"The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" (1 Viewer)

[Shawn.F]

Even less Jesus Lion in future installments?!?!?! CURSE YOU, C.S. LEWIS (waves fist at the heavens)

 

[Brandon Conway]

The cinematic adaptation of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader will be interesting to see happen, as it has no epic battles or large conflicts. It's essentially a sea voyage adventure that contains soul searching, with the biggest "villain" being one's own pride and moral ineptitude/immaturity as prominently portrayed by Eustace (by far THE most important casting decision in all the films).

I wonder how the audiences will react to it. Will they accept it on its own terms and embrace the radical structural departure, or will they balk at the change in tone and introspective climax? After all, this is a story that ends with a spiritual fulfillment realized for a mouse who essentially gets to go to Narnian heaven, while Eustace learns to look for Aslan "by another name" in his own world. Not exactly like the rousing physical battle victories over the White Witch or the Telmarines.

In the end, VotDT is a film about personal accountability and salvation, with some vignettes involving magical and strange islands. It's reflective, ponderous, and sincerely a book about inner peace - a perfect recipe for a great transcendent film a la The Color of Paradise or Tokyo Story, but not exactly a typical action-adventure box office bonanza.

 

[Cassy_w]

I've been reading some reviews and it's laughable how many critics hate Christianity. They just cannot stand it being in movies even when it is subtle at most, yet the same critics go gaga over anything ant-religious. Image if Ben-Hur were released today. It would be crucified (pardon the pun).

That being said, at least some of those critics are still giving the film positive reviews. This is a film for the entire family and if it is decent then I hope families get to see it and enjoy it. Personally, I was terribly disappointed in TLTW&TW. To me it completely missed the boat on what was a superb story that was ripe for being turned into an epic film.

I'm hoping I don't feel the same way about this one.

 

[cafink]

Can you give an example of a film critic who can't stand subtle Christianity in film but goes "gaga" over anti-religious films?

 

[Brandon Conway]

Let's not go there, guys. Not the forum to do it in.

I just watched LWW again last night, and I honestly don't know how you adapt that book any better.

I'll be seeing Prince Caspian tonight at a sneak peak showing. Hope it lives up to the positive reviews.

EDIT: Couldn't make it tonight. Tomorrow night it is!

 

[Dave Scarpa]

That's already starting to happen, but it's disney's fault they wrangle a PG rating for what should really be a PG13

 

[MandyHan]

Thanks for the review - I've been reading some of the reviews that are up on Rotten Tomatoes, and most of the reviewers who I usually agree with there are giving it a positive review. Also, one of my friends actually got to see an early screening of it, and she said it was really great - better than the first and funnier than expected with some great action sequences. I'm really looking forward to seeing it this weekend.

 

[Edwin-S]

I'm going to go and see this for one thing only: Reepicheep. And they better not have f#$#ed up his character by turning him into comic relief ala Donkey or any other of the various "cutups" that appear in most animated films.

AFAIAC, Reepicheep was the most noble, gallant and courageous character in the whole series of books. I am going to be seriously pissed if they play his attributes for cheap laughs.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Everything thing I've read is that they played Reepicheep straight and it's only the circumstances of his physical appearance that makes the scenes funny. But his character is the noble, uncompromising faithful Narnian of the books. Errol Flynn comparisons have been numerous.

 

[Patrick Sun]

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 far away with catapaults that cause really big divots in the ground and through structures).

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

 

[Edwin-S]

This film felt oddly lifeless. The film seemed to lack any energy, despite all of the mayhem. It started slow and the pacing did not improve until about the last third of the film. So far, I have found both installments of this series to be pretty average. Lewis's books had a tempo to them. Even as an adult, I found them to be quite readable. For some reason the films just do not seem to be capturing the real magic of the books.

One bright point in this film was the character of Reepicheep. They resisted any urges to turn him into comic relief. For the most part the film makers were successful in capturing his character. Another decent character was the dwarf who meets the kids early in the film.

The lack of "charisma" in the kids didn't bother me. In fact, for the most part the portrayal of the kids seems to be pretty close to C.S Lewis's books. The kids in the books were average public school children. The looks and performances of the kids in the film reflect that. They are not "beautiful children" and I thank the film makers for not going in that direction.

The fights were bloodless and as such people are likely to roll their eyes, considering present days expectations of flying blood and entrails. However, I can overlook bloodless fights in a family orientated film. After all, they want children to be able to see the films. Flying blood and realistic battle wounds would not have been in the interest of the film. Gore would only have caused the rating to be increased.

Edit: I should add that I still hope this film makes enough money to get the series continued....at least, until "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" gets made. I liked that book the best out of all of them and I would like to see a film adaptation of it. Beyond that, I'm not sure if this franchise is going to have enough steam to get all seven books adapted......especially if the execution remains as pedestrian as the first two films.

All in all, my rating for the film would be about 2.5 stars out 4. It gets the job done but is somewhat uninspired and overly long. It really could have used some tightening.

 

[Brandon Conway]

The story is a tough one to tell. Like I've said before (though maybe not on this board), Peter and Susan don't really belong in this story, even in the book. They tread on familiar ground, help put Caspian in his royal place, and that's that. The best aspect of the book is that it sets up Lucy, Edmond, Caspian, Reepicheep, and all the new characters for Voyage of the Dawn Treader, while allowing Lewis to further his themes on faith and growth as good Christians, even after the Dark Ages or the every day monotony of school. (Yep, that's the point. I said it.)

The film does try to work with Peter and Susan, but it's to mixed results. Susan's flirtations with Caspian sort of work, because they give her something to do and it makes Caspian's connection to the Golden Age of Narnia more grounded in the end, but overall it's simply present and not anything special.

Peter's inner turmoil mostly works, IMO, but William Moseley doesn't really have the acting chops to REALLY sell the scenes all the time. He kind of has too much of the Harry Potter Order of the Phoenix book whining, to boot. In any case, it does help the motive of him being willing to face Miraz one-on-one after having failed the Narnians by attempting the ill-advised castle raid.

I liked the touch that Caspian and Peter were both tempted to bring back The White Witch, and that the sharing of this bad thought process was the instigation of them both being humbled into the positions they ultimately needed to be in. It also gave a great moment for Edward to fully solidify that he is now Aslan's most faithful King.

The battles were often too standard, in a classic-Hollywood (pre-LOTR, mind you) sort of way. I do think the idea to cut the ground from underneath the army was a GREAT cinematic move by Adamson, as it brought something fresh to the "big army on the battlefields charging" scene.

Ultimately, I just don't like the story of Prince Caspian as much as the other six stories. It always seemed to me like a necessary bridge to Voyage of the Dawn Treader and that story's much more compelling concepts and tone. The film feels the same; it serves its purpose without being troublesome, but in the end it's a gap filler. And as noted above, the narrative drive is often inconsistent, particularly in the first half of the film.

I will say again that Hensley really does a remarkable job, especially since she has less to work with than in LWW. She's such a naturally sweet little girl, and after watching LWW again the other night and now Prince Caspian, I very much look forward to her larger part in Dawn Treader. Honestly, if I ever have a daughter like her I will be one lucky father; just a sweet kid, and that comes through in the films in spades.

Anyway, to sum up:

LWW - 9/10. Great film, with an enchanting story and a certain charm that hits the right notes for me. Hensley is gold in this film.

PC - 7/10. Good film, but definitely suffers from the weaker source material. It never dips into "bad" territory for me, but I only think it excelled in the performances of Hensley and Keynes, as well as some of the more creative changes to the typical end battle strategies. Otherwise, it plays it a bit too standard, and a bit too safe.

 

[Sam Favate]

I thought it was great. More mature in tone than the first, and darker in many ways too. Yes, it's a cliche, but it expands upon the Narnia story the way that Empire Strikes Back did to Star Wars.

The scenery in the first half of the movie was spectacular, and I thought the battle scenes were well done. I was expecting less from the battles scenes, frankly, since I feel we've seen so many large battle sequences on screen since the Fellowship of the Ring, but they managed to keep these fresh, IMO.

I enjoyed the kids, and thought they showed growth from the first one. About the only thing that wasn't developed enough was whatever was between Caspian and Susan. Their much-talked-about kiss at the end wasn't very satisfying since it wasn't built up as much as it could have been.

I'm going to say I enjoyed it more than Lion Witch & Wardrobe. The effects are much better and much smoother this time, the creatures more fluid and natural, and the scenery is more stunning.

Oh, and Reepicheep is terrific. He has some funny lines, but he's a noble character. I think he was handled very well.

 

[Chris Will]

Coming from someone that hasn't read the books and enjoyed the first movie but didn't love it (liked it enough to buy the Blu-Ray this week though), I liked Prince Caspian more the LWW. Can't really explain why, just found it more entertaining and more fun then the first one.

Couple things I didn't like was the song at the end of the movie. Why did the song have to begin during the last scene or two? It totally took me out of the movie and ruined the tone for me. Just play the song over the credits and everything would have been fine but, as it is, it ruin the final scene for me. I can't remember if LWW had a song come in during the last few scenes but I would have the same complaint if it did. Modern songs just don't work in movie like this IMO. I don't mind them over the credits but when they come in over a scene during the movie, it just takes me completely out of the world of the film.

Other thing I didn't like was the fact that it was only suppose to be 1 year later for the kids yet, obviously, they have aged more the one 1 year. Once again, I haven't read the books but, I don't think it would have hurt the story in anyway for the filmmakers to just say it had been 3 years to match the obvious aging of the 4 children. I guess 1 year in the film's England is a really long year.

Other then those 2 nitpicks, I had a really good time, more so then the first film.

Oh, one other thing. The line from Ashlan in the trailer were he states "1 year for you has been 1300 for Narnia" was cut from the film. Why would they do that? As it is now, you do not get any explanation about how long it as been for Narnia other then a few characters mentioning "hundreds of years" a few times. Susan does mention 1300 years at the end but without the Ashlan line from the trailer it seems out of place, like we should have already heard it before earlier.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Chris - it's Aslan, without the h.

I agree. They could have just adapted it to be two years instead of two. No biggie, really.

 

[Rhett_Y]

Just got back from seeing it. I thought it was OK.... The prince character to me seemed really flat and I really didn't care if he was killed off or not. I agree with what others have said. The little girl is once again the star of the show.

I am still bothered by the voice of Aslan. For some reason Liam Nelson doesn't hit the mark. I want a deep voice, one that demands attention when he is speaking. Liam's voice doesn't do that for me.

The last action scene is pretty darn good IMHO.

I liked this one less then the first.

 

[Brandon Conway]

A friend of mine reminded me that the castle raid does have an equivalent event in the book that I had forgotten about.

In the book, instead of an attack on the castle, it's a sortie that fails because Caspian doesn't know much about the Narnian's limitations (unwisely following the giant's lead) and ends in a fighting retreat, before the Pevensies have even arrived on the scene, with a similar result in fallen soldiers.

As he puts it, "The issue is an exercise in walking a fine line between the pride of believing you don't need God or God's help, and God helping those who help themselves."

Helps me accept the castle raid addition a bit more, though moving the idea from being Caspian's to being Peter's comes at a cost to Caspian's character arc, even if it helps Peter's.

 

[DaveF]

As a lifelong fan of the C.S. Lewis's The Chronicles of Narnia, these movies are both a pleasure and a sorrow to me. It is fantastic to see the material adapated, but sad to see the concessions required of a "blockbuster". And so Prince Caspian is acceptable, but not impressive. The movie jettisons the book's interesting dual narrative for the sake of a generic blockbuster structure. The running theme of Lucy seeing Aslan when the others couldn't was diminished to provide more time for galloping horses and unwritten battles.

Still, it is Prince Caspian. Peter, Edmund, Susan, and Lucy are pulled back to Narnia by their great horn -- blown in times of great need. And now, centuries after their rule, they again unite the Narnians against an evil foe. It preserves an essence of Lewis's theme on faith and doubt.

The audience seemed to enjoy it. I heard kids laughing at the contrived jokes that annoyed me , so I guess Hollywood people know their target audience. The final battle scenes were stirring, but also captured nice moments of character intimacy.


Then you're going to enjoy Dawn Treader. That was my favorite as a kid, and Reepicheep is a wonderful character in that story. (I hope that's not a spoiler )

 

[Josh.C]

Long, Long time since I've been on the forum guys. I could blame it on golf, fantasy sports, and a bigger role at the job, but mainly it's a new 7 month old. Hard to get out to the movies these days.

I have to say that until now I've not been very excited about the films coming out, and there hasn't been much to write about. PC was a "can't miss" for me and I'm glad I was able to go see it on opening night.

As with any film I can nitpick at some things in PC as others have. For me the overall viewing experience more than covered it's bad points. The acting and character portrayl of the 4 kids is just fine with me. Sometimes less is more, and I believe PC got this right. Edmond was a far more likeable character in this film, and I like the way he had Lucy's back, and I really liked the first sword fighting scene between him and the dwarf. Peter flat out kicked butt. These guys are kids, but in Narnia reality have years and years of sword fighting experience, and I like the way their childesh appearance didn't limit this aspect of their character. I thought the two boys were pretty convincing swordsmen.

The mouse was great, and added some comic relief. Aslan, like Gandolf, Dumbledoore, and other characters from epic fantasy stories is that "go to" character that seems to always have the answers and you can't wait to see come on the screen.

There were numerous shots in this film (battle scenes, kids flying in on giant birds, etc.) that I thought were just breathtaking. Caspian took some getting used to, but pulled it off by the end of the film.

I'm a big fan of this series, and I was not dissapointed with PC. I'd like to see how it holds up on a second viewing.

Right now I'm going to say 8.5/10

JC

 

[Larry Sutliff]

I saw it yesterday, I felt that it was a nice improvement over the first one. The battles had a bit more sweep, the characters were more interesting this time around, and the f/x are greatly improved. Not much more to say other than I had a good time watching it.

A solid *** to ***1/2 flick.