posted
It baffles me that there isn't already a thread for this, so I'm thinking that due to the late hour I could just be missing it. However, on the off chance that I am the first to post about it ... yay?
I actually went to the midnight showing, so I've had a full day to ruminate about it. And yet I'm still not sure how best to describe my feelings. I'm quite sure how I feel, I just can't describe it. Disappointed just doesn't quite cut it. It really wasn't a bad movie. It did a lot of things right, I guess. It was well made, and I at least really enjoyed a lot of the dialogue and quips. The problem I have with it is that it is not C.S. Lewis. If you didn't listen and ignored the fact that there's going to be spoilers and don't ant them, stop reading now.
They took out or changed probably my two favorite scenes, one of which is minor, one of which (IMO) completely changed the movie from the book in a way that I'm not comfortable with. The first was the archery contest between Susan and Trumpkin. I loved that part of the book. Not that important, but it would've translated great into film. The second part was the scene early on in the book where they've gotten lost because they didn't listen to Lucy about Aslan. IIRC, Aslan wakes Lucy up and tells her to tell the others to come. It's a very powerful scene where Lucy basically asks Aslan what to do if they don't believe her and he says come anyways. Or something like that. They all end up coming with her and eventually they all see Aslan. Unfortunately, at the part in the movie when this is supposed to happen, they instead meet Prince Caspian. Sparks fly between Susan and him. A different sort of sparks fly between Peter and Prince Caspian. And from then on, the rest of the movie is off track. The characters aren't nearly as likable and the decisions they make are just plain stupid. I wanted to scream "C.S. Lewis knew what he was doing!!"
The fact that Caspian blew the horn without knowing what it was really irked me too, as well as the water lord destroying the bridge instead of the bridge being the water lords chains which needed to be destroyed. The inclusion of the White Witch was also annoyed, though understandable in a way. The kiss at the end ... well, the whole romance thing between Susan and Caspian ticked me off. That's why Caspian should have been cast much younger.
Something I'm torn about: The scenes where Caspian confronts Miraz were consistently reminiscent of Inigo Montoya. On one hand, this took away from the drama. On the other hand, it reminded me of The Princess Bride which, seriously, can't be that bad of a thing.
Some things I really liked: Reepiecheep (crap, I bet I spelled his name wrong. He'd kill me for that). The fact that from the very beginning the Telmarines reminded me of pirates. I just wanted them to all yell "Arrrgh! Avast!". The soundtrack. Really, most of the technical aspects of the movie. I thought it was beautifully made.
I think my dissatisfaction with the movie comes from several things. First off, I'm a purist. I think there's a reason Chronicles of Narnia is so popular, and that's because C.S. Lewis was brilliant. Same with Tolkien. Therefore, it annoys me when serious changes are made to the stories. But also, I love the Chronicles of Narnia not just from a literary standpoint, but also from a Christian standpoint. This is a whole other topic I don't want to get into right now, but I definitely feel as though the movie betrayed or compromised a lot of the message I found so profound in the book. And I know, it's Hollywood and it's Disney, but this really makes me not want to go see Voyage of the Dawn Treader. That one is my favorite book and for me the most meaningful and powerful. I might cry if they did to it what they did to Caspian.
Alright, enough of this too long and poorly worded review. I'm sure most people really loved it, and I'm not going to argue with that. There was a lot to love. Just not for me.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't seen it yet, but having read the book I didn't see the harm in reading some spoilers. From what I've read, I'll probably agree with you, as I'm a purist too.
But I'm still certainly going to see it. I think I was one of the few people who was less than thrilled with the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. I'm looking forward to Reepicheep and the soundtrack, if nothing else. I'm seeing it Monday.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I watched it last night and really enjoyed it. Frankly, I think most of the parts they changed were necessary to adapt it to a film medium. While I love the book, it does start rather slow, and the separation of the two sets of main characters until near the climax just wouldn't film well.
Once the movie makers made the decision to have the Pensives and Caspian meet up sooner (a good decision, IMo), most of the other changes they made had to follow. In particular, there's no way Aslan could have been introduced the way he was in the book - he's too powerful, so coming in too soon would have ruined the movie's suspense.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Can we just write off this movie as fan-fic. I mean, it was a "Narnian" movie - it was set in the Narnian universe, but it resembled Lewis's version only about as well as the all time movie standard of Jurassic Park!
What really frustrates me is that movies from these books CAN be done. I understand that scripts can be exact, but the BBC made Narnia movies ages ago. The LWW script is almost perfect. Prince Caspian and Voyage of the Dawn Treader aren't AS good, but compared to what I saw today... If the BBC could make a decent script, why can't Disney!?!? I mean, the BBC things are really low budget but even if you took those exact scripts and redid them with some decent special effects it would have been better than what I saw today....
And, after seeing this, I can only IMAGINE what would happen to Ender's Game if OSC let them turn Ender into a teenager. Seriously, Caspian is only about 10ish (maybe as old as 12 to 14, but I think that's a stretch) in the book.... He's 17 or 18 in the movie and ends up with a crush on Susan??? YUCK!
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, sorry, have to respond to Jhai??? What part of the adaptations were NEEDED?
Why on earth would Peter ever need to become a fighter in the real world? I actually thought the way they discovered Cair Paravel was fine, that is an understandable and deft change for theater, but the way they met the DLF? And, quite honestly, after they got to the mainland absolutely nothing about it followed the story line AT ALL!!! There were a few scenes here and there (Lucy seeing the trees move, Peter facing Miraz) but the story itself was changed. Heck, they even changed the very NATURE of Driads. Driads are NOT moving trees... Driads are tree SPIRITS! The most disturbing, however, is that the meaning of the book is no longer in tact when all the characters and story have been mangled. That bothered me enough in the first movie... I can understand consolidating and cutting out scenes - but adding whole NEW ones.... and it was just worse here...
It was an ok movie set in the Narnian universe, but it was NOT "Prince Caspian"... I shudder to think what they will do to my beloved "Voyage of the Dawn Treader"
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm beginning to see why Tolkien hated allegory so much. This movie really makes no sense, and has little meaning unless you interpret it as Christian allegory. The books seemed to do a decent job of having interesting Christian allegory for the Christian readers, in addition to being an interesting story otherwise.
Sure, Prince Caspian was exciting and fun to watch. I just didn't find it meaningful. Like, at all. I've watched LWW multiple times, and I've seen different layers each time, in addition to the meaning it has to me as a Christian.
So yeah. It was a decent movie, but certainly not great. Like LWW.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, if they'd had Susan sex Caspian up a bit, they'd've had a good reason not to let her into Heaven in the last movie.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just hope that they make the adaption(forget which book) that is entirely on there boat. Its heavy on reechiecheep, which was one of my favorite parts of the movie.
My biggest problem with the movie was that i just felt like fighting and calling all the charecters stupid, maybe it's just easier to see their mistakes when it's on the big screen. Not that it makes up for my wanting to kill peter off.
Posts: 549 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Hey, if they'd had Susan sex Caspian up a bit, they'd've had a good reason not to let her into Heaven in the last movie.
Sounds like you've got a pretty big misunderstanding of The Last Battle there, Tom.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you think Susan made it to Heaven after all, then? Because my reading of the book strongly suggested that Susan liked makeup too much to make it in.
It is sad that that's not the most reprehensible part of The Last Battle, though. I walked away from Lewis having learned the lesson that allegory is only tolerable when kept at a great distance from its source material.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I made a point of not re-reading the book before going to see the movie. So I wasn't able to compare the differences in the story as it went along, and I think that made it quite a bit more enjoyable.
I really liked the movie, and I think they did a better job with this one than with LWW, possibly because there's less direct allegory in PC and more action.
Was Caspian really supposed to be 10-14? I remembered him being about the same age as the four. (Although see above statement, I really have no idea :-p )
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: So you think Susan made it to Heaven after all, then? Because my reading of the book strongly suggested that Susan liked makeup too much to make it in.
The point was that Susan had given up on Narnia, so she didn't get to take the easy way in. She had become so wrapped up in the 'real world' that she no longer believed what she had once known to be perfectly true.
There's nothing in Last Battle to suggest that Susan is damned, just that she'll take the hard road.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:So you think Susan made it to Heaven after all, then? Because my reading of the book strongly suggested that Susan liked makeup too much to make it in. [Wink]
Like Eowyn said, Susan just "gave up" on Narnia. I don't think the book implied anywhere that she was going to be damned for that. Besides, that would pretty much go against some of the themes of the books in the first place. Susan's preoccupation with the "real" world kept her from Narnia in TLB. But come on. Considering what Edmund did in LWW I don't think Susan's actions are going to keep her from Lewis' heaven.
quote:I walked away from Lewis having learned the lesson that allegory is only tolerable when kept at a great distance from its source material.
Pretty much agreed here, though. TLB was arguably even the worst in that regard. Like I said, I really understand Tolkien's stance on allegory.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually Susan is there in the Last Battle, at the very end, they determine that the various mountains are like islands but all connected. Susan and her parents were on the train as well, and they died but they were in a different area. Peter and the other could go and see them if they wanted.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Actually Susan is there in the Last Battle, at the very end...
Are you entirely sure about that? IIRC -- and it's been a while since I read the book -- their parents were there, having died on the other train, but Susan was not, and was said to be on vacation in America at the time. She is, as far as I know, the only human to visit Narnia without being killed by Aslan's meddling in British rail.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was wondering why all of my memories of The Last Battle were more fuzzy than the other books. Turns out that's the one book missing from my collection. Go figure.
To all of you who commented on the allegory: The big problem I have with it is that the allegory you saw is almost entirely not via C.S. Lewis. Some of the same general ideas, but really very little of what Lewis intended (IMO). That's why the movie upset me a bit, because I respect C.S. Lewis and am fine with heavy-handed allegory when it comes from him. I'm not at all ok with it coming from this director.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not necessarily, but becoming an atheist is an example of getting distracted from the truth to the point of disbelief.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I thought they were heavy on the allegory, and I agree that it wasn't really the same allegory that Lewis intentionally intended, but I think it was close enough to be in the same vein of things.
My feelings on the movie now that I've seen it? I think it was actually pretty neat for what it was. The dialogue was wickedly awful, except for Reepicheep's lines. I mean the corny jokes were too bad to be silly funny. The love thing between Caspian and Susan was goofy too. Other than the childish behavior of Peter and Susan's embracing of Narnian quicker than she should have, the characters were mostly on.
Mostly? It was a good movie, but I'd still love to see a good adaptation of Prince Caspian some day. It was some really good Caspian fanfic though. It fails horribly as an adaptation, horribly. The first two thirds of the movie was off six ways from Sunday. The last third was rather good. I think if I hadn't of read the book I'd have wondered what was going on in some bits, but I suppose it was still fine for those who hadn't seen it.
I hope they do better with Dawn Treader.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was well-scored. The best part about it, for me, was that the obnoxious traits I saw in Peter in the last movie were dealt with here. I hated Peter last time, and it's good that this time it seemed he may have learned from his mistakes.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought the movie was pretty good, not great, but good. I enjoyed it, but I haven't read the book yet, so that might account for why I wasn't disappointed.
There is one small thing I would like to complain about. While I think Ben Barnes is a reasonably good actor, there was one noticeable flaw in his performance -- his accent.
First of all, he is British, so I don't understand why he didn't just talk in his normal voice. There were times in the movie where he seemed to be trying to sound Scottish, other times his accent was like fake movie Spanish, other times I knew it wasn't British but I couldn't actually say what it was suppose to be; pirate maybe.
Again, since he is British, I can't see any reason why he would need to affect any accent other than his natural accent.
Posts: 803 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A lot of you have mentioned that V of the DT is your favorite book of the series. Why is that? (just wondering)
Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
I really like the Dufflepuds. One of my favorite lines in all of literature is that one where Lucy and the Chief are arguing and the Dufflepuds are agreeing with them and Lucy says "But we're saying just the opposite!" and they say "So you are, to be sure, so you are. Nothing like an opposite." I love that line.
On an unrelated note, does anyone remember how Matilda says that there are no funny bits in C.S. Lewis's books, and it's such a mistake because children love to laugh? Every time I read that I want to write Roald Dahl a stroppy letter - does he not remember the Dufflepuds or Lazaraleen?
Posts: 910 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
I think because they were all Spanish. In this adaptation they're considered to be the descendents of Spanish pirates, so they'd still have Spanish accents I'd gather.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My kids (the ones who study with me daily are 4, 6, and 8) fell about giggling when we read aloud the Uncle Andrew-in-Narnia parts of MN.
Narnia is also funny when poorly acted. What comes to mind here is the scenery-chewing of the BBC Wonderworks L,W & W White Witch.
Posts: 575 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never read the book (Prince Caspian), so I had no idea what to expect going in to see the movie. Both hubby and I enjoyed it a lot. Much better than Indiana Jones Crystal Skulls which we had seen just a few days earlier. I'm interested to read the book now.
Posts: 315 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw PC last week. If I had never read the book it probably would have been a good movie.
The director missed the entire point of the journey to Caspian. Lucy still believes in Aslan, that's why she can still see him. The other children and DLF must come back to their belief. It doesn't matter if you personally believe in God, the characters journey is about their journey back to belief. The director chose to remove that very vital story point and replace it with a teen romance that never occurred, an assault on a castle that never happened and a conflict between Peter and Caspian that does not exist.
When DLF can finally see Aslan at the end of the film, it baffled me ... and I knew what was going on! I can only imagine what it looked like to the audience who had not read the book. Trumpkin was the representative of the Narnia that had forgotten Aslan. His belief is what brings back the "Golden Age" of Narnia as much as Caspian's victory.
I must say that I understand things have to be changed for the visual medium. Ripping out important story points and replacing them with romantic action drivel is not the best way to adapt a novel IMHO.
Posts: 1 | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
For what it's worth, these are my two cents:
I also saw Prince Caspian recently. I almost never see a movie I can't say anything bad about, but Prince Caspian was one of those movies for me. The last movie I couldn't complain about was The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.
I don't know much about film or acting, but I know what I like. I've always been a fan of the Narnia books and I loved to watch the BBC adaptations as a kid, but honestly, I think these films have been better than the books.
I think the way Peter was so proud in the film version would have bothered me if it wasn't just so believable and perfectly in-character from the Peter we saw in the last film. Susan falling for Caspian seems inevitable to me from what I read about her in the other books. I don't think it was dwelt on too much.
I'm usually against making such major changes in plot in an adaptation to film from a book, but that is because those changes usually don't make any sense. The changes made sense to me and made a more powerful story than the original. I'm looking forward to Voyage of the Dawn Treader.
Posts: 46 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Law, but I can't say that. The film was ok.. but the books are truly wonderful, and the film was a mockery of them.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
