Just Saw "Narnia"...it Sucked

n/a | 12-27-05 | Bob J

[luckystarmom]

Have you ever looked at the stories that you are comparing.

The LOTR books have over 1000 pages.each.

The Harry Potter books have over 700 pages each.

The Chronicles of Narnia have less than 150 pages each. They are made for 8 & 9 year olds to read.

You cannot get that much information out of a book that is less thank 150 pages.

[frogjerk]

The Magician's Nephew, there is much that you will not understand if you haven't read the preceding five books

I just read it (Chronicles of Narnia) for the first time and I disagree. I read the first book as if it was the beginning of the story. Yes, there were somethings that kept me guessing but they filled themselves in by the end of the story. This is what kept my interest in reading the rest of the books.

I don't think you lose anything from reading them chronologically, in fact, I think I would have not liked reading them out of sequence.

[cake_crumb]

Thans. The guy at the bookstore (she was going to buy the editions they had seperately in the hope of owning the whole collection when the bookstores reordered) told her it would be cheaper to wait until they restocked and that the whole series bound together should be under $20 dollars.

[freepertoo]

I don't think I should offer an opinion. I liked "The Fantastic Four" so what do I know? :-D

Actually, I haven't seen the movie yet. I discovered the book as a child (not knowing it had Christian undertones) and I loved it dearly..read it over and over. I *am* a Christian and when I read LW&W later in life I was delighted all over again when I recognized the "hidden" message.

[RaginRak]

Took my son, daughter-in-law and grandson to see it. We all enjoyed it. yOu have to have a free imagination to let it entertain you. Some parts were a little too intense for little kids.

[AnAmericanMother]

Well, since you can only read them for the first time ONCE . . . I guess we'll never know.

I think the important thing is to READ them, though.

My kids still quote scads of dialogue from the book (after 50 years, I have all seven almost committed to memory). We were skiing on a BSA Venture Crew trip when my daughter came hauling down the slope, skis parallel, screaming, "Beware! Beware! Beware! The Bolt of Tash falls from above!" Of course she wiped out, and I skied over to the snow-covered heap and inquired, "Does it ever get caught on a hook half way?"

[BradyLS]

If you read TMN first, you don't have any questions about Narnia.

It does help to read the books in the order the author finally intended, but that's not the order they were written or published. And my one sympathy to the reviewer is that the movie should stand on its own without relying on the book(s) to fill the gaps. But I did see the movie, loved it, and find the reviewer's complaints basically an effort at baiting.

[Miss Marple]

I will let you know after tomorrow. We are going with our grandchildren, son, daughter, and spouses, along with two nieces. All of us have read the books except my husband and my daughter-in-law.

Bob, most of your complaints are unfair, since what you really don't like is the premise and the plot. As I understand it, the movie faithfully follows the books, so your complaint is really with C.S. Lewis. Had the children been of exagerrated importance, had there been a scientific explanation for the parallel world, etc., most of us who have read the books would be outraged.

I am sorry you didn't like it, but as someone hinted to you before, God uses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.

[Restorer]

Mr. Tomnas (as pronounced in the movie) was half fawn, half man. Not goat.

Mr. Tumnus was all faun.

He was not a fawn, a man or a goat. Not by halves or wholes.

[Bob J]

You argue your points from the standpoint of reading the books. Fair enough. However, my comments relate strictly to it's impressions on me as an adult seeing the movie without reading the books....as will 99.5% of viewers.

If they are going to make a movie into a book, and much more so it it's from a series, the producers and director must do it such a way as those who haven't read the books will understand and accept the plot, as well as bond with the main characters.

All I'm saying is this movie didn't do that.

[ThisLittleLightofMine]

I respectfully disagree and am wondering if you have read the "The Magicians Nephew" it might answer some of your questions.

I grew up loving these books and am very happy with the adaptation. However the witch did not look like the witch I had envisioned as a child.

[frogjerk]

And there's no reason to have made the second one.

You are forgetting Hollywood Welfare, otherwise known as expensive "movie tickets."

Selling these consist of suckering the American public into buying an inferior product based on 30 second commercials of sequels containing the "best" clips of the so-called movie!

These 30 second commercials consist of gratuitous boob shots, kicks to the groin, sexual innuendo, Gay-love, Blasphemes, etc...

Then people go out and spend their hard-earned money on these wastes of time and complain while Hollywood elites only get richer, go on Oprah, bash the President and the troops, curse God and family, and the like...

Sorry for the rant... ;)

[GLDNGUN]

Ok, so what order should the books be read in?

I read all the books as a kid and loved them. I think the Silver Chair was the first book in the series that I read, only because it was a gift.

My wife is eager to read the books because she didn't read them as a kid, but LOVED the movie (hear that, BobJ?).

So for someone who hasn't read the books, in what order should they be read for maximum enjoyment?

[Enterprise]

I just saw the Island the other day at a friend's house. I don't know why I missed it at the theater. I think the previews must not have been impressive. It should have done a hell of a lot better!

[cuz_it_aint_their_money]

OK, I’ll put my two cents worth in.

Yes I did see Narnia, and I’ve read the books as well. The movie was pretty good and the actors did a very good job portraying the characters that CS described in the book. I will admit, after all the publicity hype, the movie wasn’t the overwhelming success I had come to expect, but I certainly wouldn’t say it “Sucked.”

I’d also like to add that I was disappointed in the latest Harry Potter movie. Yes the book is over 700 pages long, and yes the movie couldn’t be expected to follow the book that closely. However, I thought the editing in this movie was too choppy and I’d be willing to bet a lot of story development got left on the cutting room floor just for the sake of limiting the movie to 2 ½ hours.

[ApplegateRanch]

Yes, children should be brutally murdered for teasing.

I would have loved to have called out a she bear to disembowl that brat...but alas... where have all the she bears gone?

Go back, and look at the word you show as translated 'children'. It is 'youths', in the same sense that the French car burners were 'youths'. They're in reality late teens or mostly 20-somethings.

I won't go into the religious connotations of what it meant for them to be calling him a 'bald pate', but it was far from a 'teasing' about his age.

As for where all the bears have gone, NJ anti-hunting ecofreaks have given them all sanctuary in their basements. Shhh! Don't tell them that they'll wake up in March very hungry

[AnAmericanMother]

Man . . . talk about same planet, different worlds.

I don't know how you managed to miss every single important thing about this film . . . that must be some sort of record.

I think the basic problem is that you're approaching it as a grownup . . . and you can't. It's not a grownup's movie and the books aren't for grownups or even for big kids - I would peg them at the 7-8 year old level. I first read them when I was 6.

I will say that, although you can enjoy the movie without the books, it helps to have read them first. I think (I can't really remember when I HADN'T read them.)

A bunch of my 17 y.o. daughter's friends went to see it together, and they were kind enough to let an old lady tag along. They all loved it to distraction - boys and girls between the ages of 15 and 18. One kid who is an exchange student from Croatia was a little bit puzzled about the other kids' very strong reactions to the film -- he thought it was pretty good but didn't understand why everyone was having such an emotional reaction (several of the girls were in tears, and I sniffled a little myself). All the other kids fell over themselves trying to explain, one girl summed it up pretty well I think: "This is our CHILDHOOD!" There's a nostalgia among teens (and grownups) who remember their moms and dads reading this book to them . . . sort of the same thing that drives some of the Winnie-the-Pooh mania. A FReeper whose name I can't remember pointed out that it's kind of like watching home movies -- if you know the folks involved it's a much more intense experience!

[luckystarmom]

I liked it. The objections that Bob J have with the movie are because it is just one of a series of books. You leave the movie with questions. However you leave with less questions than the first of the LOTR trilogy.

[frogjerk]

At this point one would conclude he was irredeemable...but they try to redeem him anyway.

You are missing the point, especially from a Christian standpoint.

[stocksthatgoup]

'Just Saw "Narnia"...it Sucked' I must have seen a different version. Too bad you missed the good one. It was GREAT.