Posted on 01/11/2006 8:36:00 AM PST by presidio9
I was all wrong about "Narnia."
Which is to say, about six months ago in this space I was hell-bent on the white-hot idea that Hollywood and the Christian-right group/billionaire that helped produce the tepid and saccharine flick would absolutely ruin "The Chronicles of Narnia" books, ruin the deep magic and the astounding sense of wonder these books held for millions of children (including this writer) by regurgitating them as a slick, dumbed-down, poorly acted smarm-fest full of ham-fisted Jesus allusions and excessive special effects, all from the director who brought you, ahem, "Shrek 2."
Things did not, shall we say, look good.
Truly, I was of the mind that the "Narnia" books, to my dreamy, rose-colored memory, were these insanely rich and ingenious tales, dense and deeply involved anecdotes of children exploring a phenomenally magical world that was so utterly not of this grungy, terrestrial plane it might as well have been Pluto. Like many, my time-addled vision elevated the books to the status of utter genius, largely due to the feeling of unchecked awe I can still recall them providing. And I was absolutely sure Hollywood would rape that memory for all the pseudo-Christian bullcrap and Burger King tie-ins it possibly could.
I was wrong. Sort of. Hollywood didn't actually ruin "Narnia." Hollywood didn't cheapen it all that much, or reduce it down or remove much of the original majesty by injecting it with too much CGI and not enough heart. Rather, Hollywood has done something even more depressing: It's revealed "The Chronicles of Narnia" books to be what they actually are: a rather lean slice of delightfully wrought but fairly simpleminded, largely hobbled fantasy for the imagination-deprived single-digit set.
I have now seen the movie. -snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
No, that would be Dan Savage, our own local, divine Ms. M. He licked the doorknobs at Gary Bauer's office (he says) to see if he could make him sick.
That's his story, anyway...I'm thinking he was looking at the doorknob, and it looked so shiny and hard and smooth, he just wanted to touch it with his tongue...
Then someone walked by...
And Aslan, when all his appearances are taken together.
> I actually didn't like the movie that much. Not sure what it was, but the characters just felt flat.
Same here. I went in thinking that I'd come out wanting to read the books, but... eh. As you say, the characters are pretty flat, and the White Witch just ain't that impressive. And Aslan, while a technological marvel, is a non-entity of a character. Even the "sacrifice" was pretty banal, since it was actually a lesson in proper back-stabbing.
Oh, well. Hopefully Artemis Foul will make it to the big screen...
The books are great, the movie was great. Morford sucks.
Hah! His inner child loved the movie and he hates that. He spanked him and sent him to his room without dinner.
I learned a lot about Morford's basic bitterness about life in general by reading this review. He's actually giving the movie a good review, and it gnaws at him that he can't bring himself to fully hate it.
A telling view into a twisted soul is his view of the actress playing the White Witch as "sexy" and that devils and villains are always the most interesting characters.
While villains certainly do bring complex themes at times, it is curious that he cannot grasp the magnificence of the role of the hero across the history of literature. He identifies with the wrong side of the story. Not the first or last time that's ever happened.
And if a sickly, gaunt, pasty villain with a clearly diseased mind can somehow be viewed as "sexy" then perhaps we've learned all we need to know.
Remember Narnia when you see Brokeback Mountain score a hundred Oscar nominations. It has nothing to do with the sales of the movies...it has to do with foppish, whiny "artists" pandering to their peers and telling the rest of us to shut up and buy their spew...after all, Hollywood is much smarter than we are!
How I long for the Hollywood of sixty years ago when the Studio moguls ran it all. Movies were marketed TO the Midwest, and if Tallula Bankhead was a lesbian, they had people paid to ensure it never was uttered in the media. Don't get me wrong, Hollywood has always been unspeakably corrupt...but at one time, they at least were ashamed of it.
Reepicheep is the best written character.
Leave it to hoMorford to get the words "sucked" and "fisted" in in the first 50 words.
Reep was always a favorite -- as was the DLF -- but IMO he was overdramatized in Dawn Treader -- a few too many cutesy scenes.
Thank you for posting the Hendonism-Bot pic. I didn't want to Google the word "hendonism" at work...
Well excuse me for enjoying it, Mr. Mofo........, er I mean Morford.
Kind of like the Democratic Party's platform these last few elections?
A Miss Mark Morford rant. Spray the screen with Lysol after reading.
}:-)4
BTW, when I post Morford, I don't usually bother reading the articles. I made an exception here. Mark's biggest criticism of the books is based on a misunderstanding of the the simple point the author is making. She can't understand why the children are so accepting of strange new worlds.
Morford obviously did not read all of the books, like she said, or she would have realized that Estauce, the most prominent liberal athiest character can not come to terms with the fact that he is in a strange world for at least half the book. He keeps asking to be taken to the British Consulate, and complains that he never could stand performing animals.
Also Morford claims that her newfound perspective the Christian themes of Narnia have ruined it for her. Henceforth, she says she will stick with Tolkein. I'm wondering here if anybody has the heart to tell her the CS Lewis and Tolkein were best friends. TLOTR is full of Christian metaphors. Or did she think it became a literary classic because it was the first book that ever had dragons in it. She probably thinks "The Once & Future King" is about Arthur too.
ping
Reep was like a cartoon character, in that he had a set persona that was always over the top. He needed to be that way for Lewis to make the point that he was trying to make about bravery.
This is not the first time you asked this question. I'm missing the point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.