The Chronicles Of Narnia Movies: Prince Caspian

[hectorberlioz]

Lol! They did fine with The Little Mermaid

Well, I meant more Aslan running through etc. They could pass over that particularly bacchanalian part .

[inked]

NO, No, no, HectorB! That part should have been included because it pictures the pleasures in their proper order under Aslan and the Emperor-over-the-
Sea! People tend to forget that the pleasures are good creations and properly taken to be enjoyed by all - even the Pevensies (who are not mere children in Narnia, recall).

Lewis is constantly making the point that being in the love of God one may, as St Augustine said famously, "Love God and do as you please."

Screwtape bemoans that the pleasures all have to be twisted to be of any use to temptors because "He made them...and out in his presence are oceans of pleasure to be enjoyed eternally."

Surely, then, to have the Lewisian picture of proper pleasures properly taken and thoroughly enjoyed should NEVER be left out!

Frankly, I'm looking forward to them. And there's no point in missing a little practice here below, either: "Love God and do as you please."

[hectorberlioz]

Right, I hope they do a little extra filming and put it in. Then Disney will rue the day they dumped Walden, as flocks of boy teens rush into the theater .

[Midge]

Insight on the arrogant Peter thing...

Apparently, the director was reading into the character of Peter that after being a King in Narnia for many years, the children would have trouble adapting to being mere children again, Peter most of all as the High King. So to the director, that means that when the children get to where they're going, Peter acts like a brat instead of a King. Way to go.

It's almost like they forgot what the air of Narnia does to people... You know... how after one day, Lucy was already two-thirds a Queen of Narnia and only one-third a little girl going to school for the first time. *sigh*

[hectorberlioz]

I watched Prince Caspian again last night. Everything in that movie could have been excellent or OK if only the dialogue wasn't made up 75% of one-liners. I kid you not. They form the bulk of the movie dialogue. Not only that, but it seriously impairs the characters and their relationships. All the Pevensies do is mock each other. All Trumpkin does is be snarky. All Peter and Caspian do is throw barbs at eachother. All Susan and Caspian's romance is comprised off is a few one-liners. It's bad when the only well-developed characters are Nikabrik (excellently played by Warwick Davis), and Lord Glazelle.

If there was any other kind of dialogue in the movie that outweighed this, it'd be a different and much better movie. I understand condensing sentences from book to movie. I understand change of word choice. But whoever wrote the PC script....doesn't know the first thing about natural-sounding human dialogue.

I pray there are different script-writers for Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

PS: I'm so glad Andrew Adamson isn't directing the next one.

[Midge]

I discovered a podcast that was reviewing PC. They talked about how there are three instances of someone shouting "Shut up!" to another to make a point. Uno momento and I'll post them. It's actually enjoyable to listen to, to know that you're not the only one who feels that way.

Here: Prince Caspian Analyses 1-8 are on this page and I think there might be one or two more on the previous page along with a couple of character analyses.

If there's one thing that I personally think, it's that the Chronicles of Narnia would be the absolute easiest thing to move from book to movie with few to no changes at all. The one change I understand is the Witch coming back in PC.

P.S. Meee... tooooo...

[hectorberlioz]

Yeah, I think the "shut up" was definitely used a bit much. Not that "shut up" doesn't make its appearance plenty of times in the books, though. I recall several spats between Jill and Eustace where it comes into use .

I enjoy the Narniaweb podcasts a lot, despite their sometimes frustrating unprofessionalism. Listened to one of them last night, too.

PS: Even a few times where "damn" is used in the books!

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Midge

The whole point of Aslan is that he is the God-figure in Narnia. There are traces of God (all-knowing, all-powerful, loving), traces of Jesus (LWW.. He died...) and even traces of the Holy Spirit (the feelings the children get when they hear his name the first time, the peace Lucy feels after hearing the albatross in the Dark Island in VDT).

Not just the God-figure for Narnia, but he IS God in Narnia. There's a difference, right?

[inked]

Yep, HB. See the Letters. Aslan is is the Incarnation in Narnia. Cf. The MAGICIAN'S NEPHEW.

[Earniel]

Finally got around to seeing Prince Caspian on TV. Okayish movie, but not particularly impressive or successful as adaptation.

As it was my favourite book, it had something to live up to. I had heard of the bad reviews and Disney dropping the franchise, so I was prepared. But overall, it was still disappointing.

The kid playing Caspian did his best. Loved his outfit. (Costumes all around were pretty good.) The exotic accent was surprising and I could almost hear countless teenage girls swooning on the first word he spoke.

One of the two scenes I was looking forward to, the kids working out that the ruins were Cair Paraval, was well-done. (Man, the brilliant blue water was enchanting, that had to be filmed somewhere tropical.) The second favourite scene, the 're-awakening' of Narnia was pretty much cut alltogether, which was a big bummer. The River-god came in too aggressively for my taste as well. But at least he was in it.

And the whole storm-the-castle-scene, what the hell was that good for?! Totally unnecessary. So utterly pointless, waste of film. Probably the movie's worst change.

The extended scene with the White Witch wasn't that much of a successful addition either, but was pretty much saved by Edmund's brilliant quip.

[Midge]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

Finally got around to seeing Prince Caspian on TV. Okayish movie, but not particularly impressive or successful as adaptation.

As it was my favourite book, it had something to live up to. I had heard of the bad reviews and Disney dropping the franchise, so I was prepared. But overall, it was still disappointing.

The kid playing Caspian did his best. Loved his outfit. (Costumes all around were pretty good.) The exotic accent was surprising and I could almost hear countless teenage girls swooning on the first word he spoke.

One of the two scenes I was looking forward to, the kids working out that the ruins were Cair Paraval, was well-done. (Man, the brilliant blue water was enchanting, that had to be filmed somewhere tropical.) The second favourite scene, the 're-awakening' of Narnia was pretty much cut alltogether, which was a big bummer. The River-god came in too aggressively for my taste as well. But at least he was in it.

And the whole storm-the-castle-scene, what the hell was that good for?! Totally unnecessary. So utterly pointless, waste of film. Probably the movie's worst change.

The extended scene with the White Witch wasn't that much of a successful addition either, but was pretty much saved by Edmund's brilliant quip.

If there's one thing I don't understand, it's why the Hollywood people feel they have to change so much about books that should be SO straight-forward to make into movies. It's not like there's a lot of internal dialogue or boring backstory. They're kids' books, for Pete's sake! Really burns me up!

[Earniel]

Yes, it's so pointless. If they're not going to bother to actually use the story from the book even when it's filmable, they should just write their own original story and don't bother adapting somebody else's.