Prince Caspian --Trailer coming soon??

[fernsita]

Man, I love the holiday season because all the good movies come out then. i am really hoping the prince caspian trailer is shown before the golden compass or something..does anyone know when its supposed to be released??? cant wait :)

[Groucho]

Somehow I doubt the trailer will be shown before Golden Compass. :lol:

[dcprules]

I believe there is already a trailer out for this.

However, it is only screening at the El Capitan theater in Hollywood on prints of Enchanted only. I'm sure it'll be on youtube soon.

More info:
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news07/071130j.php

[pinata242]

According to NarniaWeb, the trailer should be online on December 5th (next Wednesday): http://www.narniaweb.com/news.asp?id=1350&dl=14424750

[Lara Means]

There is a poster for Voyage of the Dawn Treader at my local theater.

[HE Pennypacker]

Can't wait.

[fernsita]

man, that means its gonna come out tomorrow! cant wait. i found this production blog about the movie and its pretty cool. sharing is caring :) so here ya go!

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

[Seantn]

So the trailer is most likely debuting with "The Golden Compass", right?

[majorjoe23]

Sorry Seantn, that joke was GrouchOwned in post 2.

[Seantn]

He was joking, I was being serious. It most likely WILL be with Golden Compass. He was joking that it wouldn't be because the author of Golden Compass apparently hated CS Lewis.

[Groucho]

There is a poster for Voyage of the Dawn Treader at my local theater.I thought so too -- until I got closer and realized it was for The Water Horse.

[The Bus]

Narnia and Golden Compass will draw similar audiences. They would be idiots to not put the trailer in front of that.

If not GC, then at least Book of Secrets.

[fernsita]

ya. exactly- i heard that some people who saw the golden compass, saw the prince caspian trailer before the movie! see, i wasnt joking :)

[Giles]

question: I thought Prince Caspian merged Voyage of the Dawn Treader story- or am I thinking of the BBC mini series.

[fernsita]

Caspian and Dawn Treader are going to be two separate movies..the Dawn Treader is supposed to be the next one in theaters after Caspian.

[Seantn]

Trailer is HERE

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=13009

Looks great.

[Lateralus]

Trailer is HERE

http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=13009

Looks great.

Anybody else having problems playing the HD trailer? (It is probably just me!) finally got it to work in Media player of all things!

It looks pretty good, I thought the first trailer for the first movie looked pretty good but I liked it only marginaly.

[DealMan]

Looks pretty decent, I'm down.

[Artman]

To me, it still looks like actors in costumes and on sets... rather than a fully believable world. I think it's because it looks too clean, if they would dirty it up a bit, more dirt and grit like LOTR, that'd help imo.

[Michael Corvin]

Looks awesome.

[Giles]

yes the trailer is before 'The Golden Compass' - it looks great (especially in DLP) and the actress playing Lucy, is obviousily looking older.

[fernsita]

i think the trailer is great! i especially liked the costumes and battle scenes. its good that aslan is returning. so excited :)

[dolphinboy]

yes the trailer is before 'The Golden Compass' - it looks great (especially in DLP) and the actress playing Lucy, is obviousily looking older.

With the longer than expected time between the films, I was expecting all the kids to have changed a lot, but really only the little one you mentioned, the actress who plays Lucy, seems to have really changed noticeably.

Does anyone know how many they plan to make.

It's been a long while since I've read the books, so I can't remember how many of them include Peter, Susan, Lucy, and Edmund but I wonder how fans will react when they realize they have to adapt to entirely new characters.

LOTR didn't have that problem. It will be sad for me when the kids go, but I've know the story so it won't be awful. However, so many of the people who are now seeing the films probably didn't grow up with the books like I did and might not like the drastic change.

I never watched a Harry Potter book, but from clips and all that I saw, I think the primary characters stayed the same throughout as well.

I certainly hope the adapt every book. And it's clearly a cash cow, so they might want to take their cues from Potter and LOTR and try and have a faster schedule. Unless the plan is definately not to make all the books into movies and find a way to combine stories and move more quickly to "The Last Battle."

Edit: Just looked through my books and all 4 Pevensie children show up in the last movie (if the make the last movie). I don't think there is any way that these 4 actors can do that, so it will have to be 4 new actors. That will be strange.

[Michael Corvin]

Does anyone know how many they plan to make.

It's been a long while since I've read the books, so I can't remember how many of them include Peter, Susan, Lucy, and Edmund but I wonder how fans will react when they realize they have to adapt to entirely new characters.

I'm sure as long as they make money, they will make them all. Here's the breakdown of characters:

Chronicles of Narnia - Peter, Susan, Lucy & Edmund
Prince Caspian - Peter, Susan, Lucy & Edmund
Voyage of the Dawn Treader - Lucy, Edmund & Eustice
The Silver Chair - Eustice & Jill
The Horse and his Boy - Bree & Shasta
The Magician's Nephew - Polly & Digory
The Final Battle - Eustice & Jill

[dolphinboy]

I'm sure as long as they make money, they will make them all. Here's the breakdown of characters:

Chronicles of Narnia - Peter, Susan, Lucy & Edmund
Prince Caspian - Peter, Susan, Lucy & Edmund
Voyage of the Dawn Treader - Lucy, Edmund & Eustice
The Silver Chair - Eustice & Jill
The Horse and his Boy - Bree & Shasta
The Magician's Nephew - Polly & Digory
The Final Battle - Eustice & Jill

It's been forever since I've read Dawn Treader, but do Peter and Susan appear at all? Because they are listed in the cast for the film.

And, as I edited above about when you were posting, all 4 do show up in the Last Battle. Even if they can get to the beginning of shooting of that film in, say, 5 years, I don't see how they can use the same kids. I hope they find a way.

I also can't wait for the movies...all of them. These were MY books growing up, like many kids now have Harry Potter or like some of my peers preferred LOTR. Bridge to Terabithia was my second favorite, so I feel lucky that I'm getting to see these as films.

I don't like the comparisons to the LOTR films. Those were far more serious, fantasy films. I wouldn't diminish the incredible job done by everyone involved in the LOTR, but especially not having read the books at all since I was around 11, I was often confused and felt like I needed a notebook to keep track of who was who and what was going on. The Narnia books are more "fun" to watch. More light-hearted and I think that's captured in the way it's being filmed. The LOTR was shot perfectly for the kind of material it was and I feel the same about the Narnia films, based on 1 movie and the trailer for the 2nd film.

[onebyone]

Great trailer! I got way too excited watching it, I may have even clapped at points. I guess they can count me in for the opening weekend.

[fernsita]

ya, i agree. i dont like when the narnia and LOTR are compared either. i think they are pretty different actually.

i love seeing these movies come to life on the big screen.

[davidh777]

Crud, I went to Golden Compass on the second weekend and no Prince Caspian. They had Inkheart and Spiderwick.

[The Bus]

I don't like the comparisons to the LOTR films.

For better or for worse, the LOTR trilogy will be used as comparison for any serious and/or epic fantasy film for the next decade, at least.

[Kal-El]

Nice. I'm there.

[KillerCannibal]

It looked better than the first one was, but I'm still unsure of it. I'll wait for some reviews before I decide to see it or not. I hope the CG work is better than last time.

[DRG]

I'm torn. I think this trailer looks great, but I hated the first movie. I thought Tilda Swinton was phenomenal but hated almost everything else. Yet this one looks to have more going on, and just to be more interesting altogether.

[JeremyM]

For what it's worth, Susan does not show up in the "Last Battle" which is a controversial plot point among many Narnia fans. She apparently doesn't believe in Narnia any longer, or for those who like allegory, she doesn't believe in God any longer.

[Giles]

It's been forever since I've read Dawn Treader, but do Peter and Susan appear at all? Because they are listed in the cast for the film.

And, as I edited above about when you were posting, all 4 do show up in the Last Battle. Even if they can get to the beginning of shooting of that film in, say, 5 years, I don't see how they can use the same kids. I hope they find a way.

I also can't wait for the movies...all of them. These were MY books growing up, like many kids now have Harry Potter or like some of my peers preferred LOTR. Bridge to Terabithia was my second favorite, so I feel lucky that I'm getting to see these as films.

I don't like the comparisons to the LOTR films. Those were far more serious, fantasy films. I wouldn't diminish the incredible job done by everyone involved in the LOTR, but especially not having read the books at all since I was around 11, I was often confused and felt like I needed a notebook to keep track of who was who and what was going on. The Narnia books are more "fun" to watch. More light-hearted and I think that's captured in the way it's being filmed. The LOTR was shot perfectly for the kind of material it was and I feel the same about the Narnia films, based on 1 movie and the trailer for the 2nd film.

they might have to shoot this out of sequence and actually complete 'The Last Battle' before the other books/films.

[Giles]

I never watched a Harry Potter book, but from clips and all that I saw, I think the primary characters stayed the same throughout as well.



the real dramatic change is watching the actor who plays Neville Longbottom (Matthew Lewis) age.

[fernsita]

lucy looks so much older in this movie, so im anxious to see if her mannerisms and attitude also changes in this film. its good that they kept the same characters in the second film though. when do you think the next teaser will drop?

[dolphinboy]

they might have to shoot this out of sequence and actually complete 'The Last Battle' before the other books/films.

I genuinely hope that it isn't too difficult to get "the Last Battle scenes" done that involve Lucy, Edmund, Susan, and Peter but it does seem like it would be a very difficult thing to do. How many years did they average between Potter films? I wonder if they will be able to shoot 2 films at the same time like Pirates. The fact that children are so heavily involved might not make that possible.

It would be a strange way to end this series to walk into a theater in 5 years or so and see the conclusion of the films with 4 completely different actors.

I wish this didn't have to be released in May. It's a great birthday present (for a horrible age), but I'm pretty sure the film would be ready much sooner and with the delays, I wish they'd have put it out earlier. I imagine the choice of May, in the world of film releases, is a purely economical one.

[fernsita]

i completely agree with using the same characters. i hope the continue to use the same actors so there is some sort of continuity in the films. i think the harry potter films were great b/c of the same casting. this trailer looks much darker and i think ben barnes is going to do a wonderful job in the movie!

[Michael Corvin]

I wonder if they would shoot the Last Battle after Dawn Treader and shelve it for release later. Unfortunately, by the time that release would come about the CGI would look seriously dated since they aren't top notch to begin with.

[fernsita]

ya i dont suppose the would film it and shelve it for that reason alone..everything would look noticeably aged. i know the first trailer just came out, but when do you think they will drop the second one??

[Drop]

I wonder if they would shoot the Last Battle after Dawn Treader and shelve it for release later. Unfortunately, by the time that release would come about the CGI would look seriously dated since they aren't top notch to begin with.

Why would they even bother doing the CGI then? I'm sure a bigger concern would be the cost of filming it and just sitting on it.

[fernsita]

Though I would share this MSN Movies review (http://http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/02-26-08?GT1=MOVIES5&silentchk=1). They really broke down the movie and it looks like it's going to be just as good as we have all been anticipating!

[Michael Corvin]

Why would they even bother doing the CGI then?

Good point. I guess they could film all the green screen stuff with the actors and let it sit.

[JeremyM]

I'm looking forward to this, but the next two are the ones I'm really looking forward to- Dawn Treader and the Silver Chair. I thought the BBC versions of those two were very good as well.

[fernsita]

Really JeremyM?? I have heard alot about the BBC series. I need to see if I can find clips on YouTube or something.

Ya, at first LWW was my favorite book and I loved the movie then I just finished reading Prince Caspian and it's awesome, so it might be my new favorite. I think I just get anxious to see to the books come to life on the big screen!

[Giles]

the review link isn't working

[adamblast]

I don't see why using the same four actors would be difficult at all for The Last Battle--if they get that far into the series. They're supposed to have grown up by that time. They can just fudge *how* grown up.

(Unlike Prince Caspian, which is supposed to happen not long after LW&W, although Lucy looks like years have passed...)

I just hope this film has a better script than LW&W did. Not that the LW&W script was awful, but it wasn't that great, and Caspian is a less satisfying story to begin with.

If I remember right, about half the book is a story-with-a-story flashback not involving the kids at all. Basically all the kids do is listen to a long story and take a cross-country hike. Then Peter has a duel.

Dawn Treader has a great adventure story, in comparison, albeit maybe too episodic and disjointed... Number three should be a hell of a movie.

Contrary to some posters, I actually *like* the more colorful & cleaner look for the Narnia adventures. I think the gritty, lived-in pseudo-realism of LOTR would be too oppressive for books written with elementary school kids as their primary target.

[fernsita]

Giles --

So sorry, don't know why it isn't working. I was trying to be all fancy incorporating the link into the words. Here you go! Let me know what you think!

http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/02-26-08?GT1=MOVIES5&silentchk=1

[Michael Corvin]

Thanks fernsita. That's a pretty glowing writeup.

Here's the new poster(pretty cool looking):
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/186/36384imagerb2.jpg

Not sure if this is an official poster, more likely just a promo shot with the logo, but I'd buy it in a heartbeat(can't seem to find it for sale anywhere yet).
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/1047/princecaspianposter1es5.jpg

[fernsita]

Ya, that second poster they released is awesome. Here is the "Return to Narnia" (http://movies.yahoo.com/premieres/6827931/standardformat/) featurette they released last wk from Yahoo!

[Michael Corvin]

<s>I wish they would announce the Blu-ray of LW&TW already.</s> Set for May 13th. :banana: Three days to watch it before Caspian's release.

I saw a clip of it on a demo disc at BB. What a tease. :lol:

[fernsita]

I can't believe this movie is coming out next Friday! It seems so soon. This character guide (http://movies.aol.com/movie/the-chronicles-of-narnia-prince-caspian/24862/character-guide) on AOL Moviefone was super interesting and helpful. Reep looks amazing, of course!

I want to get the Blu-Ray LWW too! I bet it's so clear and awesome.

[kefrank]

I want to get the Blu-Ray LWW too! I bet it's so clear and awesome.
it seems to be getting rave reviews for picture and audio quality. i just wish it had the extended cut!

[DeputyDave]

I'm not sure if I get the concern for the actors aging throughout the series. It's been a Loooooooooong time (28 years) since I read the books but I always understood the reason the characters changed was that the older ones grew up and were too old to get back to Narnia.

[Sierra Disc]

Seems like very little buzz on this one, but then again it'll still make a mint. As a longtime fan of the books I wish I had liked the first one more, but for some reason it just struck me as dutiful rather than inspired. I'm curious to see #2 but will probably wait till DVD I imagine. Wondering how they did Repicheep the mouse though.

[fernsita]

My friend got 2 sneak preview tickets and we saw the movie last night. I was so awesome! Much better than I had ever anticipated.

DeputyDave -- I completely agree- the Pevensies' ages were perfect and Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) was a great addition to the cast. The battles were even more dramatic than I had thought they would be.

Sierra Disc -- Reep is awesome in the movie, but I will keep it a secret so you can enjoy it! :) I definitely think you can't completely appreciate the movie if you don't watch it on the big screen. The visual aspect of this movie is untouchable.

[Michael Corvin]

I'm definitely going tonight. Can't wait! :banana:

[mdc3000]

I thought the first film was just OK...and this one didn't live up to my expectations either. The kids are still unlikeable and uncharismatic. There are no scenes that pulled me in and got me invested in what happens to them...same goes for Prince Caspian - he just struck me as a whiny douche. The tacked on love story, tired battle scenes and lack of any real magic made this one a chore to sit through. I'm sure it'll do a ton of business, but what an uninspired bore - Reepicheep was the only good part of the flick.

[matrixrok9]

I thought the first film was just OK...and this one didn't live up to my expectations either. The kids are still unlikeable and uncharismatic. There are no scenes that pulled me in and got me invested in what happens to them...same goes for Prince Caspian - he just struck me as a whiny douche. The tacked on love story, tired battle scenes and lack of any real magic made this one a chore to sit through. I'm sure it'll do a ton of business, but what an uninspired bore - Reepicheep was the only good part of the flick.

I totally agree. Prince Caspian wasn't even established well. They decided not to focus on his backstory. Pretty much he was pointless and they could have still gone to war without him.

The kids acting were a bit better than the original but damn the bad guys were just plain dull. The "epic" battle scenes I didn't care for because there's too much unrealistic CGI.

Also, why can't movies make a realistic looking centaur? It looked fake in Potter and also looks fake in Narnia. The tv show Hercules perfected how a Centaur should look without using CG.

[fernsita]

I totally agree. Prince Caspian wasn't even established well. They decided not to focus on his backstory. Pretty much he was pointless and they could have still gone to war without him.

The kids acting were a bit better than the original but damn the bad guys were just plain dull. The "epic" battle scenes I didn't care for because there's too much unrealistic CGI.

Also, why can't movies make a realistic looking centaur? It looked fake in Potter and also looks fake in Narnia. The tv show Hercules perfected how a Centaur should look without using CG.
Really?? I loved the scenery and landscapes in this movie. One of my favorites parts was when they Narnians came from below in the battle scene. I thought that was such an awesome scene. I really thought everything looked pretty real, considering the fact that the entire idea of Narnia is fantasy to begin with.

I liked how Ben Barnes was portrayed and I just think this was a good beginning and introduction of his character for the next movie (The Voyage of Dawn Treader).

[mytzplyx]

Movie had a very boring first 30-45 minutes. Caspian is pretty unlikeable and useless here. The kid actors improved somewhat - Susan is far and away better than the other 3 kids.

Battle scene was too long and too dull, especially the one-on-one which could have been cut in half. Aslan's appearance was quite anti-climatic.

2 out of 4 stars.

[Michael Corvin]

I LOVED it and thought the pacing was great. Outside of Caspian, you know the characters so they can jump right into the action. The acting was much better this time around. Lucy was the only weak link for me. In the first film her performance could be shrugged off as childlike innocence which worked for the character, but I felt she tried too hard in this one. Susan and Peter really shined. I really enjoyed Ben Barnes and look forward to seeing him in Dawn Treader.

The effects and CGI were also greatly improved in this film. Everything seemed to flow better. Overall I think I enjoyed it more than Wardrobe. The 'water' scene would have had a much bigger impact if it wasn't ruined in the trailer.

Also seeing The White Witch really threw me. I wasn't expecting that at all. It was a nice addition and worked well in the script.

[Patman]

This film has a lethargic mess of bloated screenplay (running time around 140 minutes) that doesn't even use its long running time to bother with developing any of the new characters it introduces, and the familiar 4 siblings are still bland and uncharismatic to the core. I put the blame squarely on Andrew Adamson, the director, who also shares screenwriting credit on the film. Adamson simply doesn't know how to handle this material, or shoot a visually interesting film.

The first 2/3 of the film was just boring mind-numbingly inane in terms of character actions (resulting in consequences seen a mile away, with no empathy from me when their plan of attack goes horribly wrong). The last third of the film is okay in terms of action, but it's almost laughable how bloodless all the sword stabbings and slashing that takes place on screen (in order to keep the rating kiddie-friendly, even though the action is about using swords to eviscerate your enemies, shooting arrows into people, and launching boulders from away with catapaults that cause really big divots in the ground and through structures).

I give it 2 stars, or a grade of C.

[Anubis2005X]

I felt kind of "eh" about the whole film. And morally, it just felt off. So, they're leading a bunch of animals to attack a human castle, and just start killing humans? WTF? Mentally I had a difficult time siding with the Narnians...

[Giles]

funny I'm pretty critical on a lot of films, but I really enjoyed this - I agree some more backstory about Prince Caspian could have been nice and Peter Dinklage's character of Trumpkin seems like most of it was left on the cutting room floor - but on the whole I had a blast. Great, suprisingly violent battle scenes. An excellent evocative 5.1 soundmix.

I'd get it a B

[gabeon]

I couldn't agree more with the reviewer. The movie seems to take an eternity to get going with little payoff.

One of my biggest gripes is one of the strongest elements from the first movie that falls flat in this movie: Aslan.

With his pious air and preachy persona, he manages to bring what little levity there was in the movie to a grinding halt with his "if you had believed earlier" speech.

Another part I will spoilerize about Aslan...


Spoiler:
The battle at the ford with the already done Lord of the Rings water gushing is ruined even further by the water taking the shape of Jesus H Christ!


The reviewer is dead on with the lack of emotion put into the movie.

Don't think that I hate the series since I did enjoy the first film greatly, but this one is just a slow, preachy mess.

[johnnysd]

I HATED this movie.

1. It's boring. And very long, and to be honest nothing really happens.

2. It is VERY violent. Probably the most violent PG film since the Temple of Doom created the PG-13 rating.

3. There is no character development in this film. None whatsoever.

4. I do not have a problem with religious messages in films, per se. But the "religious" message was both extremely overt and heavy-handed while at the same time being amiguous.

5. I do not even see other than a talking rat (who is cute) anything that makes this a "children's" film. In fact SEVERAL parents took their children from the theater midway or less through the film.

6. It glorifies violence and killing even of other humans. Again I like violent films as much as the next guy, but violent films with realistic, brutal killing are not categorized as a children's movie.

7. I have no idea really other than the overt religious message what the point of this movie was. There was no theme, no real arc to this movie at all.

8. Even if I ignore the religious "message", the target audience of kids, and view the movie as an adult movie purely on it's own merits, it still sucks.

I liked one special effect very much dealing with ice, but other than that (and the rat) I like nothing about this film.

I would give it a rating of F. One of the worst movies of the year. When you through in the fact that it is intende for children and glorifies killing then I am not sure it even deserves an F.

[Anubis2005X]

I HATED this movie.

1. It's boring. And very long, and to be honest nothing really happens.

2. It is VERY violent. Probably the most violent PG film since the Temple of Doom created the PG-13 rating.

3. There is no character development in this film. None whatsoever.

4. I do not have a problem with religious messages in films, per se. But the "religious" message was both extremely overt and heavy-handed while at the same time being amiguous.

5. I do not even see other than a talking rat (who is cute) anything that makes this a "children's" film. In fact SEVERAL parents took their children from the theater midway or less through the film.

6. It glorifies violence and killing even of other humans. Again I like violent films as much as the next guy, but violent films with realistic, brutal killing are not categorized as a children's movie.

7. I have no idea really other than the overt religious message what the point of this movie was. There was no theme, no real arc to this movie at all.

8. Even if I ignore the religious "message", the target audience of kids, and view the movie as an adult movie purely on it's own merits, it still sucks.

I liked one special effect very much dealing with ice, but other than that (and the rat) I like nothing about this film.

I would give it a rating of F. One of the worst movies of the year. When you through in the fact that it is intende for children and glorifies killing then I am not sure it even deserves an F.

Some good points here. It's like it wasn't sure what kind of movie it wanted to be...

[chris_sc77]

How did this earn a PG rating while The Golden Compass received a PG-13.
I hate to be a conspiracy nut but something tells me the powers of the church or other religious forces were at work here....

[danicus007]

I HATED this movie.

1. It's boring. And very long, and to be honest nothing really happens.

2. It is VERY violent. Probably the most violent PG film since the Temple of Doom created the PG-13 rating.

3. There is no character development in this film. None whatsoever.

4. I do not have a problem with religious messages in films, per se. But the "religious" message was both extremely overt and heavy-handed while at the same time being amiguous.

5. I do not even see other than a talking rat (who is cute) anything that makes this a "children's" film. In fact SEVERAL parents took their children from the theater midway or less through the film.

6. It glorifies violence and killing even of other humans. Again I like violent films as much as the next guy, but violent films with realistic, brutal killing are not categorized as a children's movie.

7. I have no idea really other than the overt religious message what the point of this movie was. There was no theme, no real arc to this movie at all.

8. Even if I ignore the religious "message", the target audience of kids, and view the movie as an adult movie purely on it's own merits, it still sucks.

I liked one special effect very much dealing with ice, but other than that (and the rat) I like nothing about this film.

I would give it a rating of F. One of the worst movies of the year. When you through in the fact that it is intende for children and glorifies killing then I am not sure it even deserves an F.
Agree 1 million percent with your points. I give the movie an F- and I loved the first one. There was absolutely nothing I enjoyed about this movie. Seems like a blatant way to make a few bucks off the success of the first film. Not that that hasn't been done a few hundred times before this abomination. Glad I got free movie money from Best Buy for buying Narnia on BD. Still can't get that 2 1/2 hours of my life back. Even though it seemed like 5 hours of torture.

[Brian T]

the "religious" message was both extremely overt and heavy-handed while at the same time being amiguous.

How is the message overt, heavy-handed and ambiguous at the same time? I'd agree it was overt, definitely heavy-handed in the river climax (was that water "person" a direct lift from the book??), but I didn't feel for a second it was ambiguous. Any chance of elaboration?

but violent films with realistic, brutal killing are not categorized as a children's movie.

Is this film being marketed exclusively as a children's film? As an adult, I don't watch a lot of children's fare on TV, nor see a lot of children's advertising in my travels, and thus the ads I've seen for this seem to suggest it's a fantasy film with family-friendly elements and a PG rating (and everything that stands for). Aren't films made directly for children generally rated G? Or at least marketed exclusively to that mentality? Perhaps I should just be glad we went to the second showing, which was virtually kid-free! :lol:

The "brutal" killings in this film are virtually bloodless. But I can see where certain imaginations might fill in the blanks.

[Matthew Chmiel]

I hate to be a conspiracy nut but something tells me the powers of the church or other religious forces were at work here....
I would say no.

Violent PG? Yes. Should've been PG-13? I don't know, especially when PG-13 films are bordering the line of R.

[If anyone gives the decapitation scene as an example, I'll show you Attack of the Clones where the decapitation is actually shown in close-up.]

If we want to start going into conspiracy theories, I would say Disney had more pull with the MPAA than the church.

I just think the MPAA is becoming less strict.

[johnnysd]

How is the message overt, heavy-handed and ambiguous at the same time? I'd agree it was overt, definitely heavy-handed in the river climax (was that water "person" a direct lift from the book??), but I didn't feel for a second it was ambiguous. Any chance of elaboration?



Is this film being marketed exclusively as a children's film? As an adult, I don't watch a lot of children's fare on TV, nor see a lot of children's advertising in my travels, and thus the ads I've seen for this seem to suggest it's a fantasy film with family-friendly elements and a PG rating (and everything that stands for). Aren't films made directly for children generally rated G? Or at least marketed exclusively to that mentality? Perhaps I should just be glad we went to the second showing, which was virtually kid-free! :lol:

The "brutal" killings in this film are virtually bloodless. But I can see where certain imaginations might fill in the blanks.

It is ambiguous from a moral standpoint exactly what help you get from Jesus (Aslan) when you "see" him (essentially accept him as savior) in that he says he will fight for you, and in fact in this movie, he kills other humans that are not on the side of the children. So if you follow Jesus it is OK to wage war and kill those who do not "see" Aslan (or in religious doctrine accept Jesus as your personal savior) It seemed like an overtly Christian message with an Islamic twist allowing for a god-supported holy war against those that you oppose. And that makes it ambiguous because that is not really a core Christian belief. In doing that, it stamped killing with a Jesus stamp of approval which I find a little bit of a twisted and ambiguous Christian message.

[Michael Corvin]

I find a little bit of a twisted and ambiguous Christian message.

Maybe you find it a bit twisted and ambiguous because you are reading far more into it than is actually there. The first film had some heavy religious overtones but they were handled well. I didn't get that vibe from this movie at all.

[pinata242]

Wow, I'm surprised at all the hate in this thread. I loved the movie. I thought it was way better than the first and even better than the book (which I found boring).

I agree the movie could have been tightened up a bit, but I thought it was paced rather well with a sold build-up. My daughters watched the BD of LWatW that morning and I thought the kids looked exactly the same as the first movie. It wasn't jarring that it had only been a year for the Pevensie kids but 3 for the actors.

I did keep expecting King Miraz to say "Narnia? This! IS! TEL-MAR!!!"

[toddly6666]

The movie was fair, not as good as the first. Too long and boring beginning.
Good things in the film:
1. Lucy and Edmond seem to be evolving as characters and are both better actors. Peter and Susan are both awful actors and are just plain boring. I don't really know the books except for the first one, but it's a pleasant surprise to me that it's Lucy and Edmond that are the main characters in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader book. I would be happy if they just totally dropped Susan and Peter from the series all together, or find different actors. I liked how Peter became an ass-kicker...
2. Warwick Davis VS. Peter Dinklage - the two best dwarf actors of our time!;)

[Save Ferris]

For people who obviously didnt read the book, and are distraught over the bridge and river scene at the end:

The man coming out of the river is explained as being the 'river god' (from greek mythology like most of the creatures in this series) not Jesus or God. It was like this in the book and you cant fault it for being unoriginal because it was original when it was written (alongside JJR and LOTR)

[whoopdido]

I couldn't agree more with the reviewer. The movie seems to take an eternity to get going with little payoff.

One of my biggest gripes is one of the strongest elements from the first movie that falls flat in this movie: Aslan.

With his pious air and preachy persona, he manages to bring what little levity there was in the movie to a grinding halt with his "if you had believed earlier" speech.

Another part I will spoilerize about Aslan...


Spoiler:
The battle at the ford with the already done Lord of the Rings water gushing is ruined even further by the water taking the shape of Jesus H Christ!


The reviewer is dead on with the lack of emotion put into the movie.

Don't think that I hate the series since I did enjoy the first film greatly, but this one is just a slow, preachy mess.

Have you read the books? In all the books, other than The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, Aslan is basically a minor character. Yes, sorry to all the people that don't like religion, but he is a Christ figure. The point of believing in Christ is that he's not always going to be there with you. He's not going to sit on the couch next to you as you watch tv, but when you need him the most he'll be there. In the rest of the books Aslan pretty much just shows up at opportune times and gives a little inspirational speach and that's it. He is NOT the main character in these stories.

Also the humans are the bad guys in this story, so what's wrong with them being attacked, killed and defeated?

Also, in response to your spoiler...

I believe the water took the shape of Poseidon, the water god. It definitely did not look like my vision of Jesus "H" Christ. Actually, I just reread that part and the book states that a bearded figure made of water came up out of the river and destroyed the bridge. In the book the bridge is not destroyed by the water so the movie did take a little something from Lord of the Rings, but the figure definitely did not portray Jesus.

Looks like Ferris already explained what I did in my spoiler.

[onebyone]

Wow, I'm surprised at all the hate in this thread. I loved the movie. I thought it was way better than the first and even better than the book (which I found boring).

I am with you. I may be the only one, but it's somebody right?

[Michael Corvin]

I loved it too as mentioned above, and never once thought the river god was anyone other than Poseidon. I think people are LOOKING for religion just to have something to bitch about.

[matrixrok9]

I loved it too as mentioned above, and never once thought the river god was anyone other than Poseidon. I think people are LOOKING for religion just to have something to bitch about.

I just didn't enjoy the movie. It wasn't because of the theme, it's because the movie was uninspired. It reminded me too much of LOTR: TTT. Now you can argue that it's not the filmmaker's fault since it's from the source. But how about being creative so I won't be reminded of LOTR.

[Save Ferris]

The book borrows heavily from Greek and Roman mythology (mythical gods and dieties); Naiads, Nymphs and especially the Dryads.

[Tuan Jim]

I enjoyed this movie overall (seemed like a good adaptation too) - although it's been quite a while since I read the original book. I would have liked to have seen a bit more of the "return of Aslan" scenes that were in the book although I can see how they would have messed up the pacing here.

I am a little disappointed that this series, like the BBC versions seems to be dropping "The Horse's Boy" from the sequence entirely - and are they going to address "The Magician's Nephew" further down the road or will that be dropped as well. Seeing how HP is doing all 7 volumes (and they're going back and working on the Hobbit now), it'd be nice to see some prequel action here too.

[Save Ferris]

AFAIK They've only committed to the next book, Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

After that they'll reassess. I hope the do them all unabridged.

[Michael Corvin]

According to IMBD, Dawn Treader is locked down May 7, 2010 for a release and has Michael Apted as the director.

[whoopdido]

From what I've heard the original intention is to do all 7. The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe was a huge success financially and because of that success, Caspian and Dawn Treader were locked up right away. If those 2 movies turn out to be box office successes too then the other 4 will be made. At least that's the rumor I've heard.

[Brack]

I thought it was pretty decent. I agree that most of the characters lacked development, which was a problem I had with the first movie. That said, I was never really bored, but I could never fully root for the Narnians simply because I had to take for granted that they were wonderful beings.

[Ghym]

I loved it too as mentioned above, and never once thought the river god was anyone other than Poseidon. I think people are LOOKING for religion just to have something to bitch about.

I agree. I liked the movie too. I also agree that people seem to be looking for religion to bitch about. I don't know why anyone thinks the river spirit is God or Jesus. As has been said, it's a world full of mythological Greek creatures. What makes more sense? Water Posiedon, or Water Jesus?

[DRG]

Haven't seen Prince Caspian, but on Ebert & Roeper they discussed the problems they had with this film (and the series so far) and their problems echoed how I felt about the first film... the 'magic' just wasn't there for them, as it wasn't for me in part one. I love all the Lord of the Rings films, as well as Harry Potter (even the Chris Columbus ones), but Lion/Witch/Wardrobe just left me feeling empty, with the exception of the Tilda Swinton's superb White Witch.

[GatorDeb]

Me and some friends from work will be catching this tomorrow :D Not big on fantasy but we go once in a while to see the "biggie" films, and we've all seen Speed Racer and Iron Man already.

[tronmaster]

I saw the movie Saturday morning, it was playing early, 9:15 am, guess it was so early that only 10 people were in the theater. Which was fine with me!

I actually liked Prince Caspian better than the first one. Watching Prince Caspian made me appreciate the first one more, and I thought all of the children were great in their roles. The ending was bittersweet, and it was sad that some of the children we won't be seeing again. I hope they make movies for all 7 but I have a feeling that the next one is going to be the last one made.

I never read the Narnia books as a child, so I am planning to get the box set and read it thoroughly.

[ben12]

My problem with having a "God" character in a story like this -- if he steps in and helps using all his magical powers, it's boring. But if he hangs back and lets the characters help themselves, he looks like a prick for letting all those people die.

[whoopdido]

My problem with having a "God" character in a story like this -- if he steps in and helps using all his magical powers, it's boring. But if he hangs back and lets the characters help themselves, he looks like a prick for letting all those people die.

Well, that's what God is all about.

In theory, if God loves all living things there shouldn't be floods and hurricanes and murder and disease. God should be able to stop all those things from happening, but He allows them to happen. Why? Who knows.

To a religious person the answer might be because He wants us to figure things out on our own or that God has a plan for everything. To an atheist the fact that terrible things happen in the world is proof that God doesn't exist.

In the Narnia universe, Aslan, who is actually portrayed as Jesus, could easily step in at any time and fix everything, but he never does that, just as God doesn't step in and fix everything in our universe. So, I wouldn't say that he looks like a prick...he just looks more like what we consider God to be, which is a being that doesn't fix everything for us.

[calhoun07]

Well, that's what God is all about.

In theory, if God loves all living things there shouldn't be floods and hurricanes and murder and disease. God should be able to stop all those things from happening, but He allows them to happen. Why? Who knows.



I thought it was best explained towards the end of Time Bandits when Kevin meets God and asked him about the exact same thing.

[Son of Odin]

this movie is amazing. it could've almost been rated R. with the intense battle scenes. a little blood here and there and this could've easily been R-rated. this movie blew the first movie out of the water. better story and the main 4 children really upped the ante. peter was awesome. ed grew up alot, mentally. the older girl is going to be hot. I went in with mindset that it couldn't be better than iron man. I was wrong. it was better. that's coming from a person that has said every good thing there was to say about iron man. as long as these films break $200m or more at the domestic box office I don't see why disney would quit after the 3rd installment.

[GatorDeb]

I'm not really a fan of fantasy but this movie blew me away. Speed Racer, Forbidden Kingdom, Iron Man, Prince Caspian... this summer just keeps getting better and better. I loved this movie (I haven't watched the first, might have to and also read the books).

Question:
When Lucy finally meets up with Aslan, what does she tell him right after he said 'why didn't you come looking for me' and her asking him whether if she had come sooner all those who died might still be alive?

Highly recommended.

[Michael Corvin]

I'm glad people are coming around to it.

this movie is amazing. it could've almost been rated R. with the intense battle scenes. a little blood here and there and this could've easily been R-rated. this movie blew the first movie out of the water. better story and the main 4 children really upped the ante. peter was awesome. ed grew up alot, mentally. the older girl is going to be hot. I went in with mindset that it couldn't be better than iron man. I was wrong. it was better. that's coming from a person that has said every good thing there was to say about iron man. as long as these films break $200m or more at the domestic box office I don't see why disney would quit after the 3rd installment.

Let me correct you... IS hot. According to IMDB she's 19, so it's safe to say it. :) I loved her kicking ass in battle. Almost as great as Legolas.

[Save Ferris]

Question:
When Lucy finally meets up with Aslan, what does she tell him right after he said 'why didn't you come looking for me' and her asking him whether if she had come sooner all those who died might still be alive?

Highly recommended.

well
She was one of the ones who wanted them not to attack, but she yielded to the older siblings. They suffered great losses at the castle, if Lucy would have insisted and stood her ground it may have changed events.

For anyone wanting to read the books, I suggest reading them in the order of the movies. They were originally published this way and some consider this still the best way to read them.

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Prince Caspian
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
The Silver Chair
The Horse and his Boy
The Magician's Nephew
The Last Battle

[GatorDeb]

SaveFerris, I mean:


She says: I believed in you
He says: Then why didn't you come sooner?
She says: One or two words I missed at the theater
Then she asks whether if she had come sooner, those who died would be alive.

I'm looking for that word or two she said in between those two lines :D

[Save Ferris]

I dont think theres anything you're missing.

The gist of it is that she says 'sorry' she was afraid to stand up for what she knew was really the right thing to do.

I just looked up that scene and this is what is said exactly:

"{lucy runs up and hugs Aslan}
Lucy: I knew it was you the whole time I knew it but the others didn't believe me.

Aslan: And why would that stop you from coming to me?

Lucy: If I had come earlier, would everyone have died? Could I have stopped that?

Aslan: We can never know what would have happened Lucy, but will happen is another matter entirely."

I think her accent makes 'would everyone have died' hard to understand

[Brian T]

Well, that’s what God is all about.

In theory, if God loves all living things there shouldn’t be floods and hurricanes and murder and disease. God should be able to stop all those things from happening, but He allows them to happen. Why? Who knows.

To a religious person the answer might be because He wants us to figure things out on our own or that God has a plan for everything. To an atheist the fact that terrible things happen in the world is proof that God doesn’t exist.

Thank goodness for agnosticism. Frees up a lot of quality time.



I thought it was best explained towards the end of Time Bandits when Kevin meets God and asked him about the exact same thing.

:D

[Save Ferris]

Its kind of funny that people who want a God to stop anything evil from happening is like wanting the government to make smoking illegal or make anti cholesterol laws.

[mdc3000]

Save Ferris, I was sure there was more to that scene...I'm pretty sure Lucy said she wanted to come earlier but was embarassed to, because Peter and Susan didn't believe her.

[Save Ferris]

Save Ferris, I was sure there was more to that scene...I'm pretty sure Lucy said she wanted to come earlier but was embarassed to, because Peter and Susan didn't believe her.


nope

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3LuS3armAc

[Brian T]

Its kind of funny that people who want a God to stop anything evil from happening is like wanting the government to make smoking illegal or make anti cholesterol laws.

Exactly. Why people even bother asking is such a puzzler! ;)

[Save Ferris]

Exactly. Why people even bother asking is such a puzzler! ;)

Well, I agree, something is wrong with the theology if the sole purpose of life is to live for as many years as possible. Or, if the purpose of life is to be as happy as possible, we should be given drugs at birth and waste away in euphoria. Is 'dying' the most awful thing in existance?

Some people want cookie cutter simple answers from a God, while its quite fine to have complex theories of relativity for example. Whether your god is Science or something else, looking for a pat answer to a complex problem is likely to disappoint.

[Brian T]

Is 'dying' the most awful thing in existance?

Being born is probably more traumatic. We're just fortunate enough not to remember it.



Some people want cookie cutter simple answers from a God

Even more galling is how many people claim to receive them! ;)



Whether your god is Science or something else, looking for a pat answer to a complex problem is likely to disappoint.

To be fair, the answers to complex problems given us by the myriad of scientific disciplines have actually led to verifiable and historically-charted progress, so looking to them tends to have immeasurable benefit when societies choose to do so responsibly, which they generally do, barring the expected miscalculations (take your pick) that scientific method inevitably accounts for and corrects. And by and large the sciences can work independentally of the faith of the user.

[Save Ferris]

To be fair, the answers given us by the myriad of scientific disciplines have actually led to verifiable and historically-charted progress, so looking to them tends to have immeasurable benefit when societies choose to do so responsibly, which they generally do, barring the expected miscalculations (take your pick) that scientific method inevitably accounts for and corrects.

I wasnt comparing religion and science in general, I meant that particular question ('why would a loving god allow evil to happen') was more complex along the lines of theory of relativity which we accept requires lots of reading and study to understand.

Where it relates to the Chronicles of Narnia is not the point either so i wont discuss it further here. I dont like seeing them reduced to simple religious parables when really they're so much more. They were written with more heart than that and with all the mythological characters thrown in, it wasnt meant to be taken as some kind of religious authority.

[Brian T]

Where it relates to the Chronicles of Narnia is not the point either so i wont discuss it further here. I dont like seeing them reduced to simple religious parables when really they're so much more. They were written with more heart than that and with all the mythological characters thrown in, it wasnt meant to be taken as some kind of religious authority.

No offense intended above, but I don't like science (of any kind) being called a "god". ;) It's not, obviously, nor does it seek to define such a thing. Yet it's too often the case when the faithful assume that those that don't follow suit automatically "worship" something else by default.

You're right about the potential for the Narnia stories to be reduced to simple religious parables when they're much deeper than that. But despite all the mythological trappings (Greek, Christian or otherwise), the movies, possibly by their very nature when books are translated to the screen, have a tendency to do just that. :(

[Son of Odin]

why can't peter and susan just stay in narnia at the end of prince caspian just like they did in the LWW? if they can never come back can't they just stay in narnia and grow old again. I didn't get the "our time is up" line. they were able to stay in the first one for many years. I can't invision the next movies without them. to me peter is the best part of the movies.

[Save Ferris]

I dont know the real answer for it but my theory is it depends how old they are in our world. A clue might be a dedication CS Lewis wrote for LWW:

To Lucy Barfield

My Dear Lucy,

I wrote this story for you, but when I began it I had not realized that girls grow quicker than books. As a result you are already too old for fairy tales, and by the time it is printed and bound you will be older still. But some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again. You can then take it down from some upper shelf, dust it, and tell me what you think of it. I shall probably be too deaf to hear, and too old to understand, a word you say, but I shall still be

your affectionate Godfather,
C.S. Lewis

[GatorDeb]

nope

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3LuS3armAc
Hey, you're right, she goes from one sentence to the next and it's her 'Britash' accent that makes it sound like there's another word in there :D And there I thought she had said this very important revelation ;)

Awesome movie. One of the best movie summers and we still have Indy, S&TC, and best of all, Batman to go (and I'm sure I'll like Hulk since I liked the other remake).

[whoopdido]

why can't peter and susan just stay in narnia at the end of prince caspian just like they did in the LWW? if they can never come back can't they just stay in narnia and grow old again. I didn't get the "our time is up" line. they were able to stay in the first one for many years. I can't invision the next movies without them. to me peter is the best part of the movies.

New characters show up in the other books and movies (if they get made). A new human character will join Lucy and Edmund in the next movie. Subsequent movies (again if they get made) will also introduce more human characters. More than likely you won't miss Peter and Susan.

I believe that the point of Narnia is to learn things--faith being one of them. I think Aslan says something like Peter and Susan have learned all that they can from the Narnian world and they must continue their "education" in their own world. In Aslan's opinion Lucy and Edmund can still learn from their future experiences in Narnia. Of course if Aslan (Jesus) wants them to become more faithful Christians then I'm not really sure why Lucy needs to come back. She's the one that believed in Aslan the most.

I think really Narnia is simply a way for the children to become more faithful Christians in a different world. I can't remember which book it is, but at the end of one of them Aslan tells the kids that they must go back to their own world and know know him by another name. Obviously that other name is Jesus.

[MoviePage]

Haven't taken the time to read this entire thread because I just didn't care enough about the movie to do so, but a few thoughts:

- The movie definitely needed some trimming. 2:00 would have been a good run time, 2:20 was overdoing it.

- The ending is the most overtly religious of any recent mainstream movie, and anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is being willfully blind. This was part of Lewis' intention in writing the thing, for starters. After the mass baptism in the river, when the Peter Dinklage dwarf character kneeled to Aslan, my friend turned me to me and whispered, "Umm...did he just get saved?" He sure did!

- Georgie Henley (Lucy) was seriously under-used in this one. She was the heart and soul of the first movie and there was (deserved) Oscar buzz for her in the Supporting Actress category that year, though it didn't pan out in the end.

- The entire "storming the castle at night" sequence was fantastic - thrilling, suspenseful, expertly choreographed.

- This movie suffered drastically from the lack of Tilda Swinton, who played the most fascinating character in the first movie and was really the best thing about it. It's no accident that the one brief scene involving her in Prince Caspian is one of the best, and certainly one of the most exciting.

- Speaking of which, I think the story of this one suffered greatly from the lack of a good, interesting villain.

I read the book many years ago and didn't remember a thing about it. After seeing the movie, I remember why I didn't remember. Overall, I was just about bored to tears.

[whoopdido]

Haven't taken the time to read this entire thread because I just didn't care enough about the movie to do so, but a few thoughts:

- The movie definitely needed some trimming. 2:00 would have been a good run time, 2:20 was overdoing it.

- The ending is the most overtly religious of any recent mainstream movie, and anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is being willfully blind. This was part of Lewis' intention in writing the thing, for starters. After the mass baptism in the river, when the Peter Dinklage dwarf character kneeled to Aslan, my friend turned me to me and whispered, "Umm...did he just get saved?" He sure did!

- Georgie Henley (Lucy) was seriously under-used in this one. She was the heart and soul of the first movie and there was (deserved) Oscar buzz for her in the Supporting Actress category that year, though it didn't pan out in the end.

- The entire "storming the castle at night" sequence was fantastic - thrilling, suspenseful, expertly choreographed.

- This movie suffered drastically from the lack of Tilda Swinton, who played the most fascinating character in the first movie and was really the best thing about it. It's no accident that the one brief scene involving her in Prince Caspian is one of the best, and certainly one of the most exciting.

- Speaking of which, I think the story of this one suffered greatly from the lack of a good, interesting villain.

I read the book many years ago and didn't remember a thing about it. After seeing the movie, I remember why I didn't remember. Overall, I was just about bored to tears.

Just so you know, as far as I can remember from the book, The White Witch (Tilda Swinton) wasn't even in the book. Jadis took the form of the old hag. I may be mistaken but I think the movie took some liberties and inserted The White Witch character into the movie when it wasn't in the book. Also the storming of the castle sequence wasn't in the book either.

I'm not saying that changing the book was bad. Some people just go crazy when a movie is even slightly different from the book. Just pointing that out.

And just to reiterate, of course the ending was religious in nature. If the filmmakers changed that aspect of the movie then they should have changed the name of the movie as well. If the movie didn't contain religious aspects then it couldn't be called a Narnia movie. It's a religious movie with talking animals and anybody that's offended by that or doesn't want to see religion in movies definitely should not see this or any other Narnia movies.

[Save Ferris]

Too much is being made of the Christian allegories. There is easily more greek mythology in the films and books than people recognize. Yes the author was a famous apologetist but the books are meant to be enjoyed regardless of viewpoint. If the Greek mythology isnt distracting, the Christian themes shouldnt be either.

The river scene involves the 'River-god' and the evil guys were drowned in it (they hated water--a theme from the book that wasnt explained in the movie). It wasnt a 'baptism'. Breaking the bridge, symbolized a returning to nature and reviving the natural elements back into Narnia (the River-god called the bridge a 'chain'). In the book the Dwarf spent lots of time doubting the existence of Aslan, so the roar in his face made more sense if you read it. The returning to nature is the biggest theme at the end of the book--it takes time to describe people letting their hair down, the trees coming back to life, lots of revelry and dancing in the woods etc.

When they went through Beruna, Telmarines who accepted the new life with nature, kicked off their shoes and joined in the party, while others were afraid of 'wild beasts' and eventually were given a way to return to where they came without harm. They werent 'converted' into 'narnians' by returning to the human world. I dont know what religion this is supposed to resemble, but it wasnt 'saving' them or anything of a religious nature (saving them from narnia?).

[Son of Odin]

I actually liked the main villains. the main villain treated his general and counsel members like trash so when he was wounded in battle his own people finished him off and took over. the fight between peter and the other guy was amazing. If peter and susan didn't believe lucy when she said she seen aslan, wouldn't that mean they needed to be in narnia more. since they didn't believe. great movie that should've pulled in more $ but it should still do over $200m. I enjoyed it more than indy and a tad better than iron man.

[Michael Corvin]

Too much is being made of the Christian allegories. There is easily more greek mythology in the films and books than people recognize. Yes the author was a famous apologetist but the books are meant to be enjoyed regardless of viewpoint. If the Greek mythology isnt distracting, the Christian themes shouldnt be either.

The river scene involves the 'River-god' and the evil guys were drowned in it (they hated water--a theme from the book that wasnt explained in the movie). It wasnt a 'baptism'. Breaking the bridge, symbolized a returning to nature and reviving the natural elements back into Narnia (the River-god called the bridge a 'chain'). In the book the Dwarf spent lots of time doubting the existence of Aslan, so the roar in his face made more sense if you read it. The returning to nature is the biggest theme at the end of the book--it takes time to describe people letting their hair down, the trees coming back to life, lots of revelry and dancing in the woods etc.

When they went through Beruna, Telmarines who accepted the new life with nature, kicked off their shoes and joined in the party, while others were afraid of 'wild beasts' and eventually were given a way to return to where they came without harm. They werent 'converted' into 'narnians' by returning to the human world. I dont know what religion this is supposed to resemble, but it wasnt 'saving' them or anything of a religious nature (saving them from narnia?).

Very well said Ferris. I'll just reiterate what I said above. People are overtly looking for religion/Christianity, when it's not even there, just to have something to bitch about.

[Ky-Fi]

Too much is being made of the Christian allegories. There is easily more greek mythology in the films and books than people recognize. Yes the author was a famous apologetist but the books are meant to be enjoyed regardless of viewpoint. If the Greek mythology isnt distracting, the Christian themes shouldnt be either.


Yep, while Lewis was foremost a Christian, he was extremely well-read and a huge fan of Greek mythology, and his love of anthropomorphic animals was an enduring fascination from his childhood--and Lewis' understanding of Christianity didn't require him to jettison those things from his work, but rather to just put them in perspective.

On to the movie, I enjoyed it overall. I was having trouble getting drawn into the narrative for the first 45 min. or so---when Caspian made his way to Narnia, and the Narnians were going to kill him, and then suddenly ready to follow him---that felt way too rushed for me. But I felt they brought things together better in the second half, and I got more into it. Loved Peter's marathon sword duel, and I really liked Lewis' themes of the potential for redemption and change exemplefied by the fact that Ed's judgement and ethics were a bit sharper than Peter's in this movie.

I did have a gripe that some of the CGI shots looked a tad shoddy here and there---and at this point, they're capable of making them all look great if they're willing to take the time and spend the money.

As far as fantasy movies go, I find the Narnia series to be a bit weightier and more substantial than the Harry Potter movies, but not quite up to Lord of the Rings movies. Although maybe that's not a fair comparison, as Tolkien was dealing with a more epic and grander-scale setting and story than was Lewis.

[Giles]

I saw this a second time in non-digital sound and I have to say I was completely underwhelmed, the 5.1 soundmix I saw with the DLP presentation initially was amazing - here though every sound aspect seemed restrained, the voices were hard to hear, very little surround envelopment, the battle scenes didn't pack a wallop as they should have - I'm felt kind of bad for my friend, since I felt this was a technical letdown, it was a beautiful flawless 35mm print, visually, but for some reason it wasn't encoded or decoded in any of the three audio codex' (Dolby Digital, DTS, SDDS).

[Shannon Nutt]

I read the book many years ago and didn't remember a thing about it. After seeing the movie, I remember why I didn't remember. Overall, I was just about bored to tears.

That's the biggest problem with the remaining books as well, except for THE LAST BATTLE, which is pretty nifty. But I honesty see no way Disney is going to successfully release all seven without changing the stories. Not only are Peter and Susan gone now, but I think Lucy disappears after DAWN TREADER until the final book (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

[mdc3000]

I think most people would cheer the loss of these kids in the franchise, I know I will :)

No way Disney makes any more after Dawn Treader...it's returns are going to be even worse than Caspians IMO.

[Ravenous]

The best movie Ive seen since Return of The King. I loved this flick.

[ben12]

I also found it weird that they were fighting so hard to restore a monarchy.

But that's in a lot of stories.

[pinata242]

They were fighting to usurp a usurper.

[Tom Banjo]

That's the biggest problem with the remaining books as well, except for THE LAST BATTLE, which is pretty nifty. But I honesty see no way Disney is going to successfully release all seven without changing the stories. Not only are Peter and Susan gone now, but I think Lucy disappears after DAWN TREADER until the final book (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

Regarding the children in The Last Battle:
They all die in a train wreck in the real world, and all but Susan come back to Narnia. Susan quit believing, and ends up in Hell. The 3 children (who I believe are in their 20's by this time) and the believers of Aslan from the dying Narnia all go to a new land formed by Aslan, aka Heaven.

[Save Ferris]

If you're going to oversimplify and misinterpret things, dont forget to mention how the jesus-lion saves the muslim in the end because he was a good muslim.

[chris_sc77]

Pretty funny article about Disney's excuses for the box office of PC From /film.com
"Disney CEO Robert Iger is now claiming that The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian isn’t performing as well as expected at the box office because the May 16 release date was “too competitive”. It probably had nothing to do with the fact that a large portion of moviegoers were

A. disappointed by the first film, and/or
B. Not excited by the trailers and prerelease advertising for the second film.

Yeah, it probably has NOTHING to do with either of those factors. It’s a good thing that Disney moved Prince Caspian from it’s original Christmas 2007 season release out of fear that The Water Horse would be targeting the same audience. Because we all know what kind of HUGE hit The Water Horse went on to become… To be fair, Disney might have made the move due to Walden Media, who was both their production partner on Prince Caspian and the production company behind the Water Horse. Besides, the footage shown at WonderCon in late February was in such an uncompleted state that I double a 2007 release would have been possible.

It should also be noted that The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is scheduled to hit theaters on May 7th 2010, only a week after Iron Man 2. So it looks like they’ll be able to use the same excuse next time around as well."

[Michael Corvin]

So you don't think being sandwiched between Iron Man and Indiana Jones was a factor at all? It may not be the only factor but probably the biggest one.

[Sierra Disc]

Really funny how at the start of summer most of the estimates had this in the top 3 at least for the season. Going to be quite a blow to continuing the series past #3 (which I do hope gets made, as it's the best of the books easily.)

[mrflix]

I can honestly say that I truly enjoyed the first movie, however I am agreeing with the Disney execs on this one. I saw Iron Man opening week, wasn't able to see Prince Caspian the following, then saw Indy. With nothing truly worthwhile coming out the next couple of weeks I may try and see Caspian now.

[chris_sc77]

So you don't think being sandwiched between Iron Man and Indiana Jones was a factor at all? It may not be the only factor but probably the biggest one.
Actually I kinda do. I think it would have done more if it came out in December as was orig. planned. I think it could have made $200 million if released then. But then again it would have been sandwiched between I am Legend and National Treasure 2 so maybe it would have suffered then as well.

[brainee]

Just saw this, and have to agree with the DVDTalk review. About a 4/10 from me. Overlong, generally unpleasant, lacking in "magic", generic villain (I was rooting for Tilda Swinton just to have a character that was interesting pop up), generic Prince. Maybe I've been spoiled by movies like LotR, but just the presence of massive fantasy CGI battles isn't enough. I need a movie to have more, and this didn't do it for me. I'm pretty astonished this didn't merit a PG-13, given the body count. And a couple stupid things had me shaking my head:

First, I couldn't believe that in the middle of the big one-on-one sword duel, one guy calls for a timeout ... and the other goes "sounds good to me!" :lol:

And the whole "Aslan saves the day" bit. I'm not talking at all about religious allegories - just the whole thing from a fantasy plot perspective. Aslan stays out of things the whole movie, and when found he explains that he isn't going to ride in and save the day because the same thing doesn't happen twice. But what then happened? He roars, an army of trees and a water giant rises up, and they all ride in and save the day!

Not surprised that this is underachieving at the BO. Christmas would've been a better time. But more than a few people have turned cold to the series. I'm not familiar with the book series, so I don't know if the stories become more engaging (what I've heard hear suggests that won't help). I agree with suggestion offered by Richard Roeper on his show - to have a chance at going on, this series needs someone good (if not great) to take over the reigns at writing and directing.

[calhoun07]

I just wanted to say that even though I found this movie not as good as the first, I found the book even worse. It actually improved on an otherwise uneventful and boring book. The book was a poor sequel...this movie had a lot to work against going into it. It actually is one of the few book to movie adaptations that improved on the source material to me.

So while it wasn't a great movie, if I was to put it all alone by itself...it was actually pretty good.

[starman9000]

Saw this this weekend. I think I liked it a little more than others in this thread, but like the first one, it was lacking a little something that would have made it a solid movie for me. To me the beginning was the weakest part and just seemed pretty rushed (not that I would want to lengthen an already bloated movie, but the acceptance of Caspian by the Narnians and arrival of the kids just seemed too quick)

[calhoun07]

Saw this this weekend. I think I liked it a little more than others in this thread, but like the first one, it was lacking a little something that would have made it a solid movie for me. To me the beginning was the weakest part and just seemed pretty rushed (not that I would want to lengthen an already bloated movie, but the acceptance of Caspian by the Narnians and arrival of the kids just seemed too quick)

Have you ever read the book? The book starts out at the train station and before you have a chance to get settled in, the kids are whisked away IMMEDIATELY! It's like the first thing that happens. At least the director tried to come up with some stuff for them to do at the station..the boy crushing on Susan and such...otherwise the movie would have just started with them being taken away if it followed the book. The first thing that happens in the book is Lucy going OW like something stung her like a wasp.

People complain about this stuff, and I wonder if they ever actually read the book. I think the movie was good, as I stated before, because it actually managed to improve on a pretty weak book over all.

[starman9000]

People complain about this stuff, and I wonder if they ever actually read the book. I think the movie was good, as I stated before, because it actually managed to improve on a pretty weak book over all.

I read the books years ago and don't really remember them. The train scene didn't really bother me, it was more the stuff right away in Narnia, primarily with Caspian. It doesn't really matter to me if it improved on the book or not as it felt rushed in the movie. Saying "have you read the book?" doesn't really matter unless someone is stating that the book was way better or something. That said, I enjoyed the movie just fine.

[RichC2]

Some people still have the mindset that a movie's merit is based directly on how it compares to the source material. :shrug:

"The book was better" doesn't make it a bad movie, "It's better than the book" doesn't make it a good one.

[Save Ferris]

Good point Rich. With regards to how it all pans out in the end:

Aslan is more out of the picture in this one. In a sense, when Narnia fell to the Telmarines, the magic of the land, along with the magical creatures, receded into the woods and out of mind. The Telmarines became the rulers of the known land.

The Narnians accepted Caspian for several reasons--1. he was being hunted by the king, 2. he had historical treasures and knowledge/belief in real narnian history, and 3. perhaps most importantly to many of the more magical creatures (the Centaurs who were arguably the most powerful 'good' creatures) the stars foretold the coming of a new king.

Aslan is more distant because he has been discarded in a sense by the outcast creatures--Trumpkin the red haired dwarf is a big 'unbeliever' in many conversations (didnt translate it too much in the movie). The character of Aslan is more of a mystical and wild creature--not like a king that would himself, claim a throne and rule. Overall in the series, his purpose tends to be to inspire lower and weaker creatures to become great and rise to meet challenges. When other good creatures rise up and act as a nation of good, he does fight too.

The swordfight was a traditional type that relied heavily on rules and honor. Like a cage fighting match, there were breaks in the action to ensure the fighters fought at their best. The book went more into details about the rules that would have been tedious to see on screen.

[SonOfAStu]

Just watched this last night and REALLY enjoyed it! Growing up in a very Christian household my entire life, I didn't even get the "religious" themes from this movie until I read them here. Guess I just wasn't looking for them.

Oh well, great movie and can't wait to see the next one, if it still gets made.

[riley_dude]

I watched it for the first time a few weeks ago and I was bored. Nothing magical about this movie. Very drab.

[wm lopez]

I also was bored. I would have turned it off but I was waiting for the lion to appear.