My wife has the complete collection in hardback and I was thinking of reading the book before I see the movie. Never read any of them. I saw in previous posts that the order of the books in her collection are not the correct order???

So do I just need to read Lion, Witch & Wardrobe or do I need to read the book before it first for any backstory or characters? Does the book stand on its own? Also, is the movie strictly doing just that book or are they combining elements from other Chronicles into the one movie?

I would say that helps. I never read the books, and I could sense character stuff was missing.

Lion, Witch & Wardrobe is the first book in the series. It was the first book written, and it wasn't until much later that Lewis wrote the novel that now preceeds it.



Edit: From http://www.thelionscall.com/faq.cfm?...nu_item_id=101

While you can get some background information about The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe in the Magician's Nephew, it is in no way needed or required. Think of it as a prequel in the way that SW: Episodes 1-3 are prequels ... nice, maybe interesting, maybe entertaining, but needed to enjoy the original.

Jeffrey Wells was pleasantly surprised by it:

Possible Spoilers

Narnia Good

I am not, never have been and never will be a big fan of eye-candy fantasy flicks about adventure, young heroes, holy grails, scary monsters, nice-guy monsters and waves of pseudo-profound emotion, but...

I was quite impressed and moved, even, by Mark Johnson and Andrew Adam- son's The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (Disney, 12.9)...and go figure. This surprised me, given my general loathing of poster-paint family-friendly films. But it's a very satisfying movie of this type, and my personal favorite since...I don't recall but it's been a while.

I'll make it clear again: I respected Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy for the craft, feeling and exactitude he invested, but sitting through those three films was, on a deep-down personal level, agony. And I'm so sick of the Harry Potter series I can't make myself see the latest installment. I'd rather have my appendix removed.

I was grimming up for more of the same as I drove to the Narnia screening yester- day afternoon. A Wizard of Oz-like magical-mythical kingdom, child actors, talking animals, CG digiscapes...I'm a man, I can take it, lay it on me.

Then the lights went down and everything changed. In a way it's the same old magical fantasy action formula, but in several other ways it isn't for the simple reason that it's very well composed. In the ways that really count, Narnia is fairly exceptional.

It's a tighter, far better thing than any one of the Rings films, in part because it's thoroughly British (it's based a series of novels by C.S. Lewis) with the bookend sections set in the early 1940s, which saves it from the odor and attitudes of 21st Century trash culture.

The talking-animal CG is about as good as current technology allows, which isn't perfect but acceptable. The New Testament allegory stuff is plain as day, and it's easy to see why multitudes of families and Christian right groups are going to support this sucker big-time.

And three of the four child actors (Skandar Keynes, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell) are good enough to make you weep with relief...no Hayden Christen- sen-level performances! And the lead, 10 year-old Georgie Henley, is so skilled and centered and wonderfully sublime she should move right into the Best Sup- porting Actress lineup.

And the script (written by Ann Peacock, Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely and Adamson) moves right along with plot turns and character motives that hold water and fit right into the whole.

And Adamson, bless him, doesn't wallow in overbaked emotion the way Jackson always has. Adamson hits the mark, conveys a story point, exudes the feeling and moves on. I don't mean to upset the Jackson fans but the stuff Adamson is show- ing is called (watch out for the bad word!) discipline.

And it has a perfect ending, by which I mean a perfect final line.

Disney and Walden Media have spent $150 million on this debut in what will probably be a new franchise series, and the money is very much on the screen. The battle scenes are exciting, the various CG-scapes are first rate, and all the talking beavers, wolves, bisons, foxes, lions and tigers are...well, good enough.

The tale begins when the German bombing of London early in World War II results in the four children characters -- Peter (Moseley), Susan (Popplewell), Edmund (Keynes) and Lucy (Henley) -- to move to a big country estate owned by a kindly white-haired professor type (Jim Broadbent).

A painting and not a representation of any The Chronicles of Narnia scene in the film.
Then a game of hide-and-seek reveals an enchanted armoire full of fur coats, which turns out to be a passageway into the snow-covered world of Narnia. This ice-and- snow kingdom is populated, we soon learn, by talking animals and opposing armies -- the baddies led by the White Witch (Tilda Swinton) and the goodies led by the wise and kindly lion called Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson).

The arrival of the four kids shakes everything up. Edmund, lured by dreams of being crowned king, is captured by the White Witch and soon betrays his siblings as well as a half-human, half-goat character (played by James McAvoy and called a "faun") along with the good-guy forces.

But Edmund eventually saved from the White Witch's grasp by Aslan's decision to not only forgive Edmund but sacrifice himself.

There is much more to Aslan's story, but it's clear early on that this lion is a stand-in for Yeshua of Nazareth, which should indicate that his submission to the White Witch and her schemes in the third act is not necessarily final or binding.

Neeson (who replaced Brian Cox when the producers felt his reading wasn't sufficiently spiritual or soothing) conveys just the right tone of lordly wisdom and authority. Ray Winstone and Dawn French voice a pair of married beavers, Rupert Everett plays a fox, and Broadbent's professor -- a live-body performance -- is just right.

There's a big battle scene that's said to be based in large part on a similar show- down in Mel Gibson's Braveheart, but it reminded me more of the one staged in Spain by Stanley Kubrick for Spartacus.

Donald McAlpine's lensing looks beautiful, and the music by Harry Gregson-Will- iams...well, I can't remember it to be honest, but if you can't hear a score that's supposed to mean it's pretty good. The special effects chores were shared by three companies -- Rhythm & Hues, Industrail Light and Magic and Sony Pictures Imageworks.

(One CG complaint: there are too many German planes in the air in a too-tight formation during the London bombing sequence at the very beginning. Too much like a video game.)

Most of the indoor footage was shot in New Zealand, and the outdoor stuff was captured in that country also on top of locales in England, Poland, and the Czech Republic.

I asked an east-coast critic friend who was at the Arclight screening what he thought, and he said, "I was bored out of my skull." And he said he really liked the Rings trilogy. I said I felt just the opposite. Maybe I'll be in the minority among the smarty-pants set, but this thing works, delivers, satisfies.

Maybe a crankhead like myself liking this film means something...the film might be fantasy movie for people who don't like fantasy movies ...or maybe it doesn't mean a damn thing.

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/

I thought Weta did the effects? Behind the Magic of Weta featurette

I think WETA just did the creature effects and costumes. I don't think they did any of the CG.

Weta Workshop worked on the film creating props, armor, etc. Weta Digital did not work on the film. Rythm & Hues, Imageworks, ILM, and KNB worked on the film.

As for Wells, I've learned to completely ignore him, regardless of his opinion. Not to mention his writing is awful when compared to good writers like Ebert.

There are two parts of WETA, Weta Workshop and Weta Digital. Ghym is right in that Weta Workshop was only involved in this film. Weta Digital was tied up with Kong.

Another movie I am looking forward too. I remember watching the old stop motion/animatronic version and thought it was so cool then. Pretty packed weekend for us in SF with the limited Memoirs and Brokeback out the same week as this one.

Jay G.,

Do be aware that if you get the current one-volume omnibus edition of The Chronicles of Narnia you will also read them in the chronological order as defined by C. S. Lewis' stepson Douglas Gresham. I'm note sure if readers of this edition are willling to "hop around" to read each story in published order, though.

Got my tickets for first showing Friday. Should be GREAT!~~

I'll be going to see this next week and am looking forward to it greatly. I don't think I was even aware of the damn thing until last week but have been pleasantly surprised at the favourable reviews and the apparent faithfulness of the movie to the original story which, like millions of adults, I read as a kid and have very fond memories of.

FYI - Don't get up right away as the credits start. After about 1 minute of credits there is a short scene...

Well shucks. I did just that - I heard the toilet desperately calls for drink.

But at least I know I'll be seeing this movie again. Loved it. It's too bad that some people don't share what I think. They thought the movie is for children, therefore they didn't like it. I hope it was only a few of them.

can you describe the scene (spoilerized, of course, for others' viewing safety)? when i ask my friends to stay during end credits for a scene they're not to fond when it turns out to be 4 seconds of nothing like, i don't know, breathing at the very end

It's literally only 1 minute of cast credits before the scene... I think they can tough it out. Anyway here's the description:

Saw it at the DLP tonight. In short, it's a very good piece of fantasy, and this will be the main competition for King Kong this holiday season. Been eons since I read the book, so I don't remember much, but it was mostly faithful. FWIW, I was glad to see a movie where they made the FX a part of the story and used them to create meaningful characters you could actually be interested in as opposed to just having them present for eye candy.

Is this the official review thread or the one saying they feel like they just left church?

Just saw the movie... let me start by saying this:
I was BORED and CONFUSED with the Lord of the Rings movies; i found nothing exciting about Harry Potter films; I dont even own the Star Wars movies, they just dont interest me.
Having heard it compared to all the above movies mixed together, I grudgingly went along to the movies this afternoon (plus, there is nothing else at the theater now I havent seen that caught my eye).
BUT "The Chronicles of Narnia" may have just entered my top 10 favorite movies ever. It is so good, so emotional, interesting, captivating... i think many people can really relate to it.
I really want to go see it again. And I hope this is only the first in the series.
I would compare this movie more to a MUCH better version of "Lemony Snicket's" than to anything related to "Lord of the Rings"

I thought the first act was probably overly long, but the middle act wasn't long enough. It would seem the children just accept their prophetic destiny and almost overnight become capable of waging Braveheart-like battle (at least for Peter, the oldest). The final act had some nice battles of mainly CGI creatures and characters, but for a film aimed at children, at least the blood was held to a minimum, but it was savage, nonetheless, I was sort of surprised to find out it was only rated PG.

The child actors are very good in their respective roles, and the CGI characters were acceptable, though sometimes Aslan looked a little bit less sharp when humans were the shot with him. I didn't like the direction as much as I had hoped. I felt that the director could have chosen better angles for some of the scenes.

But even with some of the misgivings of the pacing of the film, I give it 3 stars, or a grade of B.

i was shocked to find out it was PG... the movie theater even had it listed as PG-13 on the board with all the showtimes.

there was quite a bit of violence, drama, and scares for a PG film.

It's funny that you ended up loving the Chronicles of Narnia then... I saw the midnight showing last night and found it to be a pretty good movie, but I myself would describe it as a sort of a "Lord of the Rings for a younger audience."

That may be a good way to put it, and i was really surprised that i did like after not exactly loving LOTR or HP. I enjoyed that it was much more straightforward than lord of the rings.

Well, I was disappointed. I love the books and have been looking forward to this movie, but I was let down. I wasn't so much let down by the pacing or the effects, but the casting nearly killed the movie. The child actors were awful. Little Lucy was one of the most annoying onscreen children in any movie in recent memory, Edmond was 1 dimensional and came off as an unsympathetic prick. Susan was bland as well. Even the emotional moments seem to come out of nowhere, seeming as if the director just yelled out "cry!" and the kids just do it, not caring about the how or why.

The first act's pace was definitely off...until the introduction of the Beavers the film was pretty much stalled IMO...after that it sure took off, but like I said, having these horrible child actors who can't convey an emotional ARC, rather just seeming like they're spouting lines and having their emotions turn on a dime instead of progress... some of the problems lie in the streamlined script...many moments they could have fleshed out just gave us the essential skeleton of the story and hardly anything more.

I thought the visuals were fantastic and the movie was thrilling, but the Casting director and Andrew Adamson really are to blame for the parts I thought didn't work...hopefully Adamson will learn how to work with REAL people on camera a little better (coming from Shrek, he has a great visual style, but all the onscreen performances were extremely wooden) for the next time around... Bring on KONG.

MATT