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.
As opposed to the other 99% of Hollywood that is nothing more than front for left wing, America hating atheists.
We also ate right before we went in...maybe that should be the warning to Narnia movie-goers...don't eat...heheh.
No offense, but you're splitting a lot of hairs.
I understand most of what you say, but again, where did the Ice Queen's magic come from?
As for Medved, he has his opinion...one that I rarely follow b/c we disagree was to what is a good film more often than not. Medved's reviews are based on his moral beliefs. That's fine...just not my benchmark for movie criteria. If a movie makes me laugh, I enjoy it whether or not Medved thinks Jesus would approve of it.
Medved is actually an observant Jew - so Jesus' approval probably isn't much of a factor.
I don't think the Narnia characters in LWW know where the witch came from. That is what awaits in The Magician's Nephew.
British kids and clowns both taste funny.
This reminds me of the old riddle, 'Why don't cannibals eat clowns?'
The point is that Medved's reviews are based on his morals founded in religion...not my basis for determining what constitutes a good movie.
Because they taste like British kids?
Medved made no comment about Jesus, Christianity, or morals - - he just said he thought the movie stunk. He especially thought that Will Ferrell was miscast as the Nazi playwright.
Whic is why I respect reviewers like Ebert and Kael. They may be dyed-in-the-wool liberal scumbags—but they know what they are talking about when it comes to film criticism.
I may find their politics despicable, but their writing is engaging and thought-provoking.
The problem with old riddles is everyone knows the correct answer.
For a drama, Ferrell would have been miscast. It is a c-o-m-e-d-y. Ferrell was perfect for the role. But feel free to rely upon Medved's advice. I could care less. I simply gave my feedback when requested by another FReeper.
Yes, the bombing of London is essential to the beginning of the story and the reason for most of Edmond's bad behavior, not to mention the set up for them to meet the professor, who is important in later books, and his wardrobe.
As promised, I've now returned from the movie with my wife and two daughters (ages 5 and 7). The movie was excellent -- and those who claim there's little religious imagery in the film simply don't understand Christianity.
Wonderful movie. Two thumbs up.
...but I don't appreciate the coarse descriptive word that forms your opinion.
Wish you would have been more selective and gracious.
I really detest the common & vulgar usage of this word in polite society.
Flame me if you will.....and I know there are those who probably will.
Thanks...it's not my kind of movie at all.....my sister wanted to see it. I'm declining....sorry sis.
I won't. My children use that word, and I have told them that is really a cuss word. They were shocked. I think people use it so much that no one remembers that at one time it was considered a cuss word.
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.