Prince Caspian
by Ted Slater on 05/15/2008 at 1:53 PM
It's been almost five years since the release of the final movie in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. If you're pining for Middle Earth, with its walking trees, Fangorn forest, vengeful waters, dwarfs, epic battles, catapults, sword fights and such, then Prince Caspian is for you.
I saw it a couple of nights ago, along with a theater full of others who'd been invited to catch it before its official release tonight at midnight.
I had no idea what to expect, having not read the books. I thought it was a lot of fun, to be honest. Slick CGI, good acting, interesting plot, gripping battle scenes, and so on. It's better, in my opinion, than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but not as good as The Best Movie Ever Made, of course.
This is not a kid's movie. Though there's not much blood, it is quite violent.
I was disappointed that the scriptwriters had Susan give a pretty impassioned kiss to Prince Caspian moments before leaving Middle Earth Narnia. I don't think C.S. Lewis would have approved of his character's intentional defrauding of a man who was destined to marry someone else.
Regardless, I thought it was a fun movie. Before you decide whether or not to see it, as with any movie, I'd strongly encourage you to read reviews about it. Plugged In Online is a great place to start.
1. Joy W. said the following at 2:05 PM on May 15:
Susan and Caspian kissing? No, that's not supposed to happen. :(
Still planning on seeing it with some friends this weekend though!
2. Al said the following at 2:22 PM on May 15:
Wasn't Susan also the Pevensie who didn't make it to Narnia in the last book, because by then she'd become a conceited woman by Lewis's description, who was "interested in nothing now-a-days except nylons and lipstick and invitations"? I assume a catty approach to boys comes with that territory. Even if C.S. Lewis hadn't written her that way by the second book, this could foreshadow her eventual development. Don't know if that's the film makers' intent, though.
3. CrochetDiva said the following at 2:24 PM on May 15:
Whah-huh-HUTTTTTTT???????? Susan + Caspian.... EEEEEWWWWW!!!!! Urm... wasn't Caspian rather...youngish when he first became king? In the BBC version, he barely looks 12!!
I'm getting tired of Disney's tweakings of The Chronicles. Why, oh why do they feel the need to co-opt Peter Jackson's spin on LotR and do the same thing to TCoN? (Gotta turn any battle into a huge, CGI-filled sequence.) Silly, silly money-hungry nincompoops. They just don't get it. The focus is supposed to be Aslan, not the drama of the plotline. I mean, that's why the kids go to Narnia in the first place.
I'm not saying skip the movie, folks. But read the books, whether you see the movie or not. The books are far more worth your time. (Ooh, wouldn't an audiobook version of TCoN be fun!?!)
4. Sam said the following at 2:38 PM on May 15:
Umm...the kissing didn't bother me so much as the long, drawn out battle scenes. I am a huge LOTR fan and appreciated that the "ew" factor was less apparent in Narnia. I have read the book and there wasn't nearly that much fighting...of course, there wasn't a lot of content either so they had to stretch it out.
I really enjoyed it, though, and recommend it to everyone. I like what the guy from Walden Media said. This story is about the Truth being lost after 1300 years. Our world today has lost the Truth. When you line that stuff up, it makes for a really poignant movie.
5. Jen said the following at 2:47 PM on May 15:
might want to put SPOILER ALERT on there....just a thought
6. Christina (in green) said the following at 2:55 PM on May 15:
I didn't know Caspian was promised to another =p
But then, I guess that's because in the books, he's much younger.
In the books, he's just a boy in Prince Caspian, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, he's a young man, and in the Silver Chair, he's the King and a rather old man I think...
7. Dr. Ransom said the following at 3:01 PM on May 15:
Neither do I approve of the non-canon Killer Moment at all, Ted -- either in the film or in this Christ-follower's pre-Mawwiage reality. But, they're just doing it for the Ben Barnes fangurlz (he's the guy playing Caspian himself).
I'm seeing the film in scarcely seven hours, for a midnight showing, and finally the "hype" is setting in!
Meanwhile, oh yes, your choice for "the best movie ever made," for me, is absolutely true. While preparing to click on your link I was telling myself, No, it's likely not The Return of the King; he's instead named Citizen Kane or Gone with the Wind or some-such nonsense as that. But no -- it actually was The Return of the King. A thousand hurrahs!
But what is this new devilry? You have not read the Narnia books? Hmm. Though Prince Caspian, structurally, is not as memorable as the other Chronicles of Narnia, I would highly recommend a reading of it and the other stories -- as doubtless have many of your Christ-following friends and Boundless co-workers!
By the way, though I almost always check the Plugged In review before seeing a film, for Prince Caspian I'll make an exception, in keeping with my sacred Monastic Vow against film spoilers. Yet I do highly recommend the site -- I read through the Iron Man review last week, paying particular attention to the third category (as I usually do), and thus, without much difficulties there, I'll very likely be seeing it as well, in coming weeks.
8. Christina (in green) said the following at 3:12 PM on May 15:
Yeah,
Accrding to the books, Caspian doesn't meet his wife until The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.
I still don't think its right that Susan kissed him, as apparently the movie did turn some things around (including his age)...
I always kinda thought Lucy had a thing for Caspian =p Well, she does in the 3rd book, anyway =p
9. Gina said the following at 3:27 PM on May 15:
I could be wrong, but I don't think the man who wrote "The Allegory of Love" would have lost much sleep over one kiss between a couple of teenagers. :-) (But I'm sure Dr. Ransom is right about the motive behind it! Gotta give the fangirls their SQUEEEs.)
10. BDB said the following at 3:42 PM on May 15:
Wow...this review does make me want to see someone lop off the head of an orc...
11. DannieA said the following at 4:00 PM on May 15:
wow Ted...I can't believe you've never read these books...
I guess all my classmates and I grew up with it because we went to our Christian Academy and the Libraries in our classrooms always had those.
I just read the book last night for review...yes I am a fast reader. I can read a 400 page book in an afternoon.
to all those who complain about the movie being slightly different from the book...please, what is the big deal, would you rather they were boring like the BBC ones or top notch so everyone can access and maybe become curious about C.S. Lewis and possibly become more aware of Christianity.
12. Lissa said the following at 4:37 PM on May 15:
Thanks for the review, but seriously, Ted, how can you have not read the books???
13. Kellie said the following at 4:49 PM on May 15:
You haven't read the books?!?!
14. Ashley S. said the following at 6:47 PM on May 15:
Though I love all of the "Chronicles", I do try to keep an open mind when I watch the adaptations. I don't mind little plot twists, chronological changes, or even the addition of "romances".
What I don't like is for an author's beliefs and themes to be completely reversed. C. S. Lewis was a firm believer in the differences in gender roles and would never have let Susan fight, let alone lead others into battle. I personally think that this was a HUGE mistake on Adamson's part.
P. S. I happen to like the BBC adaptations. Yes, it's low-budget and yes, the acting could have been better. However, it keeps the themes and spirit of the books. It especially does a wonderful job at keeping Aslan in the forefront. After all, he is the true center of all of these stories.
15. alex said the following at 7:49 PM on May 15:
Read the Books!!!!
My Goodness.
16. Cassandra said the following at 8:14 PM on May 15:
The "best made movie" is actually all three, haha. Depends which segment to click. Very clever :P
As with any movie adapted from the book, I would suggest reading the book before watching the movie, but keeping an open mind towards both. As a creative writing major, I've studied the process of both novel writing and movie script writing. Different things have to be taken into account, so even a well adapted movie will have alterations. Its not fair to dismiss a movie for not slavishly depicting every single scene.
However, at times, there will be a bit of the director's own opinion thrown into the editing mix, perhaps altering the very spirit and feel of the movie. Its good to judge the merits of the book and author's intention separately from the movie.
And of course, I always like to give my imagination a go at clothing the story in visuals before placing the movie version at the forefront of my mind. Seems today, children are losing that ability, and its a sad thing!
17. DannieA said the following at 12:18 AM on May 16:
FYI most movies have adaptations in them. It shouldn't be of any surprise.
18. Emily said the following at 2:50 AM on May 16:
I'm a huge fan of the books, and am pretty worried about how much they might have changed it, specially with hollywoods reputation with film versions of books. But I heard this interview on Air1.com with the co-producer & step-son of C.S. Lewis, Douglas Gresham, the other night and found it pretty encouraging. (http://www.air1.com/Connect/MorningShow.aspx ~under interviews)
19. Karina said the following at 6:21 AM on May 16:
I saw the movie @ 12:01am....EXCITED! No, very excited but extremely dissapointed. Not just because of a passionate kiss but the ENTIRE MOVIE. Its not the book. I cried at the end because like the world is trying to not speak of the truth and God the director/producer of this movie did the same. Aslan isnt in the entire movie he is given less authority than the I am sure C.S. Lewis has given him the the other books. I truly hope that people see the movie for what it is than for what it claims to be. A movie inspired by The Chronicles of Narnia rather then say its based. Because other than the names of the characters its nothing like what I read and pictured in my head. Sorry....but its the truth.
20. Pearl said the following at 7:43 AM on May 16:
I was disappointed that the scriptwriters had Susan give a pretty impassioned kiss to Prince Caspian moments before leaving Narnia. I don't think C.S. Lewis would have approved of his character's intentional defrauding of a man who was destined to marry someone else.
But Caspian wasn't engaged to be married to anyone in Prince Caspian (yes, I have read the books, many years ago, and I love them) so with all due respect your point is moot. :)
And -- having followed the link in your essay to Scott Croft's article --I emphatically do not believe that pre-marital kissing is sinful or 'defrauds' anyone who might get married in the future.
21. Gandalf from Valinor said the following at 8:51 AM on May 16:
I'm listening to the audio book now and I like it. Thanks for this review - I'll probably see it now.
In defense of Ted, who hasn't read all of the books yet, I have this to say: "Go back to the Shadow!"
22. K.S.R. Kingworth said the following at 11:04 AM on May 16:
Thanks for the post. And thanks for warning us about it not being for kids because of the violence. Always good to know ahead of time.
Thought you might want to take a peek at http://www.SecretSpeakers.com, a young adult fantasy that comes out this fall. It's like a Chronicles of Narnia meets Wizard of Oz.
23. Karina said the following at 11:11 AM on May 16:
You the whole point of going to see a movie based on a book its because you like the book not because you want to see how they butcher a movie just because its Hollywood.
24. Lee said the following at 12:52 PM on May 16:
I will not be taking my kids to see the violent garbage. And frankly I'm appalled that FotF would be promoting filth like this on their site. SHAME!
25. Christina (in green) said the following at 12:54 PM on May 16:
The person about Aslan not having as much authority -
Aslan wasn't very active in the the Prince Caspian and Voyage of the Dawn Treader books...so no surprise on less Aslan...
I can't see the movie til next week...but I'm dying to see it.
26. Karina said the following at 1:50 PM on May 16:
Like I said Aslan is not in much of the movie but if I am not wrong the books where about the Lion and the kids. In the new movie its about characters that had of little value in the book.
27. DannieA said the following at 2:24 PM on May 16:
Uh Karina,
have you read the books lately? Aslan isn't in Prince Caspian all that much...so why is it a surprise...?
Lee--let's just say that the movie is a lot more family friendly then 90% of things out there. That being said, everyone has a choice of whether to see it or not.
28. MaryBeth said the following at 5:22 PM on May 16:
If you want an amazing way to 'read' the books that is incredibly accurate, than listen to Focus on the Family's Radio Theatre version. It it totally worth it!
29. J.T. said the following at 7:15 PM on May 16:
I think the kissing was unnessecary. I got downright angry when during that scene. I was even made moreso by the fact that Susan was toying with that other boy at the beginning of the film! What hypocrisy.
30. ST said the following at 9:33 PM on May 16:
Lee, take a chill pill man. Do you even know what these movies are about? If you think this is trash, I'd sure like to know what you consider treasure!
31. DEH said the following at 12:11 AM on May 17:
Despite some of the changes, I absolutely loved the movie. I think they took a difficult book to adapt to film and made it work really well without ruining the story. I'd love to go see it again.
32. Christina said the following at 12:13 AM on May 17:
Karina,
I couldn't agree with you more :( Although it was a well-made movie, it had NOTHING in common with the book Prince Caspian... The characters had the same names, but that's about it... Peter was a jerk, Caspian was a 20 yr old jerk (when he should have been about 10 or 12, which makes the fact that Miraz is still ruling over the kingdom make sense b/c Caspian's still a child his uncle is his guardian), Susan was in all the fight scenes and romantically involved w/ Caspian (um.... eeew!), and at least 75% of the events in the movie DID NOT occur in the book EVER (the bits that were actually somewhat based on Prince Caspian were so chopped up and rearranged that they lost all meaning.... It's sad that so many people will see this and think that it's C.S. Lewis' story... :(
*PS: I'm not one of those crazy purists who freaks out if a movie isn't exactly like a book... I fully expected some things to be changed in taking the story from the page to the screen, that's only natural.... However, when the ONLY thing that the book and the movie have in common is the title, one wonders why the filmmakers didn't just name it something else?
33. Christina said the following at 12:38 AM on May 17:
btw... I was so sad to see that this part (which always makes me cry when I read it b/c it ministers to me so much) was one of the only things left in the movie, but it was so horribly butchered and out of order that it didn't make sense...
Here's what Lewis wrote:
"… You have work in hand, and much time has been lost today."
"Yes, wasn't it a shame?" said Lucy. "I saw you all right. They wouldn't believe me. They're all so—"
From somewhere deep inside Aslan's body there came the faintest suggestion of a growl.
"I'm sorry," said Lucy, who understood some of his moods. "I didn't mean to start slanging the others. But it wasn't my fault anyway, was it?"
The Lion looked straight into her eyes.
"Oh, Aslan," said Lucy. "You don't mean it was? How could I – I couldn't have left the others and come up to you alone, how could I? Don't look at me like that… oh well, I suppose I could. Yes, and it wouldn't have been alone, I know, not if I was with you. But what would have been the good?"
Aslan said nothing.
"You mean," said Lucy rather faintly, "that it would have turned out all right – somehow? But how? Please, Aslan! Am I not to know?"
"To know what would have happened, child?" said Aslan. "No. Nobody is ever told that."
"Oh dear," said Lucy.
"But anyone can find out what will happen," said Aslan. "If you go back to the others now, and wake them up; and tell them you have seen me again; and that you must all get up at once and follow me – what will happen? There is only one way of finding out."
"Do you mean that is what you want me to do?" gasped Lucy.
"Yes, little one," said Aslan.
"Will the others see you too?" asked Lucy.
"Certainly not at first," said Aslan. "Later on, it depends."
"But they won't believe me!" said Lucy.
"It doesn't matter," said Aslan.
"Oh dear, oh dear," said Lucy. "And I was so pleased at finding you again. And I thought you'd let me stay. And I thought you'd come roaring in and frighten all the enemies away – like last time. And now everything is going to be horrid."
"It is hard for you, little one," said Aslan. "But things never happen the same way twice. It has been hard for us all in Narnia before now."
Lucy buried her head in his mane to hide from his face. But there must have been magic in his mane. She could feel lion-strength going into her. Quite suddenly she sat up. "I'm sorry, Aslan," she said. "I'm ready now."
34. Pearl said the following at 2:55 AM on May 17:
To Lee, no. 24.
I will not be taking my kids to see the violent garbage. And frankly I'm appalled that FotF would be promoting filth like this on their site. SHAME!
What an extraordinary post. One kiss constitutes 'filth'??? Have you ever read the Narnia books, Lee?
35. Ashley S. said the following at 6:55 AM on May 17:
Regarding Aslan's apparent absence from "Prince Caspian", I just wanted to say that I think that one of the best aspects of the Chronicles is that you can feel Aslan's presence and guidance even when you (or the characters) can't see him. He is there even when the old Narnians are beginning to doubt his existence, and he is there even when the Pevensies can't see him. As Shasta says in "The Horse and His Boy", "...he [Aslan] seems to be at the back of all the stories."
I think that that is what most of the commenters mean when they say that Aslan isn't "in" the movie as much as the book. His presence probably doesn't fill the screen as much as it did the pages.
36. BDB said the following at 2:56 PM on May 17:
Huh...I just saw the review in my local paper. They mentioned that the movie would be different than the Christ-like sacrifice made be Aslan in the last movie. In the newspaper.
37. jen said the following at 6:40 PM on May 17:
Just saw the movie this morning.
Enjoyed the movie - but - Quite Disappointed with the differences.
In the first movie, I felt the differences were useful-necessary-(even inspired!) in order to well-communicate the spirit of the book.
But this one, to me, seemed much more rearranged for Movie Making Purposes. To me, the book's spirit was sorely lacking in the Prince Caspian movie.
That kiss is just one example. I sat there picturing someone saying, "Oh, but we have to have a love interest. Otherwise no one will be 'interested'!" (Too bad they couldn't work in a good excuse to get this teenager into bed dressed only in a revealing sheet! Guess they had to compromise with a kiss instead.)
In the book, there's a sense of the Pevensies re-gaining their nobility progressively. (And they don't start off tooo badly either.)
Whereas in the movie Peter just came off as an annoyingly arrogant teenager, basically all the way through.
And Peter enthralled by the White Witch??? HUh?? What's up with that? And - much more offensive than that kiss, really - what's up with Susan's gratuitous, Un-Remarked (and totally un-called-for!) LIE, which bookends their Narnian experience? The kiss Might be arguable. ("Look, God never actually condemned pre-marital kissing.") But, in this world, I believe God has told us pretty distinctly that HE considers lying a no-no. And if I recall correctly, (ie The Horse and His Boy), Lewis didn't exactly endorse lying - even for good purpose! - in his worlds either.
In the first Narnia movie, all the changes seemed like movie making IN Service To The Book. It seemed made by people who loved Narnia.
But this time, Narnia seems to have been a convenient storyline for people who like to make movies. I think they made a reasonably good movie, without - (quite) - jettisoning the actual story. But, I think they missed the books spirit widely, by wide margin
I did enjoy watching it - but - I probably won't go again. (Like I did with the first one.) Also, due to the excessive & possibly frightening violence, I'd think twice about taking a child.
38. Jen said the following at 6:59 PM on May 17:
Oh - I know I just posted, but I walked away and suddenly found myself even more appalled. Something is wrong.
The comments posted here so far care about that kiss near the end. But, none so far have even mentioned the un-related lie that was added too.
WHY would Christians notice a kiss, and not the pointless lie that both far precedes and then follows again soon after?
Why would any of us be more angered over a Kiss than a Lie??
Something is very wrong with our world.
39. Caroline said the following at 7:56 PM on May 17:
I found the entire film disappointing -- it clearly wanted to be LotR but failed miserably.
Other issues:
1. Recycling too much music from LWTW
2. Lucy SITTING on the Stone Table(!)
3. Unneeded attraction and the ridiculous kiss between Susan and Caspian
4. The cheesy Telemarine accent
5. Heavy additions of scenes (crossbows in the bedroom, what?)
6. Reduction of Aslan's role
7. Walking trees. Do these people not know what dryads are??
8. Introduction of random schoolboy to eye Susan
9. More complete invoking of White Witch -- who doesn't make it back fully in the books
Need I go on? I wish this film had been better.
40. Yolanda said the following at 9:49 PM on May 17:
My husband & were also disappointed w/the kissing @ the end, but leave it to Disney/Hollywood for you. As Plugged In definitely recommends this film is NOT for 'tweens. Sadly, the kissing only encourages what Hollywood & let's face it Disney also do best, encourage impressionable young, perhaps even 'tweens that kissing someone you just met is OK, not! Call us old fashion (-;
I reread the PC the 1st wkend in May & glad I did. I'm still pleased the way the film was put together. Already looking fw'd to the 3rd installment!!
41. Phoebe said the following at 11:45 PM on May 17:
I agree wholeheartedly with your entire post, Ted Slater. I loved the movie, and am craving to see it again (unlike with the LWW), and I feel no need to 'qualify' most of the changes they made.
My main disappointment is that Susan would kiss Caspian. A kiss is like a spark that lights a fire. Why do that?
I wish there was a bit more of Caspian in it, since he sometimes takes a subordinate role to the four Pevensies, but maybe that'll change with the Voyage of the Dawn Treader!!!
As for the Christian themes, I felt it was very clear that this movie doesn't emphasize Aslan in the same way as the first one, but in a different way. It isn't emphasizing the substitutionary atonement of Aslan's death and resurrection, but the issue of trust in Aslan. Each of the characters must learn to trust Aslan, trust his will that he reveals even when it seems to contradict what they think makes sense. Aslan's messages are "Follow me. Wait for me. Seek to glorify me. Trust that I will come to save you." This is shown when Peter and Susan are tempted to believe that it is better to use common sense than to follow Lucy's vision of Aslan. Lucy chooses to follow her siblings in turning away, rather than follow the faith she has that she saw Aslan. Peter is tempted to do things for his own glory and not Aslan's. Caspian is tempted to give in to the 'dark magic' that is offered to him by Nikabrik rather than waiting for Aslan. (There is a nice moment here, where Edmund displays his sure faith in Aslan by helping Peter and Caspian resist the dark magic.) Narnians in general must decide to follow Aslan and their leaders.
And yes, moments of sacrifice shine through. A Minotaur (a good Narnian) sacrifices himself to hold open a gate for Narnians fleeing Miraz's castle. Peter risks himself by dueling Miraz to the death. Susan risks herself to shoot riders that are chasing her to let Lucy go free.
So yes, true themes from the book come through only more clearly in the movie. Beautiful moments from the book, such as the delightful journey of Susan and Lucy from Beruna, are not present, so the book is still beautiful and dear in its own form. But the movie has a new character, one that is like the book's character, but enhanced with new moments that are true and moving in their own way.
42. Marc said the following at 1:35 AM on May 18:
some quick background:
have read the books many, many times, and believe that they convey large, mysterious insights into the character of God through a fictional medium. I saw the first movie some nine times, on account of its usage in a youth ministry I was a part of, but disliked many parts of it.
I also just saw the midnight-oh-one showing of PC and would put my tally in the "don't bother" category, especially after re-reading the book yesterday.
I realize the difference between the mediums of children's book and cinematic feature necessitate some changes so I give some grace in the adaptation. Generally, I mentally lump any book-to-movie changes into three different categories, arranged in ascending order of outrage.
First, we have expansion and dramatization of certain plot points, meant to showcase the visual medium. Examples in PC would be turning Caspian's flight into a full-out pursuit and the hag/werewolf summoning scene. I'm totally cool with those, and feel like they add a lot.
Secondly, we have the re-arrangement, addition and subtraction of plot points to (ostensibly) improve story flow. I could go either way on these. Starting the story with Caspian's cousin being born instead of getting to that much later is fine, but Caspian blowing Susan's horn right off the bat changes things a bit much for my tastes.
Finally, and most abhorrently, is the addition / removal / changing of essential thematic elements. For example, the power struggle between Caspian and Peter was completely unnecessary, out of canon and tarnished both characters. But most of all, and this was my major problem with the first movie, as well, was the gross adjustment of the plot and the subtle adjustment of language away from the deity of Aslan. In the books (if you'll forgive me for invoking that dreaded phrase once more), Aslan is never, ever, out of control or out-of-the-know. He tells Lucy "no one is ever told what would have been," (book) not "we can't know what would have been" (movie). A subtle difference for some, but a world of character change to me. The reduction and deletion of the beautiful story of the group gradually seeing / following Aslan irked me, as it was a great image of how we, as believers, are asked to follow and obey an often invisible, yet completely powerful God.
Because Lewis gave no detail into the battles, some liberties there were okay, but it should be stated that every move made in the battles was a stall tactic done out of complete trust that Aslan would be the one to win the fight.
In case I haven't ruffled enough feathers (and I'm feeling sassy), here's some parting shots.
LOTR != CoN. Making that comparison shows an embarrassing level of ignorance. Additionally, they were terrible movie adaptations, namely due to the complete emaciation of the character of Aragorn. Viggo Mortensen? What were you thinking!
43. Laurel said the following at 4:10 AM on May 18:
OK. I don't think "Prince Caspian" was as good of a movie as "L,W, & W," but may be biased as "L,W, & W" is my favorite book of the series. As for the kiss, I think it was an acurate portrayal of who Susan becomes, and as such may not be exactly "by the book" but is not a betrayal of what C.S. Lewis wrote. There is violence, but the film makers did go out of their way to make it "ungory" as you never see any blood; that said I would not take a 5 or 6 year old to see it. I found the portrayal of Aslan to be quite accurate, he is not in the book for very much of it, but I did not think that fact took away any authority, if anything it illustrated his absolute power when he was there. I found the scene with the hag and wer wolf to be very well done according to the book, as well as most of the other pivotal scenes, such as the fight between Peter and Miraz, which was exactly like the book. In a practical sense, it is understandable that they aged Prince Caspian a few years; when it comes time to do "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" they can use the same actor for continuity, and won't have to age him much . . . that will work better for us moviegoers. All in all, I was happy with the movie, loved the soundtrack, and can't wait for the next one. I heard an interview about it that discussed "Christians making quality movies," and this is certainly quality.
44. Jonathan said the following at 10:12 AM on May 18:
SPOILER BELOW!
I was not that disappointed by the kiss. Actually, I wish Disney had used that little plot line as the only change it made.
What disappointed me MOST of all was the slaughter in the courtyard of the castle. That scene is not in the book AT ALL, it was very saddening and a horrible, horrible scene. To have all those mythical creatures trapped against a gate with arrows raining on them was completely and utterly unnecessary.
The book is thin in the sense that it all moves along almost too easy from tutoring to flight to hiding to "rescue" by Aslan, but I would have liked to see Disney not extend it with a tragic and saddening event like that. And yes, even without that scene, there was far more violent combat than in the book.
45. Claire said the following at 2:24 PM on May 18:
I agree with ST #30... I would say that kids need to be older to see this film, but to call it trash is harsh. With that said, I was disappointed in this movie. Can't really put my finger on why, but I was, as was my brother.
46. Gina said the following at 6:38 PM on May 18:
Susan wasn't toying with the other boy, she was trying to get away from him. As a female who's been there and done that, I know the signs!
47. Heather said the following at 7:14 PM on May 18:
After hearing the Focus on the Family interview about the Prince Caspian movie, I was very excited to see it and brought my whole family. Although I knew it would have violence, I noted the PG rating. Myself and my children who have read the book were shocked by how much the story was changed. I was particularly appalled by the scene in the tomb with the white witch. That is NOT something CS Lewis would have approved of, I am sure. It was terrifying and I felt like we were being cursed just listening to the hag's voice --what exactly DID that say??--and had to hide my child's eyes so she would not see that. THAT was DISNEY, not CS Lewis, and I am angry that CS. Lewis's son & focus on the family would think that scene was ok. I know there is evil in the world, and so did CS Lewis--but that scene was TOO strong & creepy for children. I expected that with Voldemort/Harry Potter stuff. NOT so with a Narnia release. Overall, as a Narnia lover I thought the special effects were great, but the writing really undercut the original themes of the novel. I am planning to write whoever I can to help make sure the future Narnia movies aren't so reduced.
48. Heather said the following at 7:16 PM on May 18:
After hearing the Focus on the Family interview about the Prince Caspian movie, I was very excited to see it and brought my whole family. Although I knew it would have violence, I noted the PG rating. Myself and my children who have read the book were shocked by how much the story was changed. I was particularly appalled by the scene in the tomb with the white witch. That is NOT something CS Lewis would have approved of, I am sure. It was terrifying and I felt like we were being cursed just listening to the hag's voice --what exactly DID that say??--and had to hide my child's eyes so she would not see that. THAT was DISNEY, not CS Lewis, and I am angry that CS. Lewis's son & focus on the family would think that scene was ok. I know there is evil in the world, and so did CS Lewis--but that scene was TOO strong & creepy for children. I expected that with Voldemort/Harry Potter stuff. NOT so with a Narnia release. Overall, as a Narnia lover I thought the special effects were great, but the writing really undercut the original themes of the novel. I am planning to write whoever I can to help make sure the future Narnia movies aren't so reduced.
49. Cathy S said the following at 8:26 PM on May 18:
I just saw the movie this afternoon and thought it was pretty good! I had been forewarned of the kiss and the violence, so it didn't bother me too much. (Well, at least the violence didn't, I think the kiss was uneccessary.) I haven't read the Narnia books in years and really only remember the first one anyway. But I could definitely see evidence of the Christian faith portrayed throughout the movie.
50. DannieA said the following at 8:37 PM on May 18:
Ok so now that I've seen the movie (last night with my entire family and my best friend) I'll comment with my honest opinion instead of just commenting.
1. Very well made...in this day and age when anything family friendly is usually low budget or poorly made, I am glad to say that this movie was well made just like 'the lion, the witch, and the wardrobe.'
2. re: adaptations...yes, the chronological order of events is not the same, however, sometimes in order to make a movie good, adaptations are made because it's more cinematic friendly...in the book much of the story is based on a flashback...storytelling from Trumpkin. I think cinematically, that would have confused people.
3. I know what some people are saying about the battle scenes and violence...there was a lot of tense moments in the book, but because it was a children's book you "read between the lines" and it wasn't drawn out. Again part of an adaptation that makes more sense cinematically.
4. re: the spirit of the book. This is kept alive in the movie. The most crucial aspect of the Prince Caspian book was the fact that Aslan chided Lucy for not following Him and going with the crowd due to fear. That was kept in the movie. And I believed that the movie conveyed what happens when ego, focus on self (instead of what is right or Whom to follow), governs your decisions and how those decisions affect things for the worse.
Face it folks. Narnia is a fantasy series. It is written about the Good Power and the Bad Powers that be and how it can affect us. Instead of using magic or witchcraft, Lewis beautifully comes at this with a faith based look at Good and Evil. The fact is, evil is evil and the battle scenes and corruption is part of that. I was very touched by the movie itself..because it shows the consequences of what can happen if we rely on ourselves instead of God.
I hope this isn't the last movie made.
51. taly said the following at 8:56 PM on May 18:
I'm a college student, and we just finished studying Prince Caspian as a supplementary chapel campus-wide discussion. I'll start out positive about the movie: it was very well done, a very artistic and beautiful movie. The acting was great, the CGI pretty amazing, and flow was good. However, I was soooo dissappointed with how they changed just about everything. If you are interested in being entertained, it was a fine movie on that standard. But it didn't deserve to have the name "Prince Caspian." There were simply too many details that were blatantly altered and just plain opposite to what C.S. Lewis wrote. He would be turning in his grave if he had seen this. Lucy's walk in the forest was not a dream, it was real; they did not attack Miraz in his castle and their goal for victory was not a desire for revenge, but simply to regain the throne rightfully Caspian's; the horn was blown at the wrong time; these are just a few of things that went wrong. All these little details could have been sooo good, had they just accurately portrayed them. Maybe they should have read the books. =P and then the kiss... i'm not even going to go there. So not cool. Hopefully they won't botch the Voyage of the Dawn Treader as much as they did this.
52. Alex C. said the following at 9:16 PM on May 18:
I just saw the movie the other day, and I loved it!! I thought the battles were really well done and epic, and I liked the expansions they added on the story. I wasn't too bothered with the Susan/Caspian romance either, because I thought it made Susan 's character a little more interesting. To be honest, though I really enjoyed the books, I've so far liked these adaptions more, and one reason is because I think all the kids have more developed characters and personalities. Truthfully, I always thought Peter and Susan were really BORING characters in the books/BBC versions ^^;, but I actually liked them in the two Walden Media adaptions.
One thing I found really amusing was that Warwick Davis played Nikabrik in this new version. He played Reepicheep in the old BBC version of Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader" ^^.
53. Katy said the following at 12:32 AM on May 19:
I just saw the movie today. Being a Chronicles of Narnia purist, this is not the way I would have written the movie. However, Lucy's choice to turn away from Aslan's calling and follow the others has larger repercussions in the movie than in the book. In the book, the children are merely thrown off course and delayed for a time. In the movie, a bunch on Narnians are brutally killed. I think that the central themes of PC are child-like faith and humility. The movie clearly shows the consequences of trusting one's self instead of Aslan (Christ) and being prideful.
I think that Susan's behavior foreshadows her ultimate rejection of Narnia and, by implication, Aslan.
54. Friederike said the following at 1:31 AM on May 19:
My husband and I saw the movie today and we loved it.( we didn't take our little kids, thanks in part to the review here on this website) I didn't think the kiss even fit in the movie,it didn't even make sense. But other wise it was good. I really liked how they potrait Edmund,how his personality had changed.(the next contains a little spoiler) He played a major role especially in the scene with the witch.
55. Olivia said the following at 4:29 AM on May 19:
I just re-read the book. I have not yet seen the movie, though.
What I love about all the books is how Lewis translates all of the main Christian truths and themes into a children's book.
A great one in Prince Caspian is that Aslan IS NOT THERE or has not been there for hundreds of years. And that when he IS there, they still have to go on without his lead.
I can't wait for my children to be old enough to hear these stories.
56. Alicia said the following at 5:42 AM on May 19:
The kiss was totally about appealing to Ben Barnes fanbase. No joke- amongst a group of 12 year old girls sitting next to us in the theater, one of them actually audibly cried out "Yes!!" when Susan and Caspian kissed. I am so glad I am well past that stage.
57. Elizabeth H. said the following at 7:01 AM on May 19:
Any comments on the soundtrack? The songs sound like they sort of hint at Christianity yet include some fluff.
58. Mike said the following at 7:23 AM on May 19:
I took my family to see Prince Caspian this weekend. I finished reading the book to them on Thursday (second time through for my two oldest). The kiss at the end of the movie gave me an opportunity to talk to my eleven year old daughter. Susan looked back before leaving and was going to miss Caspian. Lucy looked back before leaving and was going to miss Aslan. What a great opportunity to talk to my daughter about relationships.
59. Christina (in green) said the following at 9:38 AM on May 19:
I know its different, but after seeing the movie, I think the movie still kept true to one of the themes in the books -
In order to find victory, you must lose control and rely not on yourself, but on God.
That was all over that movie. In spite of the things that were left out, it still rang true to me.
60. joel Loukus said the following at 9:41 AM on May 19:
Violent? That's laughable, Ted.
Me, Im not a fan of the kiss, but it is something susan could/would do, and Lewis would say so. Let's not forget that she falls away from wisdom by the time the seventh book rolls around.
Would Caspian do it, though? Not a chance, he would be too enamored at the mythic proportion of the Pevensies even being there.
I dont know what any of you are talking about, though, Aslan's presence is pretty subdued in almost all the books, with the exception of LWW.
61. cathys said the following at 10:58 AM on May 19:
Regarding Christina in post 33....
I saw the movie this weekend and I thought that part was really good in the movie. Alhtough I have not read the books in years. But reading your quote from the book and remembering the part in the movie, I don't see a contradiction. Then again, I tend to add stuff in my head to the scene, I think. Maybe I am missing something...
My take is that Lucy did not follow Aslan when he called the first time b/c no one believed her. When he came again she wanted to know why it wasn't like last time. She didn't want to follow him alone. She realized she made a mistake and seemed to repent of that. Aslan forgave her and went on and pretty much said that he was still in control even in the midst of her mistake.
Like I said, though maybe there is something I am missing.
62. DannieA said the following at 1:23 PM on May 19:
re: #57 comments on the soundtrack.
Loved it. Have a friend who is married to one of the guys from Switchfoot so of course we all stayed for the credits and the song.
Re: Heather in #48
The incantation with the White Witch was a phenomenal scene. Not in the sense that I was happy with it but because of the seriousness of what they were advising Caspian to do. Did you read in the book where the bear/wher wolf and hag with the dwarf were telling Caspian about summoning the power of the white witch? How else do you think they were going to summon up the white witch...hold hands and sing songs??????
I especially liked the contrast when Edmund broke the glass/ice and you could see the witch fade and then see Aslan's statue coming through. That was pretty powerful.
63. Diana said the following at 1:41 PM on May 19:
I loved the first movie. I felt that the changes made to the story didn't contradict the themes or characters.
Prince Caspian, though, was a giant disappointment. For one thing, they entirely changed the character of the TITLE character. Battle scenes replaced character development and building suspense. What was added to the story wasn't even original. It was all stuff we've seen in other movies, especially Lord of the Rings. (Can you imagine how annoyed Tolkien would have been to see his ideas in a Narnia movie?)
64. Christina (in green) said the following at 2:00 PM on May 19:
I absolutely loved how true to Edmund's character the movie remained.
Out of all of them, I think Edmund the Just learned the most in Narnia the first time around...
65. Tara said the following at 2:31 PM on May 19:
I was actually very surprised at how well the themes of humility, trust and faith were preserved in the movie. Don't get me wrong: you could see how the filmmakers tried to dumb the religious aspects down--particularily with many of Aslan's lines--but at other times they almost seemed stronger through the visual symbolism. My favourite was Peter staring at carving of Aslan after the confrontation with the Witch and you could see just how strongly Peter was feeling he had it wrong. The movie was rather blatant that the only way to do things was to follow Aslan's instructions. Even during the final battle the characters kept fighting, not knowing when Aslan would come and they did not even have the proof that he would come at all but they kept on the lookout.
Other than the silly & cheap kiss at the end (what was up with that???) I was thoroughly impressed. And I think I enjoy the kick-butt version of Susan. ;)
66. BDB said the following at 4:09 PM on May 19:
Christina (#33):
Thank you for that reminder that our obedience to God's calling is not contingent on other people think at first - and in fact that our willingness to follow God on our own may be precisely what God uses to change the hearts of others. I needed to be reminded of that today.
67. Liz said the following at 9:20 PM on May 19:
I just saw it today and LOVED it. I think it is fine that it had epic battle sequences because sometimes life feels like an epic battle. It was probably a hard book to adapt into a movie because the Pevensies spend a lot of time wandering around in the woods. I liked what they did with Peter and I liked the part where the white witch tries to come back. I thought it was consistent with the themes in the books. I'm going to go see it again!
68. Marisa G. said the following at 1:35 AM on May 21:
I saw a review of the movie in the Friday paper and strongly disagreed with whoever wrote it. Their opinion was that it didn't contain the same magic as the first movie and that the characters didn't have large enough changes from the beginning to the end. That was just the beginning.
In my opinion it was an excelent sequel to the first movie. Keeping the first movie's Pevensie children in mind and seeing how they have changed after returning from Narnia the first time was the character arch viewers should be looking for.
A huge part of the reason many people didn't appreciate the second addition to this line of stories was that it strayed quite a bit from the book in two major ways. *SPOILER ALERT* There wasn't an attack on any castle and there was not a Caspian/Susan romance.
The attack on the castle showed us that Peter was trying to be grown up again and do things in his own timing. This lesson is reason enough for that extra battle scene.
It is very true that Caspian and Susan never "fell in love", but their side long glances at each other give watchers a chance to breathe during all the upheavle that is going on around them.
All in all I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and am happy that it brought to light that I also am a little like Peter in not wanting to wait to do it HIS way.
69. Pearl said the following at 4:40 AM on May 21:
@ Marc, post no. 24.
LOTR != CoN. Making that comparison shows an embarrassing level of ignorance. Additionally, they were terrible movie adaptations, namely due to the complete emaciation of the character of Aragorn. Viggo Mortensen? What were you thinking!
As a long-time Tolkien fan, I absolutely loved Peter Jackson's film adaptation of LotR. Yes, Jackson did take quite a lot of liberties with Tolkien's text. But his films are still magnificent, with wonderful iconic moments, and he still told the story.
Oh, and the writing of Aragorn's character has nothing to do with Mortensen's acting! :) Those are decisions taken by the scriptwriter and the director. I liked Viggo's Aragorn a lot, I have to say, despite some annoying moments. ;)
'Prince Caspian' doesn't open in the UK until next month. I'm prepared for a fair amount of Hollywoodizing of the story (am avoiding too many spoilers).
I really liked the first Narnia film: I thought it was an enchanting and faithful adaptation of a childhood favourite. I love the Narnia books but tend to prefer Lewis's adult fantasy fiction, especially the sublime 'Till We Have Faces'.
70. Marc said the following at 6:59 PM on May 21:
@Pearl
Thanks for rising to my comment :-)
I enjoy the comments and perspectives of many people who enjoyed the LotR movies for all of the things that they got right. But they disassembled the things about it that compelled me to read them over and over again as a kid. And so I berate the movies in an attempt to start a dialog that will hopefully reclaim some of the beauty that is always lost in the book-to-movie transition.
peace,
-m
71. Joel Loukus said the following at 9:26 PM on May 21:
I dont understand why no one is slamming the film for glarring continuity errors. the shift of Trumpkin's capture means he doesnt know anything about the war, the horn, or caspian, or his goal to usurp the thrown, and somehow, he's able to inform Peter of these things, even having no knowledge of them.
72. ptschett said the following at 10:45 PM on May 21:
Diana (#63), it wouldn't be the first crossover. Lewis' That Hideous Strength (3rd book in the "space trilogy") has a character who is the last of the race of Numenor, and Middle-Earth is referenced too if I remember correctly.
73. BDB said the following at 11:15 PM on May 21:
RE: LOTR
Gosh, folks, the theatrical versions were 9 hours long. I don't know if any of you drank a jumbo Coke during the first half hour of one of those movies, but I'm not sure it would be a good idea for Peter Jackson to to have put any more into them. Sure, you could make the battle sequences shorter, but it was the length of those battles that really made the "epic" quality of of the books come alive.
74. Jackie said the following at 12:50 AM on May 22:
Dr. Ransom? As in the space trilogy Dr. Ransom? You're a clever one.
75. Amy Jane (Untangling Tales) said the following at 3:51 PM on May 22:
Hey, if anybody's interested in a writer's perspective, I made a list of some changes in the movie-- the good as well as the bad.
Some people think *any* changes are automatically evil, but as a storyteller I could totally understand (and even applaud) *some* of the changes they made.
76. patrick said the following at 6:08 PM on May 22:
haven't seen Prince Caspian yet but definitely looking forward to it... i'll have to look over the book one more time just to remind myself how the original story goes