The Chronicles Of Narnia Super Thread

[Zor Primus]

Saw it on Friday as well. Overall I'd put it under LOTR and Harry Potter 4...definatly not in the same class of film as it pushes more towards the kiddie crowd (Disney movie duh).

The FXwere really good, glad to see that they spared no expense. I was pleasently surprised they got Liam Neisen to VA the lion, and yes the Witch's actress was perfectly cast as well!

I haven't read the books yet, and quite frankly probably wont get around to them for some time.

All in all I'd give the movie a 7 out of 10 and will probably want to get the dvd when it is released.

EDIT: I REALLY liked what I saw for the Pirates of the Carribean sequal...

Edited December 19, 2005 by Zor Primus

[gerwalk25]

I've seen it twice and enjoyed it equal times. The kids were believable moreso than the HP teens. BTW has anyone see the 80's BBC version?

[David Hingtgen]

I saw the BBC ones years ago (early 90's I'd guess), really only remember like 2 secs from The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, mostly remember The Silver Chair.

[MrDisco]

Saw it on Friday as well. Overall I'd put it under LOTR and Harry Potter 4...definatly not in the same class of film as it pushes more towards the kiddie crowd

i definately agree with this. there just wasn't much action in this film compared to the other two. this isn't a fault with the movie though - it's simply how the story was originally written. i just dont know how today's youth will react to a story like this.

i did think the battle scene may too gruesome for young kids.

The FXwere really good, glad to see that they spared no expense. I was pleasently surprised they got Liam Neisen to VA the lion, and yes the Witch's actress was perfectly cast as well!

The FX was average imo. now days it would take some truly mind-blowing to get people's attention and in this movie i didn't get that sense. i will say that aslan was perfect and the facial expressions were equally well done. liam was also a good VA, unfortunately everytime he spoke i kept thinking qui gon.

The Witch was perfect hands down. I also like the casting of the 4 kids.

All in all I'd give the movie a 7 out of 10 and will probably want to get the dvd when it is released.

i give it a 7/10 as well. it wasn't the super big blockbuster but it didn't suck either. nowdays i think thats the best we can hope for.

[MrDisco]

Twoducks---good enough that there's many books devoted entirely to reading the series as an adult, adult interpretation of the plot, etc.  Though I'll reiterate, read it in the "old" order, not the new one.  IMHO. 

i have to completely disagree on this. reading them in the 'new' order makes more sense b/c it does happen in chronological order. though ultimately it really doesn't matter - the books are highly enjoyable no matter how you read it.

[David Hingtgen]

Heh heh. Gotta bring up the oft-made comparison--so would you also recommend watching Star Wars in chronological order, and not the order they were released?

[JKeats]

Saw the movie last night. If you're looking to compare it to LOTR, you're going to be disappointed so you're better off just enjoying it as a pure fantasy tale for children. It's very PG and I think that if I was a kid, this would be one of my all-time favorites. The acting isn't bad, the CG action scenes are pretty good and the story is easy enough to follow for all ages.

[Blaine23]

Hmmm... I'm a bit mixed on the Chronic What? - cles of Narnia.

See, I read LotR first and then was recommended Narnia when I was about 13. And thusly, I thought Narnia was lame.

Same thing kinda goes for the movie. The characterization is weak, Peter can do wrong, but Edmund gets constantly pooped on for having the occasional flaw in judgement. And Aslan is a giant fuzzy overt Christian religious metaphor.

I've never been sure what people see in Narnia. My wife loves the books, but even she thought the movie was too dumbed down and tried too hard to emulate the cinematography of LotR in a very obvious, forced kinda way.

Edited December 20, 2005 by Blaine23

[MrDisco]

Heh heh.  Gotta bring up the oft-made comparison--so would you also recommend watching Star Wars in chronological order, and not the order they were released?

353780[/snapback]

well if we were going to use star wars as a model wasn't ep4 only done first because of budget reasons and he felt it would be the most interesting one to make? or in other words its not necessarily what his intended viewing order was supposed to be. like i said either way it doesnt really matter b/c both ways are still highly enjoyable.

[UN Spacy]

I just saw the movie tonight and it's a shame that it'll have to be compared to Lord Of The Rings so often. I guess you could say that the bard definitely has to be raised when it comes to Fantasy movies.

Is the next movie going to center around the 2 Kings and Queens?

[David Hingtgen]

The only book set during that era is A Horse and His Boy, my fave but also the least likely to be a movie--it's quite a stand-alone tale with few links to other characters in other books. You've seen about 90% of what happens to Peter and Susan, and half of Edmund and Lucy.

[Zor Primus]

And Aslan is a giant fuzzy overt Christian religious metaphor.

Kinda like Goliath, except no clay animation...

[DARTHTODD]

Saw this movie a few days ago and just couldn't get into it. It was just to "kiddie" for me (which isn't a bad thing if you're a kid or parent and I know that that's what the story is about). I didn't care at all what happened to the whiney kids. I guess that's what really disppointed me is that I had a hard time developing any sort of attachment for the characters.

[Mr March]

Saw the film last night. Same problem as Harry Potter, too juvenile and pretentious to take it seriously yet too unbelivably trite to be immersed by the fiction. Must say the controversy is such a joke, totally eclipsing the film itself. But I suppose selling controversy has become the new film marketting scam. This film gets 1 out of 5 for me.

[areaseven]

Back from the dead...

Coming to theaters on May 16, 2008 is Prince Caspian, the sequel to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and the second installment of The Chronicles of Narnia film series. Andrew Adamson (Shrek 1-2) returns to the director's chair, with return appearances by William Moseley as Peter, Anna Popplewell as Susan, Skandar Keynes as Edmund, Georgie Henley as Lucy and Liam Neeson (Darkman, Rob Roy) as the voice of Aslan. Joining the cast are Ben Barnes as Prince Caspian, Sergio Castellitto as King Miraz, Alicia Borrachero as Queen Prunaprismia and Vincent Grass as Dr. Cornelius. As with the first film, Harry Gregson-Williams (Metal Gear Solid 2-4, Team America: World Police) will do the soundtrack for this film. According to news sources, Prince Caspian will boast over 1,500 special effects shots - nearly twice as much as the first film. Since this film is intended to be much darker than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, expect it to be rated PG-13 once it comes out.

Scheduled for release on May 1, 2009 is The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, the third chapter of the film series. Michael Apted (The World is Not Enough, Thunderheart) takes over directing duties. Ben Barnes, Skandar Keynes and Georgie Henley will reprise their roles. Casting calls for Edmund and Lucy's cousin Eustace Scrubb are currently under way. Filming will begin on January 2008.

Also, the adaptation fourth book The Silver Chair has been rumored to be released in 2010, as it's the final chapter of the Caspian Trilogy. The final three books - The Horse and His Boy, The Magician's Nephew and The Final Battle - will eventually be adapted to the big screen in the years to come.

[eugimon]

meh. Beyond the various problems of the first movie, I just found the kids to be terribly uncharismatic. Something I don't think can be fixed with stuff like a better script, pacing and direction.

[GRAND CANNON]

Good news...thanks for the info!

[GRAND CANNON]

Website and Trailers are up for those interested!

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/narnia/

[David Hingtgen]

Just waiting for Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2nd-best book IMHO, but could so easily be screwed up as a movie). I was never that big on "Prince Caspian" compared to the others.

[areaseven]

So, did anyone here watch Prince Caspian?

[Ratchet]

Read the book back in 1981.

[wolfx]

Note: I Never read the books.

Watched it last night. I kinda like it to a certain extent. Again filled with Christian metaphors of "faith" and "belief". Despite the title being "Prince Caspian", the prince himself takes a backseat throughout most of the show when the 4 "Kings and queens of old" take centerstage once again.

I liked the idea that the 4 kids lived till they were like 60 and then reverted back to their teenaged selfs when they went back to their own world. But what i find hard to swallow was for the 60 odd years they lived in Narnia, they never: fell in love, married, have kids, had a more mature outlook of life etc. Oh sure we get to see Edmund with l33thax sword skills which was cool but that was it. They learnt nothing else from their free 60 years of life. Not even the mental maturity that comes with it. And King Peter resorts to street brawling in the subway. Sheesh.

Oh wait I forgot...children's book. Damn hollywood for making me think it was something more.

Anyway....meh....i wonder what C.S Lewis' msg was that depicted Aslan like he needed a small girl to come fetch him deep in the forest, THEN he will help people. And there's the Christian metaphor of "When Jesus calls you, you go....." where only Lucy believed it was him when others were in doubt. I mean ...you stupid lion...if you want people to believe you, you stay there and stop doing cryptic things like appearing for 1 second and disappear the next. Geh.

Oh....and pedobear spotted amongst the Narnians. The bear is pretty cute and awesome!

[Alpha OTS]

So, did anyone here watch Prince Caspian?

Saw it, liked it, but it's nowhere near as good or as cohesive as the first one.

The pacing's off. They battle here, they battle there, but you're never quite sure exactly why. Some new characters are introduced, but before you get a chance to know them, they move on to something else. Caspian himself is a very dull boy. As a viewer, you're *supposed* to get behind him and root for him, but he's just so uncharismatic and quite frankly stupid that you're left asking yourself why the Narnians are trusting him at all, and when he finally does confront his corrupt uncle, you just don't care. The only thing Caspian does in the movie is blow the horn and look sexy for Susan. That's it. Nothing else.

I've never read the book, but I have seen the BBC Caspian, and despite the total lack of budget, they at least had a charismatic Caspain, who was also half the age of this Caspian. When the BBC Caspian gave a speech to the Narnians, you could see why they'd get behind him.

Summary, wait for video. I'm hoping there'll be an extended dvd that'll help explain why the Telmarines hated and wiped out the Narnians because this is really glossed over in the movie and really makes most of the battles feel pretty pointless.

[Arthurius]

I watched it on the weekend, and definetly liked it. I would go again, but my wife wont allow me... That said, i recommend this movie if you have children, that like stuff like Harry Potter and Starwars. Its not as much for teenagers, cause its not dark enough, but its not bad either. I liked the first one better though, as the kids were more charasmatic. Go see it, and you be the critic.

[areaseven]

Back from the dead. Again.

So who in here is watching The Voyage of the Dawn Treader?

[David Hingtgen]

Undecided. I'll make a rant I thought up of years ago:

IMHO, many people miss the main point of Prince Caspian. The palace life, life in the city, life of a prince there, etc. It's one of the "lower" books, but if you miss/gloss over that part of the book, then all you have left is an awful source for a movie. And of course, they ditched most all of that so they could have a uber-expensive 45-minute castle siege to copy Helm's Deep. Thus, what should have been a short, simple, cheap, fantasy movie, became an expensive long war movie.

I knew this would happen, and knew it would basically screw over Dawn Treader, as the 2nd movie would be too expensive and the source material simply isn't good enough to justify a large production in the first place. Thus, sucking away all the money that Dawn Treader would have required (it would require zillions of FX shots), but it actually would have deserved it as it's one of, if not the best books in the series---and it is far and away the best one for adapting to a movie.

Caspian should have been done cheaply, focusing on the Prince's life, with a quick little rebellion battle at the end--having JUST the duel would have been fine, with everything else viewed in the background and narrated away by Qui-Gon.

In short---inserting a big huge battle into Caspian frankly killed the series. Made the 2nd movie too long, too much of the same, and too expensive. Thus, making Disney abandoning it. And even if they hadn't, they still wouldn't have poured as much money into Dawn Treader if they'd produced it, seeing the expense vs return on Caspian.

But Dawn Treader and Silver Chair could have made an awesome pair of back to back movies, given care/budget. Early reviews of Dawn Treader don't seem encouraging, so Silver Chair may never come to be. (A Horse and His Boy is still my fave though, but if any were to be skipped, it'd probably be that---of course, knowing Hollywood, they'd skip a lot of the horse-journey stuff, and focus on the battle of the end of course----the book is 90/10 horse/battle, the movie would be the opposite)

[one_klump]

Dawn Treader was actually my favorite book out of the entire series. I'm looking forward to seeing it, but Prince Caspian left me disappointed, so I am going into Dawn Treader with a cynic's eye.

[aerocombatpilot]

I saw the BBC ones years ago (early 90's I'd guess), really only remember like 2 secs from The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, mostly remember The Silver Chair.

That's the one with Doctor Who (Tom Baker) in it!!!!!

[David Hingtgen]

5 years, that might be a record for "delayed response" here at MW.

Anyways, just got back from seeing it. Pleasantly surprised. Given its length, I can't think of any way it could have really been done better. A few "combining" moments and minor changes, but overall pretty good IMHO. I think we all know that doing EVERYTHING in the book would have taken 3 or 4 hours... Bodes well for future movies, if they can be done this well considering time/budget.

::edit:: Addendum---most every negative review criticizes on lack of plot. True, but not really. More like "lack of exposition/explanation". WHY they're doing what they do and going where they go isn't really able to be gleaned much from what's on-screen. But seriously---if you read the books, you know why. Anyone seeing the 3rd movie and STILL hasn't read the books---why? Seriously, I think every negative review comes from those who haven't read the books. Yes, you probably would be pretty lost with no background.

But if you HAVE read the book---they do 90% of what's in there. To me, that's a lot of plot. They just don't directly talk about it in a contrived monologue to the audience disguised as an internal narrative like most movies do to spoon-feed their viewers...

[Uxi]

I liked the Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe and own it on Blu-ray. Was disappointed with Prince Caspian. Will probably wait for Dawn Treader to come out on Blu-ray.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Uxi

[David Hingtgen]

Big disconnect between critics and "everyone else" at Rottentomatoes etc. Seems "the masses" like it quite a bit more than the critics. As do I.

[David Hingtgen]

Just a bit of necromancy here, but Voyage of the Dawn Treader is out on DVD/Blu-Ray today. Yes, a Friday.

[sabretooth]

i saw it, and liked it. definitely watchable.