it was very good. I'm glad CGI has gotten good enough that we weren't forced to endure actors in animal suits or semi-expressive animatronic puppets.
That said, I thought they could have done a slightly better job with the CGI. Sometimes it didn't feel like the beavers, or Aslan were actually interacting with their environment. But that was minor.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly what I expected. Very very pleased. The only thing is that it could have been much better if it had been more intense. The whole lack of blood thing got a bit goofy at times. But I understand them wanting to keep it PG. So I will say it is one of the best PG movies I've seen in a long time, if not ever. Btw, did anyone else see the Pirates of the Carribean trailer? Maybe I'm a bit late on that, but woohoo!
Posts: 143 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly what I say, libertygirl. Oh wait, no, I did say that! (That's my sister ... she didn't log off so I posted before I noticed it was her. SHE hasn't seen the movie. sucker!)
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was absolutely amazing. It was one of those movies where I just couldn't help smiling through the whole thing!
Posts: 1789 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone who has seen the version they made back in the 80's think that the White Witch was better in that version than this one? Because I definately think she was better in that version.
And I'm quite psyched for the PotC movie!
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you mean the nostril-flaring lady from the BBC productions...no. No, do not think that actress was better.
Tilda Swinton's icy-cool Jadis struck me as being far superior, but then again I found pretty much all the BBC Narnia to be underwhelming.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
underwhelming, yet I watched them anyway. I especially liked the bit in Voyage of the Dawn Treader where Caspian goes, "You all have your freedom!" and the slaves go completely Monty Python with their cheers of thanks. Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the BBC ones were the ones that were on NJN, then I guess yes those are the ones I'm talking about. I had no idea they made the rest of them; the only ones I knew about were The Lion... and The Silver Chair.
Regardless, I wasn't very impressed by the White Witch of the one that just came out. She didn't seem very mean or full of doom to me.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Saw it, enjoyed it a great deal. My only complaints was a bit of trouble with the CGI-very, very minor, but since there's so much of it, it's more noticeable. Didn't detract from my enjoyment at all really, though.
My other complaint is that we didn't really get to see the Pevensies distinguished from one another as well as I would've liked. Susan was done properly with her trying to be grown up and smart all the time. Edmund's betrayl was handled well. But there could've been more showing of Peter's bravery and magnificence, and Lucy's compassion and faith. And Edmund's intelligence, and later wisdom.
But I think they were true enough to the story, and I was very pleased with the film.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll admit... I didn't love it. Just saw it last night. The plot was all right to good, and Aslan was really good. But at times, it just made no sense.
Kids: "We're in Narnia!" Beaver: "You're the kings and queens of Narnia." Peter: "I don't believe in the prophecy." Lucy: "I do." Edmund: "I like Turkish Delight." *Snow queen reveals herself as BAD, and does NOT give Edmund Turkish delight.* Kids: "You're right. I now believe in the prophecy. Let's go kill the snow queen and save Narnia and become the kings and queens and save Aslan." *Narnia is saved*
Just... didn't love it. Oh, and the evil creatures were badly done. 'Cept the minotaur.
Posts: 53 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw it last night. I've never read the books.
I agree that the plot was really fast and way too bouncy. And I could've done with some more character development. It started off SO good and I was really excited and sure I was gonna love it, but I just didn't. Its good, yes, but not great.
And then I couldn't get the words "Christian allegory" out of my head. I must say that I was surprised how literal it is. The entire "crucifixion" and resurrection was way to precise for my taste. And the Witch was wearing that one black wing on her dress like a fallen angel. Yeah, just too much for me. I did like the debate over Edmund's blood when the Witch says something like "Traitors belong to me." Very thoughtful.
What was up with the end? They grew up and then came out of the wardrobe in their children bodies. Am I the only one creeped out by that?!
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Time doesn't pass in real life the way it does in Narnia. You go in and come out at the same moment in time.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay. I'm going this evening, at 7:10 at the Coliseum on Carling Avenue. My mom is coming, my brother and sister (with her boyfriend), my aunt, three of my cousins and one of their friends. I can't wait.
Posts: 609 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand that kojabu, but aren't they still like twenty-somethings in 12 year-old bodies now??
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: I understand that kojabu, but aren't they still like twenty-somethings in 12 year-old bodies now??
I guess so, but not in real world time. I guess they have Narnia ages and our world ages, so they experience stuff twice.
Anyone remember if, when they go back later on, they go back to the age they were when they left or if they go back at the age they are in our world?
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to C.S. Lewis in the later books, once the Pevensies keft Narnia their adult Narnian lives became hazy. Hard to remember in precise detail. The knowledge was still there, but it was hard to access in the ordinary, earthly world.
But once back in Narnia, the memories (and skills) begin to return.
Narnia isn't just another world, it's another universe...it has an effect of making humans from our world much "more" than they are here.
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if you read the Magician's Nephew, it is just another world, but more like another world in another dimension where time has little relation to the time in other worlds.
I saw it today, but I'll comment on it later, I have to get to work.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Just another world" where the stars are actually silvery-haired people with magnificent singing voices, the planet actually _is_ flat, and other things that indicate a somewhat different set of physical laws besides the time thing. Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The books are Christian allegories. Therefore, it should be blatantly obvious in the movie. I agree with tern that they 'deep magicked' a lot of the allegory away and that was ok with me. I got the feeling that they tried to leave some symbolism there for folks who would see that and that they took some of it out for folks that wouldn't.
It kind of bums me out when people act like the allegory showing up in the movie is a negative thing.
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that and, having read the books, I was expecting that. I was only replying to tern's comment that though they removed much of the Christian allegory, it was still really obvious. It was part of the book, therefore it should have been in the movie. It's not like you can really take the whole Stone Table scene out of the movie.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't understand how you can have a problem with the allegory. It's like seeing The Passion and not liking it because it had too much to do with Jesus. That's what the book IS. It wouldn't be The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe if it wasn't written that way.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A couple quotes I think apply to the discussion:
quote:Originally said by C.S. Lewis: If Aslan represented the immaterial Deity in the same way in which Giant Despair represents despair, he would be an allegorical figure. In reality however he is an invention giving an imaginary answer to the question, 'What might Christ become like, if there really were a world like Narnia and He chose to be incarnate and die and rise again in that world as He actually has done in ours?' This is not allegory at all.
and
quote:Originally said by C.S. Lewis: Some people seem to think that I began by asking myself how I could say something about Christianity to children; then fixed on the fairy tale as an instrument, then collected information about child psychology and decided what age group I'd write for; then drew up a list of basic Christian truths and hammered out 'allegories' to embody them. This is all pure moonshine. I couldn't write in that way. It all began with images; a faun carrying an umbrella, a queen on a sledge, a magnificent lion. At first there wasn't anything Christian about them; that element pushed itself in of its own accord.
posted
Interesting quotes RRR, I really just love the the way that C.S. Lewis can say things so clearly.
Posts: 697 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know Pearce, he really was perfect. I loved how he was able to show how attached he got to Lucy. What a sweetie! Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Tumnus totally reminded me of this guy Jordan I know. I couldn't figure out where I thought I knew him from and then it hit me. He was such a great character.
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I loved the film. I was so glad to see such realistic animals.
I really, really wish they'd left the witch's speech to Aslan on the Stone Table alone. And the conversation with Aslan regarding Edmund.
Other than that, it was great. I was happy they included the bit with the bomber planes, because it would be so much less obvious what was going on if they hadn't.
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's stuff I loved, and a few things I didn't care for as much.
I think Aslan should have been larger. The lion in the Queen's courtyard was supposed to be huge, and he was supposed to be smaller than Aslan. Thus I'd think Aslan would be much larger than he was.
I really liked the Griffins and what I'm assuming was a Phoenix during the battle.
Most of what bothered me was with Aslan and The White Witch. And a certain sense of something being missing, excitement or something. I can't put my finger on it, maybe after I sleep on it I'll know.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was a little underwhelmed by Aslan. Sure, he was certainly lionesque, but he wasn't nearly as impressive I imagined he should be. But that's a small quibble in a good movie.
Posts: 561 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah I definitely agree about Aslan. I kind of expected him to be the end-all guy in the film. He just seemed too normal. I also wanted his roars to be devastatingly loud, rather than just a normal lions roar. Kind of how Treebeard's cry was in Twin Towers, only deeper, louder, and scarier.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was a cool movie. It was SOOOOOO COOL! And the POLAR BEARS! AWESOME!!!! Plus I thought it was waaaaaaaaay better than HP4 in my opinion. The battle scene was great, but, it is not exactly something new, but there are parts of it that were a few parts that were a bit..... but not too many.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of the best adaptations I've seen to date, and anyone that knows me knows I am a huge stickler about this sort of thing (hence my unending hatred of the LotR trilogy movies and, more recently, the Aeon Flux movie).
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many people have mentioned that they were bothered about the Deep Magic. As a Mormon, the concept actually appealed to me rather than being a problem. I also loved the Magicians nephew...it explained some of my 'heretical' views to my wife better than I could have.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But that's just the thing... "Deep Magic from the dawn of time" is just the terminology used to describe the natural laws set at creation - not gravity and laws of nature, but that sin separates us completely from God. Sin results in death. The words "Deep Magic" fit the fantasy setting that the story was placed in. Likewise, "Deeper Magic from before the dawn of time" refers to the fact that, ultimately, nothing conquers God.
It's just terminology, not witchcraft Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But that's just the thing... "Deep Magic from the dawn of time" is just the terminology used to describe the natural laws set at creation - not gravity and laws of nature, but that sin separates us completely from God. Sin results in death. The words "Deep Magic" fit the fantasy setting that the story was placed in. Likewise, "Deeper Magic from before the dawn of time" refers to the fact that, ultimately, nothing conquers God.
Well, no wonder I didn't get the allegory. I don't believe that God does not follow natural laws.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Natural laws was poor wording. I'm talking about that God cannot go against his own nature. He just can't. And since sin is anything that is against God, God cannot sin and God cannot tolerate sin. So the laws regarding sin and His nature, that have been in place since creation, require that sin results in death.
But since God is God, he can still give us a way out, since His power is outside of time (or before the dawn of time ), which is allowing a sacrifice to atone for the sins.
The moral of the story? Never eat turkish delight.
Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:So the laws regarding sin and His nature, that have been in place since creation, require that sin results in death.
But since God is God, he can still give us a way out, since His power is outside of time (or before the dawn of time:) ), which is allowing a sacrifice to atone for the sins.
That's what I meant that I do not believe.
The sin and the atonement are part of the same law, not that sin is a law which is immutable except by God, who can do what he wants. In other words, I disagree with Lewis theologically. I'm not terribly distressed about it.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Well, no wonder I didn't get the allegory. I don't believe that God does not follow natural laws.
Well, in the book/movie, that Aslan DID have to follow the Deeper Magic--so that should fit with your statement.
Edit: Assuming the reverse of your statement is true: That you do believe God does follow natural laws.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
