skiblet

i saw Chron. of Narnia today. just some feedback, on my perspective -

*semi spoilers ahead*


Well, i never read the books as a child, and only had the vaguest idea of the story and plot. I had heard maybe once or twice that there are some elements of the story that are paralells or metaphors for christianity. I thought, ok fine whatever the trailer looks kick ass, so im going.

If your an atheiest, or not a big fan of christianity (like me), then you might have a difficult time completely enjoying the film. Visually, the film is stunning - the animations, the screenplay, the CGI, the monsters and creatures are just absolutely stunning. But, i just couldnt get over the feeling that the entire show was just a excuse for someone to subject and subconsciously impose the story of their religion on me. The movie uses glaringly and overtly obvious paralells to christianity, so much that i wonder how many viewers will start to doubt the strength of C.S. Lewis' imagination and creativity (since the entire essence of the movie's moral delivery are a direct copycat of orthodox christianity). Thats fine and all, and if you are a christian then you will be very comfortable with the story. The problem that I had with the movie was - the flavor was just so.. ., disney-ish. Yes, i realize that it is more of a childrens story, but this is a childrens story that is animated to take itself VERY seriously - to offer a sense of sanitized conflict that both child and adult can watch, and enjoy. Im not sure if that works or not.

This movie reaks of LOTR envy. It truly is beautiful to watch, but the story itself is an infantile attempt at creativity, and doesnt hold a candle to lord of the rings. It is merely a well polished and attractive propaganda tool, that makes no secret at all about its intentions to impose the authors religious views upon the viewer. Its definately worth viewing, as long as you can withstand the propaganda value.

Graphics, CGI, monsters and fantasy effects = A+
Story, moral impact, meaningfullness = C -

wewantflair

Just a note - the original publication of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is 1950. The original publication date of the Fellowship of the Ring is 1954. LOTR envy, indeed.

The Antipodean

Not to threadcrap, but it sounds like you went in with your own biases already in place and reacted accordingly?

I haven't seen it yet myself, but I'm interested in how preachy it really is. I haven't been a regular churchgoer in 20 years and also have my issues with Christianity, but I grew up on the books and never thought of them as propaganda myself. Except of course for the whole Aslan bit at the end, which I won't spoil.

skiblet

Thanks for your footnote, but this thread and discussion is about the movies, not the books.

Artman

So I guess this is our review thread now eh? Looking forward to seeing it even more!

If Jesus Christ isn't mentioned by name I don't see how lessons of courage and sacrifice can be that offensive. They've been present in other well known series.

edit: The idea behind the central character's fate is nothing new in films either, though Christ is the only religous figure to do so.

bigsoos

C.S. Lewis and Tolken were good friends.

wewantflair

You made explicit comments regarding their respective stories. Lewis published his before Tolkien. As such, suggesting that Lewis' story begs anything of Tolkien's is just dumb.

Hokeyboy

I think he meant the movie "reaks" of the LOTR movies, not a story comparison.

Anyway, I read the books as a kid and adored the living hell out of all of them. I re-read the entire series about four years ago and totally picked up the Christian allegory and what Lewis was aiming for as presenting Christianity as a "true myth", i.e. what would the story be like if God sent his son to a fantasy world, not as a man but as a lion. And it was FASCINATING and enriched my love of the series. And I am neither a Christian nor a religious person by any stretch.

You view it as imposition. I view it as storytelling. And masterful storytelling at that, although I never liked what the final fate of one of the four kids at ALL.

Tygan

You could also say that Frodo sacrificed himself for the sake of Middle Earth just like Jesus did.

You could also say that Gandalf sacrificed himself for the sake of the Fellowship and then returned just like Jesus did.

Basically both stories have themes of self-sacrifice...it's just that the church has latched onto Narnia because C.S. Lewis is usually associated with Christianity. I believe at the time of writing the books, Lewis was not even Christian.

skiblet

good post there.

Well, im not a religious person, or a christian and this is because i had a very bad experience with it in my childhood, and was subjected to it on a daily basis. So, perhaps you can understand why I might resist that. I am quite sure that I overreacted in my post above - but i soemtimes exaderate (sp?) to get my point across.

And yes, i meant that this movie gets its face slapped in comparison to the lord of the rings movies. This is a low calorie "diet" fantasy movie. Its a good one, and a nice thing to look at, but I just didnt like the feeling that I was watching a bible story that had the biblical characters swapped with fantasy characters.

Id love to hear other peoples comments who went to see it today. Its a beautiful film, and honestly and truly the CGI animals alone are worth the price of the ticket. The minotaurs and wolves are great !

DodgingCars

Actually, I would say the Church has latched on to both. However, Tolkein said his work was never meant to be allegorical to anything (in fact he didn't like allegory) -- yet, there is certainly elements of LOTR which come from a place within Tolkein that is very personal -- the story of good vs evil and self-sacrafice are surely a product of his religious faith, his feelings about WWII, and his views on nature and industry... He just intend for them to be allegorical.

Lewis, on the other hand, wrote an allegorical story on purpose. These themes and plot points didn't just seep in because of his religious faith, he put them there on purpose.

I'm not sure that I would be offended by it if I weren't Christian though. I'm not offended by the Budhist themes in some martial arts flicks like Crouching Tiger.

Jackskeleton

While I'm not really sure what an atheiest is, perhaps a more atheist than another atheist person. In anycase, as just simply an atheist fella, I have seen this film and I had no problem with it.

Why? Because much like the bible, I see a film as a simple story telling made for the purpose of getting across a moral tale.

You are reading far too much into it. I'm anti-religion because of my belief but really.. this is far from propaganda.

I don't recall them saying anything about Jesus anytime through it. Sure, they made similar connections. But it's storytelling.


It looks like he really was jabbing at the story telling of it and calling it a LOTR knock off.

Quote:

I'm not sure that I would be offended by it if I weren't Christian though. I'm not offended by the Budhist themes in some martial arts flicks like Crouching Tiger.

I love you for saying that. Exactly how I feel about this matter and why it didn't bother me in the slightest to have those undertones in there.

nodeerforamonth

Well if you think the church and Christianity is fiction to begin with, why would you have a problem with a movie? Aren't most movies fiction anyways?

uberjoe

As others pointed out, his comment was clearly in reference to the movie and the way it presents it scenes, not the story. Much the same way people continually say large battle scenes remind them of Braveheart.

I had a similar thought when I saw the Narnia trailer: "Looks like LOTR battles, but with little kids in the mix."

skiblet

actually, im not sure. Its a personal problem. Kind of like, if you have a bad experience with something, you will notice that certain things will remind you of it, and that can even sometimes lead to some unexplained negativity that will just be permanently imprinted into your subconscious mind, making it difficult or impossible to allow yourself to believe something. Over the years, I have grown really skeptical and even cynical of anything thats supernatual, or superstitious.
I dont know why that is. Perhaps im afraid of something.

Dr. DVD

FWIW, I am glad they didn't feel the need to do a Braveheart speech at the battle scene.

In terms of the movie, I felt I was being entertained, not preached toward. One question: the previews and the movie refer to the kids as "two sons of Adam and two daughters of Eve." I am not too up to date on my C.S. Lewis, but is Narnia supposed to be an aged form of Eden? I noticed it was populated by animals mostly, and it also talks about the ancient laws/early days as if they were during creation/genesis.

Groucho

Wow, you seem quite upset by the movie. I didn't know there were black people in it.

skiblet

I was pretty much waiting for the black jab. LOL. you clearly beat these other slackers to it.


The minotaur was black, he kinda bothered me a little bit. JK.

Groucho

Just yanking your chain.

For your next trick, go to Video Game Talk and declare that the N64 is the "greatest console ever."

Jackskeleton

I can't wait for next weeks thread about Kong.

"Just went to see King Kong - But feel like I just left a Furry convention"

modfather

I guess I'm a little confused. I haven't seen the movie, but I don't understand why atheists or "non-christians" have a problem with this movie having undertones of religion in it. How many movie out there have these same kinds of references, either implicit or explicit? Just a few movies that have either religious or heavy-handed agendas:

Life and Death of David Gale
Matrix (all three)
Mystic River
Million Dollar Baby
All Quiet on the Western Front

There's thousands of movies that all "have an agenda" and even if we don't agree with those, we can still enjoy the movie, right? I think atheists (and I'm not religious - just to much work... are so easily offended - generally, anyway, at anything that "forces" religion on them. But couldn't a right-wing, conservative be pissed off that All Quiet on the Western Front is an anti-war film, or a jewish person would be angry at Mel Gibson for making Passion, etc? Don't get me wrong, I'm a nihlist, so I don't get pissed at anything. heheh.

Ah well...

skiblet

LOL.

nah itll probably say,


"Just went to see King Kong - but fell asleep 18 hours into it. " his films are kinda long, i just hope we dont have to wait 2 hours to see kong like it went in hulk.

Legolas

Polly Toynbee's No.1 fan?

Inverse

Actually, in this case it's not. Tolkien and Lewis were friends, and Tolkien began work on Lord of the Rings well over a decade before it was published. By 1950 Lewis had read/heard large chunks of the LOTR manuscript. (And
The Hobbit, which was the first appearance of Tolkien's fictional universe, came out in 1937.)

Now you know ... and knowing is half the battle!

The Antipodean

"I just saw King Kong, and have to say it's not as good as the 1976 original."

Who the hell is Polly Toynbee?