Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Just Saw "Narnia"...it Sucked
n/a | 12-27-05 | Bob J

Posted on 12/27/2005 11:28:47 AM PST by Bob J

After reading all the hype in the media and on FR, I was excited to see the film of the CS Lewis book. I have to say I was disappointed. For all it's grandiosity and provenance, I found it clunky, sometimes difficult to follow and worse, unbelieveable (even a "fantasy" movie must reasonable enough in the story and behavior of it's characters to hurdle the initial "willing suspension of disbelief")

The religious basis and backdop to the story has been argued at length on FR, so let's leave that at the doorstep and discuss it's cinematic achievements, or lack thereof.

The Story.

This may have been why I had a problem with the movie. After the presentation of the premise and the characters, I found myslef resisting acceptance that an entire fantasy world filled with magic, mythologic creatures, witches, generals and armies was waiting for a four small children to come and save their world....by prophecy and design. It would have been more believeable if they happened into the world by accident and through clever plot twists were responsible for the salvation of Narnia. But there was nothing really special about these kids, no ancestors with a special connection/knowledge to Narnia, no special abilities, expertise or talents, They were not exceptional in any way...they were just kids. Why did the land of Narnia need them? They added nothing that wasn't already there and in fact detracted from it.

The opening.

The setup took far too long. I wasn't watching my watch but it must have taken over 20-30 minutes for the first kid to walk out the back of the wardrobe closet into the land of Narnia. I didn't understand the emphasis placed on this part of the book as it had little to do with subsequent events. Did it matter that much to the story that the the kids were sent off to the professor because their mother was concerned about the danger of WWII? There was a passing reference later about being shipped off to avoid the effects of war only to be dropped in the middle of the war in Narnia (and whether they should get involved at all), but it fell limply to the ground.

The characters.

Ouch. Let's go by the numbers.

The Professor and his maid (?).

Good cop bad cop. The maid is stern, the professor, kind. So what? The movie feints toward this professor knowing more about Narnia and the wardrobe, but it leaves it there. You think he is going to add some specific knowledge or experience that the kids might benefit from (if not be involved himself) but they movie drops it and he becomes a useless figure in the overall plot. Why waste screen time on it?

Lucy - A typical, precocious, British eight year old. The most likeable character in the movie (which might not be saying much) but I grow weary of the English tendancy to cast their child characters beyond their years. I had three "laugh" moments in this movie, two concerning her. First, when she hits the bullseye with her magic "knife" and then when she "flashes it" and heads off to vanquish the armies of evil. A real laugher.

Susan - The most annoying, negative character in the movie. At first I made parallels to Wendy from "Peter Pan, but you believed Wendy was concerned about the younger children while Susan comes off as a party killing shrew. They needed to soften this character but didn't. Throughout most of the movie I kept wondering when she was going to use those damn arrows...had to wait until the last 2 minutes and by then it was anticlimatic.

Edmund - The anti-hero who becomes hero. I busted out laughing (third instance) when they put he and his brother in those stupid looking suits of armor. We are asked to believe this 10 and 14 year old are going to take part in a "Braveheart" type battle with huge warriors and mythological creatures and vanquish all? I might have believed it if they were given extrahuman strength, speed and agility. Even with their magic "implements" the battle scenes with these two were comical. Think of William Wallace in a sword fight with Doogie Howser.

Peter - Peter is supposed to be the 14 year old hero of the story, protecting his siblings while winding their way through the dangers of a mystical kingdom. The residents of Narnia wait for his arrival to lead their armies of druids and gargoyles againt the forces of evil in a final battle of epic proportions and historic finality. Sorry. Through the first 4/5ths of the movie Peter comes off as an effeminate British girlie boy and it is too much to ask the audience to believe he is the saviour of Narnia. Why would they want or need him?

The Witch - Huh? Tilda Swinson does comes off as an evil bitch but I never did beleive she, or anyone, would want to be the King or Queen of Narnia. It would be like Sauron of Moldor and his legions of Orks waging an epic battle for the control of The Shire. Snooze.

That's my nutshell of a take. If you ave seen narnia and would like to comment, feel free to do so but let's keep it clean.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: moviereview; narnia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 461-462 next last
To: Alouette
I saw "Kingdom of Heaven" (the Orlando Bloom crusades movie) and I wish that I could get back those wasted 2 hours of my life. That movie was one giant vaccuum cleaner.

I agree. That movie stunk. I felt like I needed a degree in the history middle ages to keep up with the nuances in the plot.

161 posted on 12/27/2005 12:35:42 PM PST by Fzob (Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: abner
The movie left me wondering about the books I read as a kid. Now that I have read them again, they are VERY simplistic. I still like them though.

The simplest stories are usually the best.

162 posted on 12/27/2005 12:36:55 PM PST by frogjerk (LIBERALISM - Being miserable for no good reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
My complaint was that they didn't build up Aslan at all. He was on the screen for I think 3 short scenes and then he sacrificed himself. It wasn't long enough to allow the audience to have any emotional investment in him.

For a terrific film on the WRONG way to do incarnation, see John Candy's Delerious.

163 posted on 12/27/2005 12:37:43 PM PST by TomSmedley (Calvinist, optimist, home schooling dad, exuberant husband, technical writer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
"It has only made 130 million and it cost 215 million to make. It will tank and end up costing the companies that made it go in the red."

Huh?? It's grossed $153,800,000 in the US alone, $229,660,000. Total cost, including production and advertizing was about $211,000. It's paid for itself. Not by much, but it's not going into the red.

164 posted on 12/27/2005 12:38:19 PM PST by cake_crumb (Leftist Credo: One Wing to Rule them All and to the Darkside Bind them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom
You sure you don't mean Voyage of the Dawn Treader?

IMO that book is by far the best of the series. Lewis' vision of the end of earth was just fantastic.

165 posted on 12/27/2005 12:38:39 PM PST by Fzob (Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte

Wow! that sounds yummy.

Enjoy


166 posted on 12/27/2005 12:38:42 PM PST by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: GLDNGUN

To be sure, I meant Voyage of the Dawn Treader (the 3rd book) not Prince Caspian (the 2nd book). I liked TLTW&TW but didn't much care for the rest other than VotDT.


167 posted on 12/27/2005 12:39:18 PM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
You mean ALL of his books are bound into one? Wow....my daughter is planning to re-buy the series in the bound-together edition. I hope it was REAL expensive.

Not really, $17.99 on Amazon...


168 posted on 12/27/2005 12:39:25 PM PST by frogjerk (LIBERALISM - Being miserable for no good reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

We are going to see Cheaper 2 on Friday and watched Cheaper 1 again on DVD yesterday - Steve Martin is the best.


169 posted on 12/27/2005 12:40:40 PM PST by Cathy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
Um...make that $229,660,000 worldwide.

**sigh**....more coffee...

170 posted on 12/27/2005 12:40:46 PM PST by cake_crumb (Leftist Credo: One Wing to Rule them All and to the Darkside Bind them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: SolidRedState
Both my kids had to read this book in 4th grade.

Both said it was the worst book ever written, and stand by that feeling today 12 and 16 years later.

And some people don't like a perfectly cooked cheeseburger with fries and a shake, either.

Some things just can't be explained.

171 posted on 12/27/2005 12:41:14 PM PST by GLDNGUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Bob J

Why do people watch so many movies anyway? I think suspending one's disbelief in a theatre is pretty infantile to tell you the truth.


172 posted on 12/27/2005 12:41:40 PM PST by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
I found no affinity, much less any sympathy, with the main characters.

Lucy- Liked the best but a little too precocious and they made her a little too sweet...since they later turn her into a rampaging Ork killing warrior. For that she needed an edge they never gave her.

Susan - Buzzkiller. She'll be replacing Tilda Swinson as Ice Witch in the next installment.

Edmund - Snotty brat. After he sees what the witch did to fawn boy he still goes to her castle for some Krispy Creme. At this point one would conclude he was irredeemable...but they try to redeem him anyway.

Peter - Too feminine. I like to think of my heroes as manly...not ask them to do interior design work.
173 posted on 12/27/2005 12:41:42 PM PST by Bob J (RIGHTALK.com...a conservative alternative to NPR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Cathy

I think you'll like it better than 1. Let me know.


174 posted on 12/27/2005 12:41:48 PM PST by Fierce Allegiance (I miss my dad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
That is why it is not making any money. It has only made 130 million and it cost 215 million to make. It will tank and end up costing the companies that made it go in the red.

Narnia isn't doing that bad. It has made $163,544,000 , #10 Box Office in 2005 , and has pretty good legs, making $30 million last weekend, its third. Its production budget was $180 million, not $215 M.

It has made 23 times what the homo cowboy movie has done.

175 posted on 12/27/2005 12:43:33 PM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: luckystarmom

I thot it was terrific. And beautiful. And heroic. And well-acted. And true to the books. CS Lewis wasn't quite up to your standards?? haha.


176 posted on 12/27/2005 12:43:38 PM PST by bboop (Stealth Tutor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk; luckystarmom
Frog, you're right in a way, but also wrong.

When MacMillan reissued the books in the U.S., back I think in the 80s (with new illustrations by Pauline Baynes), the American publishers changed the order to Narnian chronology instead of the order in which the books were written.

The problem with that approach is that Narnia grew as Lewis produced the books over a period of years, so that when you read The Magician's Nephew, there is much that you will not understand if you haven't read the preceding five books. It comes first in the reordered series, and I think that's a mistake because too much is assumed by the author, who thinks you've already read the others.

I read the whole series when I got the books for Christmas when I was 6 -- a long, long time ago (they had just been published as a set for the first time in the U.S. . . . < eek >) I wish I could read them again for the first time!

177 posted on 12/27/2005 12:43:46 PM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . Ministrix of ye Chace (recess appointment), TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Cathy

I gotta neg on this one - to anyone who read "Cheaper by the Dozen," a very good book btw, the first movie was a lame bastardization. And there's no reason to have made the second one.


178 posted on 12/27/2005 12:44:11 PM PST by Xenalyte (MILF! MILF! MILF! MILF!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
I don't know what's worse , denying myself to see Kingdom of Heaven or seeing it and walking away even more dissapointed than had I never saw it.

A Kerryesque flip flop wouldn't you say/

179 posted on 12/27/2005 12:44:21 PM PST by bubman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Bob J
Oh, you're such an adult.

Lewis himself actually articulated your believability argument better than anyone else I've ever read. But all I can do is paraphrase: it's ok for an imaginary world to have talking animals; they simply must talk as if they would if they really talked; in other words, an imaginary world must be consistent with its own rules.

Which is where you miss it, because you are missing that Narnia is an imaginary children's world, not an imaginary adult's world.

In Braveheart, we wouldn't expect anybody to win a swordfight except by training, because, well, it is still our universe, though a different time.

But in Middle Earth, for example, did you happen to notice that hobbits killed huge goblins with little daggers? That a lady killed a witch-king who had decimated entire armies of male warriors -- because some prophecy or other said "no man" could kill him?

In an imaginary children's world, hobbits and ladies and, yes, boys actually do win swordfights with goblins, because of their courage and their goodness. Unbelievable, you say? then it's been too long since you were a boy.

You missed everything important about every character. Lucy's character was based not on her "cuteness", and not just on her age, but on her goodness. The principle being that those who are good perceive a different world than those who are bad. You notice she always perceived what the others missed: Narnia, the fauns in the fire, the dryad, Aslan leaving the camp, Aslan leaving the world.

The point of Susan's character was not her tendency to kill fun; it was her reductionist logic, which chopped off entire chunks of the cosmos for her.

The point of Peter's character was the question of whether or not he would be willing to take his father's place and take responsibility for the others -- to the point of self-sacrifice. He did do that, of course.

And so on. You missed everything. Only boards in the back of your wardrobe.

180 posted on 12/27/2005 12:48:24 PM PST by Taliesan (The power of the State to do good is the power of the State to do evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 461-462 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson