Prince Caspian (caution: a potential spoiler-haven)

[Virlomi]

Well Narnia fans, the new movie came out today. So... what's the verdict?

I saw it tonight. I don't want to give too much away until more people have had a chance to see it, but just to say, for the most part, I was pleasantly surprised.

I'm just glad they didn't completely butcher my favorite of these books.

[Darth Petra]

I was excited to be able to see the move the day it came out. As the lights dimmed, riveted my eyes to the screen. I expected them to change some things, but I fully expected it to be better than the last one. Boy, was I mistaken.
(Ok, I’m assuming you’ve read the book here, and know what I’m talking about in the following review)

The movie starts out when Caspian is woken by Cornelius and told he has to run away because Miraz had a son. (I thought, Ok, so they’ll start with Caspian’s story, and lead up to where he blows the horn at Aslan’s How, and summons the children to Narnia.) So the Prince is running away on his horse, pursued by Miraz’s men. He falls off said horse, and is attacked by two dwarves, and blows the horn. I grumble under my breath.
The children are waiting for the train to school. After breaking up a fight between Peter and some random dude who didn’t exist in the book, they are magicked away to Narnia. They walk around the beach for a while, and find the ruins of Cair Paravelle (I know that’s spelled wrong, but I’m too lazy to go upstairs and flip through my books).
Flip to Capsian, who meets Trufflehunter and Nikabrik, and finds out that Trumpkin (the other dwarf) was captured by Miraz’s soldiers.
Trumpkin gets tossed into the sea, the kids save him. Now, the children’s plot follow the book for a little while, up to the part where Lucy sees Aslan for the second time (At least they kept my favorite line in there: Lucy: “Aslan, you’re bigger,” Aslan: “That’s because you’re older…..). Lucy wakes up, and goes wandering off again, they meet up with Caspian in the woods, Peter and the Prince cross swords and bicker all the way to Aslan’s How. (and the Prince and Susan make eyes at each other) Once there, they decide to attack Miraz’s castle. They do, and the battle goes very poorly.

Must I go on? This is stressful, not to mention irritating, I’ll just make a list:
1. Aslan gets about three minutes of screen time, during which is portrayed as a purry kitty-cat.
2. Caspian and Susan kiss at the end.
3. Lucy in involved in the scuffle with the were-wolf and the hag.
4. Reepicheep was really cute. Best part of the movie.

I shudder to think of the kids who think they know Narnia just because of this…stuff. It makes me mad. They’ve unashamedly torn the heart out of my favorite series. For one thing, the portrayal of Aslan. In the book….in the book, he inspires fear, and respect. You still love him, but it’s not like he’s a huggable kitty. Hollywood has made him this cheerful, sapatizing wisp of what he is supposed to be.
No movie can ever capture the true essence of Narnia, but they could have done a better job then this sappy, Disneyfied junk.

[Virlomi]

Actually... I fully intended to have that kind of a reaction to it... but I kind of have to almost completely disagree. Mainly because I felt like a warmly lit, sweet interpretation of these stories actually fits them pretty well. I mean, to make the obvious comparison, translating a series such as the LOTR trilogy into film required something somewhat raw, gritty... it required filmmaking which wasn't afraid to be dark. It remained in keeping with the spirit of the books, even when taking minor liberties with the plot. But I've always felt like the Narnia series is warm, endearing, easily accessible. At times they're even a bit sappy. So really, I actually feel like a Disney-fied interpretation fits spirit of these books pretty well.

I guess my point is that I don't feel like these books really demanded a letter of the law, point by point, obsessively-portrayed interpretation. I feel like they needed something lovely. Something warm and sweet and slightly sappy while being powerful and stirring and reaching levels of grandeur. And while it's easy to get bogged down in a lot of little annoying details, I think that this movie achieved that.

Granted, I had my issues with it. But I was actually pleasantly surprised by how much I forgot to nitpick and just got sucked into the story. Yes, it wasn't mind-boggling. Yes, they mixed around some plot points. Yes, the Caspian/Susan-googly-eyes thing drove me BONKERS. But I actually really enjoyed it. Certainly more than I did the first one.

[Eaquae Legit]

It was a fun movie. I adored Reepicheep. But it wasn't Prince Caspian. They managed to film maybe a third of the book, and only half of that was in the right order. This is the sound of me giving up on Hollywood ever caring about the books they adapt.

But, like I said, fun movie. I would have enjoyed quite a lot it if I didn't love the book so deeply.

Except the kiss at the end and the music. That was pretty awful. And the siege engines - those would never work. And the sword fights. I really shouldn't have gone to that session last weekend on medieval sword fighting. Hollywood fights are ruined for me now.

[fawkes]

Is it just me, or did Miraz look like Leonidas (300)?

[locke]

I liked it a whole lot, about as much as I liked the first one. I never cared for the book much, I think I read it twice, maybe, which is once more than Horse and His Boy while I read the others four or five times each.

It certainly is a huge improvement on the BBC live action version.

I loved the attack on the castle I thought that was tremendously entertaining.

I think what I was most suprised about was that the film didn't hold back from children perpetrating quite a lot of carnage, true there's no gore, but they killed quite a lot of people (and it was pretty awesome). in LWW they're only killing 'bad beasts' for the most part. Of course I would have loved the irony of reinterpreting the telmarines as scandanavians with very pale skin and white-blond hair. but they didn't retcon out CS Lewis' not-really-troubling so called 'prejudice' in the portrayal of the Telmarines.

The catapaults were ridiculous, but I loved how Birnam wood came to Dunsinane, that was quite a nice touch.

It was entertaining and enjoyable and a delight, imo, from start to finish.

I was sort of stunned that they actually followed the books in 'banning' Peter and Susan from Narnia, I had fully expected to follow all four of them through Dawn Treader and Silver Chair rather than bringing in Eustace and what's-her-face, because that's the sort of hollywood decision making/logic I would expect.

It also seems like that they're setting up Susan not returning in Last Battle (again rather than retconning it to a happy ending) with her comments in her first scene, her comments as she leaves Narnia and Aslan's comment to Lucy, "why didn't you come to me alone when no one else would come with you."

Looking forward to Dawn Treader, Where the water turns sweet,/ Fear not Reepicheep,/ For you are in the utter east.

there just had better be a midasy dragon and all the other strange and wierd islands.

[Jayelle]

It was a fun movie. I adored Reepicheep. But it wasn't Prince Caspian. They managed to film maybe a third of the book, and only half of that was in the right order. This is the sound of me giving up on Hollywood ever caring about the books they adapt.

But, like I said, fun movie. I would have enjoyed quite a lot it if I didn't love the book so deeply.

Except the kiss at the end and the music. That was pretty awful. And the siege engines - those would never work. And the sword fights. I really shouldn't have gone to that session last weekend on medieval sword fighting. Hollywood fights are ruined for me now.

I agree. It wasn't a terrible movie, it was fun, but it wasn't Prince Caspian. The thing that disturbed me the most was all the battle scenes. I can watch them and find then fun now, as an adult, but there is no way I could have watched that as a kid. It would have disturbed and scared me to no end.
I read these books when I was six! There's no way in hell child can go see this movie. That sucks.

I did love parts of it. Reepicheep was spot on. Caspian was good. The kids are good and the CGI flawless.

However, I couldn't really get past the fact that they deleted my favourite scene from the book (where they all see Aslan one by one at the gorge). I try not to be too emotionally attached and see it as a movie and not my beloved book, but I still felt like it fell flat.

[Darth Petra]

It was a fun movie. I adored Reepicheep. But it wasn't Prince Caspian. They managed to film maybe a third of the book, and only half of that was in the right order. This is the sound of me giving up on Hollywood ever caring about the books they adapt.

But, like I said, fun movie. I would have enjoyed quite a lot it if I didn't love the book so deeply.

Except the kiss at the end and the music. That was pretty awful. And the siege engines - those would never work. And the sword fights. I really shouldn't have gone to that session last weekend on medieval sword fighting. Hollywood fights are ruined for me now.

I agree. It wasn't a terrible movie, it was fun, but it wasn't Prince Caspian. The thing that disturbed me the most was all the battle scenes. I can watch them and find then fun now, as an adult, but there is no way I could have watched that as a kid. It would have disturbed and scared me to no end.
I read these books when I was six! There's no way in hell child can go see this movie. That sucks.

I did love parts of it. Reepicheep was spot on. Caspian was good. The kids are good and the CGI flawless.

However, I couldn't really get past the fact that they deleted my favourite scene from the book (where they all see Aslan one by one at the gorge). I try not to be too emotionally attached and see it as a movie and not my beloved book, but I still felt like it fell flat.

You're right. As movies go, it was decent, but as Narnia....meh.
I only wonder what Lewis would think. I mean, this one was never my favorite (the Silver Chair is), but I love the books as a whole more than anything....so to see it like this really ticked me off.

[locke]

I agree. It wasn't a terrible movie, it was fun, but it wasn't Prince Caspian. The thing that disturbed me the most was all the battle scenes. I can watch them and find then fun now, as an adult, but there is no way I could have watched that as a kid. It would have disturbed and scared me to no end.
I read these books when I was six! There's no way in hell child can go see this movie. That sucks.

I did love parts of it. Reepicheep was spot on. Caspian was good. The kids are good and the CGI flawless.

However, I couldn't really get past the fact that they deleted my favourite scene from the book (where they all see Aslan one by one at the gorge). I try not to be too emotionally attached and see it as a movie and not my beloved book, but I still felt like it fell flat.

I didn't find it that scary. certainly a lot less scary than Raiders of the Lost Ark, Gremlins or any of the other PG eighties kids flicks I watched as a kid growing up.

I'd forgotten them all seeing aslan at the gorge one at a time til you mentioned it though I remember liking that scene.

[wigginboy]

Having never read the books or even watched the first movie, I watched this one with my wife's family last night and I found it entertaining. I was actually laughing at a lot of parts just to to the childishness of the scenes but that's just how I watch movies. I thought, however, that the plot moved very intermittently. You see in one scene a shmozzle of activity (i know, thats not a word but you should know what it means) and in the next four or five, only a few points from the original scene are shown. Something that seemed important in one scene would not be revisited for another four scenes. Such as the scene where Lucy goes into the woods to find Aslan. I didn't know that's what she was doing until the scene where it happens. And aside from the part where she and the older sister are riding out into the woods, thats the last we see of her until after both the single combat scene and the siege scene. All that aside, I did enjoy the movie. It was poignant and had a strong emphasis on family and the idea that no matter what, do what you have to for those you love.

I drew a few different references from the book. The first was to Hamlet. This is obvious in the fact that a prince is denied his rightful throne because his uncle has ascended it before him as a result of killing the former king. The idea of the tree's moving after Aslan wakes them up is also shown at the end of Hamlet. The second reference I took was from The Bible. Exodus to be exact. The allegory of the Telmarines taking the land and oppressing the Narnians resonated with me as being very close to the Biblical account of the Israelites in Egypt oppressed by the Egyptians. I know that the Narnians are not enslaved and but I know if you look into then both, you'll see what I mean. This is in the same vein as asserting that the LOTR series is a religious allegory (which it is).

[Virlomi]

Those are really interesting observations, Wigginboy.

I grew up with these books, so it's really interesting to hear the perspective of someone who is meeting them for the first time. I don't know how much you know about the lives of CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien, but it's ironic that you mentioned seeing LOTR as an allegory. Lewis and Tolkien were really close friends on and off for many years while they were both writing, and supposedly one of their main points of contention was that Lewis saw his stories as an allegory and Tolkien adamantly refused to write LOTR as one, and really criticized Lewis for it. Supposedly they ended up parting ways pretty heatedly, largely over that issue. (of course, anyone feel free to jump in and correctly if I totally botched that story.)

Not that you really needed a history lesson... I just thought that your comment on allegory was a kind of ironic observation.

[locke]

I drew a few different references from the book. The first was to Hamlet. This is obvious in the fact that a prince is denied his rightful throne because his uncle has ascended it before him as a result of killing the former king. The idea of the tree's moving after Aslan wakes them up is also shown at the end of Hamlet. The second reference I took was from The Bible. Exodus to be exact. The allegory of the Telmarines taking the land and oppressing the Narnians resonated with me as being very close to the Biblical account of the Israelites in Egypt oppressed by the Egyptians. I know that the Narnians are not enslaved and but I know if you look into then both, you'll see what I mean. This is in the same vein as asserting that the LOTR series is a religious allegory (which it is).

yeah there were quite a few references. Definitely hamlet, but also Macbeth with the way the trees come to life in the film (very different from the book). Additionally the film references Spartacus the film, whose story is also somewhat similar to the Moses story of Exodus you also mention (and I wasn't thinking of that one).

I don't think LOTR is allegory, it's not trying to teach a deliberate lesson. however Tolkien's core values and beliefs come through in the writing. However to call it an allegory of judeo/christian stories is about as accurate as saying it's an allegory to The Song of Roland, Das Niebelungen, Paradise Lost, or the Aeneid. All of these were influences on Tolkien, along with other mythologies but he was not writing on a specific one-to-one correlation that Lewis was using.

Lewis quite deliberately wrote Aslan=Jesus, and he intended for it to be read that way, he consciously wanted to recast the christ story in a way that it could reach people who would shrug off christian teachings, and he wanted to reinforce the principals of correct behavior of christians to his christian audience.

[3nder]

It hasent been releasd in australia yet but ive read the books ( all of them)
there doing the same thing they did with Starwars which is not making the movies in order.

The lion the wich and the wardrobe was number 2....
Prince caspian is number 4...

I want them to do number 1 that would be an interesting movie.

[locke]

They are doing them in order, they are doing them in the proper order which is:

Lion the Witch and the Warddrobe
Prince Caspian
Voyage of the Dawn Trader
Silver Chair
Horse and His Boy
Magician's Nephew
Last Battle

That's the order of publication. Some stupid publishers renumbered them in chronological order, but that is not ideal, imo.

[VelvetElvis]

I admit that I enjoy reading them in chronological order.


Saw the movies tday as a graduation celebration for my friends graduating HS this year. I was really only miffed about the susan/caspian thing. I do agree that aslan was a bit too cuddly, though.

[Wind Swept]

Let me preface this by admitting that I've only read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and the Magician's Nephew, and by saying that I'm a once Lutheran, now hovering between Agnostic and Atheist, depending on your definition of Atheist.

. . . he consciously wanted to recast the christ story in a way that it could reach people who would shrug off christian teachings, and he wanted to reinforce the principals of correct behavior of christians to his christian audience.

You know, the Symbolism of the first book and/or movie never bothered me. Jesus died, came back, woo, let's have a party.

All the business of Faith and Belief in Prince Caspian the Movie bugged the heck out of me, and if it's that blatant in the book, it's probably not going to follow the trend of favorite book in the series when I eventually read it.

[locke]

I think Lewis would have been upset that Susan took the kiss rather than waiting meekly to be kissed.

Or he would have loved it as foreshadowing that Susan is too wanton and worldly to make it into Narnia-heaven.

still if she's lived her adult life once already as a chaste woman, girl has got to be ready to kiss someone by this point.

[VelvetElvis]

I debated where to put this picture, but it goes here instead of pweb portraits because it's all about the Narnia, baby.



On opening day, in front of the sign!