we went to the midnight show of Prince Caspian last night! Caspian has never been my favorite of the books (Horse and His Boy and Last Battle are my faves), but I found myself wishing that they had remained a little more faithful to it - if they HAD, they would have done a better job of introducing us to the character of Caspian, making him less of a 2D character. Instead, his Inigo Montoya accent is distracting, and in the end you kind of want the Pevensies to stay in Narnia rather than leaving the throne to this Caspian guy.
at this point, we're used to the visual translation of Narnia's beauty and magic, and so there's less of the "aww" factor this time around, which is too bad. The powers that be also seemed to feel the need to insert extra battle sequences and humor into the story, much like Two Towers. unfortunately, Two Towers' Peter Jackson is much more adept at delivering battles that get you in the gut, and Chronicles versions felt like knockoffs.
and here's the real offense: they used Reepicheep's character as a 'comedic' foil (see Gimili in Two Towers). at least they didn't give him an Alvin & the Chipmunks-style voice. (oh, and just so you don't spend the whole movie wondering like Andrew and I did: Reepicheep's voice was done by Eddie Izzard)
still, the four siblings were perfectly cast, and they do a good job of redeeming Edmund's character from past treachery, of highlighting Peter's pride, and of touching on Susan's vanity. I thought they handled Aslan's farewell to the older Pevensies well - overall I just really liked the last few minutes; the sendoff from Narnia back to 'real life' was touching.
5.16.2008
the narnicles
Posted by Katie at 9:10 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I'll be seeing it tonight...I know I'll be sad...the books are so good!
I can't say I really liked the first film, but loved the books as a kid... I definitely liked the Lazy Sunday SNL digital short more than the first movie.
I lay a lot of the blame on the director Andrew Adamson. You can IMDB him to see his track record, which pretty much consists of Shrek (which was great, don't get me wrong) and not much else. Like you said, it's why Fellowship > The Lion, The Witch... because Peter Jackson > Andrew Adamson. That being said, they could've righted this ship by replacing the director (it worked for the Harry Potter movie franchise). Unfortunately it appears that they're keeping him for the Voyage...
Oh well, at least Guillermo del Toro is directing The Hobbit - that franchise should remain strong (as should Hellboy 2 but I'm bias).
Who would I choose to direct? Since most directors I like seem to be busy enough as it is, there is one that I'm surprised doesn't have a project currently in production: Matthew Vaughn.
Now I have to debate on whether to see Speed Racer or Prince Caspian this weekend but after your review I'm leaning toward the former. Nonetheless, I'll catch Prince Caspian soon enough and hope to be pleasantly surprised with such low expectations.
glad you got to go! sad you weren't super thrilled. -- j
I'm not ashamed to admit that I have no idea what any of this means.
-beka
I actually liked the bonus battle sequence (the courtyard commando bit in the Telmarine castle). The good guys have to lose once before they can win, or there is no contrast worthy of meriting a storyline. While Prince Caspian was among my least favorite of the stories (I'm waiting for Silver Chair, and - cross your fingers - Ray Romano as Puddleglum), they did wonderfully in some parts hyping it up a bit, and in other parts they butchered it (why the deuce did the Pevensies find the Narnian army so instantaneously upon arriving? Even in the book 11 of the 15 chapters, they haven't yet found Caspian) Also, they even left out some scurmish bits with Telmarine Garrisons due to not following Aslan (Ch 10). That's right. They wrote out some fighting (usually one has to write it IN).
What they should have done, if they planned a total re-write, was change the ending. Mobile Trees, dryads, and Water-nymphs wreaking calamity, those components always felt to me the least inspiring, alien and contrived, even when found in their pagan mythological source materials. There is (perhaps it is just me) a cognitive disconnect in the causalty and motivation of that faction. I liked Tolkien's Ents far better, in that they were genuinely indifferent to the plight of humanity, which perfectly matches my impression gained on every outdoor excursion I've chanced. Branches slap me in the face, their briars and thorns and needles are usually hostile, or indifferent at best, and this treatment they extend without preference to all.
It suspends more than my imagination to attribute or project positive personality to the elements. Nature, even in fantasy, is primarily intended to glorify God, not to make life go swimmingly for man. It simply doesn't give a fiddle about us, it's not for us, foremost. At the end of Job, God pretty much tells us why Earth nature doesn't work like Narnian nature. Who cuts a channel for the flooding rain or clears the way for lightning, to bring rain on an uninhabited land, a desert with no human life...
I like Narnia both because it is like and not like Earth. This part of the "not like" is not likable. That Aslan would harness it to win - as I think Andrew said, "at the last second" feels like it's reaching too far to be "epic." I think that's why I dislike this particular Chronicles of Narnia storyline. The ending doesn't resonate with me, especially the book version.
But in fairness, the nature of hostility means I dislike most that which I feel shows the most promise initially. If it was bad all through I wouldn't even bother thinking about it so much. Oh, and that was a blast staying up late with ya'll.
Post a Comment