Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The Pendragon saw the new Narnia movie, "Prince Caspian," last night. It was very well done. Even a Lewis purist like myself can admit that. The acting was superb and the special effects stellar as I knew they would be. The battle sequences were intense and the scene where evil members of Caspian's army try to summon back the White Witch brings some much-needed darkness to an otherwise straightforward children's movie. Good and evil are firmly identified and most of the additions are well-reasoned and fitted to the original story.
Nevertheless, the movie falls even further short of its predecessor for unnecessary changes, none more obvious than the portrayal of Peter and Susan. For the entire movie, Peter is moody and belligerent, fighting people back home in England for treating him like a kid "when he wasn't always a kid." He snubs Caspian on his first arrival, and constantly derides him as an invader with no more right to rule than his evil usurper uncle. This is a far cry from Lewis' book where Peter recognizes that Aslan has summoned him to Narnia to put Caspian in his place as king, not to regain it for himself. In the movie, it is Edmund who exemplifies the mature, calm one. And what can I say about Susan? The addition of a love interest between her and Caspian is not a major part of the movie but that almost makes it worse. The producers were so desperate to get it in there, they forced it in without trying to adapt the storyline. There is no hint that Caspian and Susan are in love until the final scene in Narnia where she kisses him. In the beginning, Susan snubs a geeky boy from school who is interested in her but again, there is no reason given for it or why it needed to be added to a story that did quite well without it. Susan also betrays a "Xenia Warrior-Princess" quality that is quite missing from the "Queen Susan the Gentle" that Lewis gave us, one that did not ride to war and never fought in a battle. I recognize the political correctness of our society demands a more activist role for any female characters but there are plenty of more modern tales that can be used in this way. LOTR didn't need it, nor does Narnia.
The movie improves on the older BBC versions due to the more modern equipment and the superior acting, but falls short on the angle of faithfulness to the story. I don't know if Doug Gresham is allowing his bitterness as a younger child to cloud the childrens' relationships in the story, but if he isn't going to be more faithful to his step-father's stories than that, he may as well resign as associate producer. Rank: 6.5 out of 10.
Nevertheless, the movie falls even further short of its predecessor for unnecessary changes, none more obvious than the portrayal of Peter and Susan. For the entire movie, Peter is moody and belligerent, fighting people back home in England for treating him like a kid "when he wasn't always a kid." He snubs Caspian on his first arrival, and constantly derides him as an invader with no more right to rule than his evil usurper uncle. This is a far cry from Lewis' book where Peter recognizes that Aslan has summoned him to Narnia to put Caspian in his place as king, not to regain it for himself. In the movie, it is Edmund who exemplifies the mature, calm one. And what can I say about Susan? The addition of a love interest between her and Caspian is not a major part of the movie but that almost makes it worse. The producers were so desperate to get it in there, they forced it in without trying to adapt the storyline. There is no hint that Caspian and Susan are in love until the final scene in Narnia where she kisses him. In the beginning, Susan snubs a geeky boy from school who is interested in her but again, there is no reason given for it or why it needed to be added to a story that did quite well without it. Susan also betrays a "Xenia Warrior-Princess" quality that is quite missing from the "Queen Susan the Gentle" that Lewis gave us, one that did not ride to war and never fought in a battle. I recognize the political correctness of our society demands a more activist role for any female characters but there are plenty of more modern tales that can be used in this way. LOTR didn't need it, nor does Narnia.
The movie improves on the older BBC versions due to the more modern equipment and the superior acting, but falls short on the angle of faithfulness to the story. I don't know if Doug Gresham is allowing his bitterness as a younger child to cloud the childrens' relationships in the story, but if he isn't going to be more faithful to his step-father's stories than that, he may as well resign as associate producer. Rank: 6.5 out of 10.
// posted by The Pendragon @ 12:58 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Wow! Quite the movie! I agree that I don't think Peter and Susan remained very faithful to the book. And that Susan was never meant to be a warrior. If they had to have a girl, it should have been Lucy. I don't know what you're talking about Douglas Gresham, he isn't at all bitter. I think from what I've heard that he has more say on sets and casting than he does on actual storyline. But all-in-all I think it's going to at least be a movie much much better than the BBC version.
Lily
Lily
# posted by 
: 8:20 PM
: 8:20 PM
Hello there, Lily. Welcome to the Hall. My comment on Doug Gresham being a bitter younger child was more the only reason I could imagine for the vendetta against Peter and Susan that these movies have been portraying. Susan as the jerk in the first movie, Peter as the jerk in the second one. I don't give a rat's hindquarters about the costumes and sets--they could be all purple. But I do care intensely about the storylines and the characters and this is what is annoying me about Disney's usual highhandedness with the plot.
Post a Comment
<< Home
