Chronicles of Narnia Movie - The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe [Archive]

RÃan

12-09-2005, 04:51 PM

I just got back from seeing CoN:LWW - wow, I need to process it a bit, but basically excellent! I've read the books for so long and know them so well that I kind of need to get one movie screening out of the way before I can really relax and enjoy the movie. It was like that with the LoTR movies, too.

Anyway, here's some first impressions:

Casting of the 4 kids was great! Lucy is adorable, Peter is brave/good without being annoying (I just wanted to pinch his cute little cheeks and introduce him to my daughter!), Susan was realistically ambivilant, and Edmund was convincing as traitor turned brave because of Aslan's sacrifice for him.

CG pretty good, but still a bit stiff at times. They're good at wind/hair effects, but it's still hard to get weight down good. The fauns (the first CG thing you see) were a bit awkward IMO, but overall very good, considering the number of CG creatures they had to do.

Death scene very moving.

Fight w/ Peter and the witch great!

V. well-imagined and interesting concept of the dryads.

The river section in the middle was an addition, and I found it very awkward and contrived - basically a set-up to show Peter "afraid" to use his sword so that it will be "better" when he uses it later :rolleyes: Kind of an Aragorn-afraid-of-his-heritage fake thing. Stupid Hollywood!

Witch was creepy - I loved the little snowflaky-things at the tips of her eyelashes - kind of gave you a dirty-eyes type of feeling, like it was eye-crud stuck on her lashes. Dresses and hair were very good, kind of creepily organic and twisted, until you got a long shot and saw how it stuck out at the back behind her neck.

Warning - they show some credits at the end, then another minute of movie! So stay seated.

Interesting beginning - showing the blitz in London, and a bit of tension between Edmund and Peter.

They even showed the bluebottle fly in the window in the wardrobe room, altho it wasn't dead. Lots of attention to details in the book like that.

I"ll prob. see it again Sunday with the rest of the family (I went with my girlfriend whose hubby works in the theater industry - free passes!) and will be able to report more. But overall very good - I think ... (need to process!)

(mods - I started a new thread because the other threads were kind of pre-movie things - merge it in one of those if you want to :) )

rohirrim TR

12-09-2005, 05:03 PM

I'm goin to see it in about 2 hours i'll check in tomorrow.

sun-star

12-09-2005, 06:14 PM

I saw it yesterday... it was so, so, so good! Loved it from the first scene, because I liked the idea of showing more about the children's background than you get in the book. I've always thought their relationships with each other make more sense when you remember they're evacuees. All the children were great, managing to be childish but grown up at the same time - difficult to explain, but they all got it exactly right. The White Witch and Mr Tumnus were excellent. I expected Liam Neeson as Aslan to be annoying, but he wasn't, and the battle scene was also well-done. The landscape of Narnia was less wild and epic than LOTR, which is what I was hoping for. Only two things I didn't like - the beavers (too much like comic relief and a bit too modern) and the dryads (nice idea, but not like the books or the legends Lewis took them from). I agree with you about the river scene, RÃ*an - it was odd and rather unnecessary.

But otherwise I loved everything. Narnia beats Harry Potter into a cocked hat, as usual!

RÃan

12-09-2005, 06:53 PM

yeah, Disney absolutely cannot refrain from having "funny" sidekicks, and the beavers took that role this time ...

rohirrim TR

12-09-2005, 10:47 PM

it was awesome, amazing, stupendacular, Liam Neesom was surprisingly a great aslan, i thought the beavers were okay,not great but okay, and the actors were surpassing all expectations, last but not least the centaurs totally owned! i thing they're my favorite creature now.the fauns were awesome totally real. the wolves were cool, the witch was not all that scary but as soon as she killed aslan she was villified enough that a scary costume wasn't necessary, but dang was her and peter's fight cool

my only beefs:
the professor was over the top and looked too much like Jim Carrey i think it would have been cooler if they had had Doug Gresham play the professor, but alas. the witche's dwarf being the comic relief was kind of annoying to me. the waterfall scene wasn't so much bad, but uncharacteristic of the wolves, i mean, the kids/beavers were outnumbered fairly helpless the wolves wouldn't have stood there talking they woud have slaughtered them and rolled. the floating on ice thing was a bit unreal too. I wish they hadn't cut the beaver's house scene short. and I wish they had shone Aslan freeing the stoned guys in the witches castle, i.e. Rumblebuffin et.al. theres more but thats all i can think of now, i'm gonna have to see it again. its that good.

rohirrim TR

12-09-2005, 10:49 PM

yeah, Disney absolutely cannot refrain from having "funny" sidekicks, and the beavers took that role this time ...
actually what was worse was the witches little sidekick being funny, i mean come on he's supposed to be a villain here.

azalea

12-10-2005, 12:17 AM

Hi, guys! I was going to wait and go Sunday, but I couldn't! I had just finished reading the book to my kids (I mean, like, today!) and just had to go. I thought it was excellent! Very well done!

Yes, the prof isn't quite as I imagine him, and his line at the end (the REAL end) about "I tried myself" to get back into Narnia through the wardrobe -- I understood why they put that, but I felt it to be a small thing that didn't jibe with the "real" story.

I REALLY enjoyed seeing all of the beasts and mythical beings! I thought they did a great job of hags, etc. (all the many "bad" creatures listed in the book -- my son kept asking "what's a...?" and I was having a hard time giving him a concise answer); they basically created looks for those things, and I liked it.

I liked Aslan, and his voice, but the only thing I would have changed is to have him BIGGER. I always imagine ALL of the kids looking UP to him, but Peter was taller than Aslan in the movie. That was the only real issue I had with it.

The casting was great for all of the kids and Mr. Tumnus. Great scene where he and Lucy meet. Great battle scenes. Yes, that added thing with the river was unnecessary, and I too thought that the wolf would have just killed Mr. Beaver, but it was okay. I liked Jadis, and her battle chariot was pretty cool. I like how they did the turning to stone. I kind of teared up when Father Christmas came. I liked how they did that scene, too, nicely building up the tension when they think it's the White Witch. I like how the wardrobe looked.

[AND I liked the preview for Pirates of the Caribbean 2! :) ]

Now I'm looking forward to Prince Caspian! :D

RÃan

12-10-2005, 12:39 AM

Yeah, Pirates 2 looked pretty good!

I agree about the professor - comb your hair, bud!

And what's with everyone having Angelina Jolie lips nowdays?

Looks like everyone liked Peter and the witch's fight - one of the best scenes, IMO.

Yeah, I guess you're right, sunstar, about the dryads, I just kind of liked how they were made up of part of the trees. But thinking back on the book, it prob. could have been done better.

Aslan was better than I expected, but not great (CG on that scale must be incredibly complex!) - I liked his eyes, though. Cool color. For some reason, the little sigh he gave right before he died was really moving.

Centaurs were pretty cool - I agree! Altho it's incredibly hard to animate a horse, and their movement was just not horsy enough for me, a person who grew up around horses.

Little touch - I like how when Edmund got the Turkish Delight, the dwarf took the hot choc. cup and then just threw it into the bushes.

Interesting switches between real dogs/wolves and animated/cg ones in the beaver's house scene.

What was that fox scene thing?

Wasn't grown-up King Peter cute?! :D

One thing my sis-in-law noticed - she remembers Lucy having "golden hair". Do you guys remember descriptions of the Pevensies?

azalea

12-10-2005, 01:45 PM

I thought both the grown-up boys were cute!

Yes, that's another thing, I picture Lucy as being blonde, and at the end of the book it describes her grown-up self as having golden hair. But I liked the way she looked in the movie and I thought the little girl did a great job. They could have lightened her hair, though.

Another thing was that I pictured them all as just slightly younger, and after checking my source, Lucy was 8 or 9, Edmund was 10, Susan was 12 and Peter was 13. The professor was 52. It really wasn't a problem, but mostly in the case of Susan -- I'm sure that actress is older than 12, but again, she did a good job.

Yeah, the fox bit came out of nowhere, but I thought it worked pretty well.

sun-star

12-10-2005, 02:28 PM

i think it would have been cooler if they had had Doug Gresham play the professor

You're right, that would have been cool! I couldn't help remembering that Jim Broadbent was... well... Jim Broadbent, and thinking about other stuff he's been in that I don't like that much. That's the problem with using famous actors, I suppose - it was the same with Dawn French as Mrs Beaver.

Douglas Gresham did get a small part - he was the announcer on the radio which the children listen to near the beginning.

The other tiny thing which got to me was Mrs Macready - what was that accent meant to be?

Yeah, I guess you're right, sunstar, about the dryads, I just kind of liked how they were made up of part of the trees. But thinking back on the book, it prob. could have been done better.

I think I noticed it because the trees are so lovely in "Prince Caspian", when Lucy witnesses their awakening and then later their feast (with the different kinds of earth, including one which looked like chocolate :D) It's always been one of my favourite parts, but it would probably be difficult to do on film.

Wasn't grown-up King Peter cute?! :D

I thought young Peter was pretty cute :D All the grown-up children (;)) looked a bit too Hollywoodish to me. You're right, Lucy does have fair hair in the books, but the young actress was so perfect that I wouldn't change anything about her!

brownjenkins

12-10-2005, 08:30 PM

And what's with everyone having Angelina Jolie lips nowdays?

botox :p

i saw it today... was pretty good.... not quite the depth and power of a lotr, but very enjoyable... similar to the potter movies for me... definitely great for the kids too :D

Elanor

12-10-2005, 09:14 PM

I saw this movie on Friday morning and really liked it. I'm afraid I was comparing it more to the BBC TV movies than to the book, and I think on average it was about equal. The Disney version was more realistic in special effects, physical details, and in some of the acting, but the music was nowhere near as moving (most of it was just your run-of the-mill movie background music, but a few pieces sounded original).

I preferred Aslan's voice in the older movie. Liam Neeson did a good job, but I thought it should have sounded more "lion-y". :) The Professor was also better in the older version. Jim Broadbent is just too... Jim Broadbent. At first I was disappointed that the Witch wasn't as obviously evil as Barbara Kellerman, but she was okay in the most important parts. I was actually happy to see Kiran Shah as Ginarrbrik, since I saw him be so cute as Frodo's double in the LotR movie appendices.

I was glad they cut out a lot of the in-between stuff at the Professor's house and on the way to the Stone Table, but I agree that the frozen river scene was awkward. The one effect I preferred in the BBC version was Aslan breathing the stone people back to life. It was kind of cheap, but I just liked the look of it better, how a sort of rainbow flowed quickly across the person's body. The dryads, wolves, and other creatures were miles better in the new movie.

Harry Potter is "fun" great, and LotR is "dramatic" great, but for me at least, Narnia is just more deep and meaningful. I got pretty teary during Aslan's death and resurrection. No matter how it is done (and this was done very well!), this story will always have a special place in my heart.

I am very excited to see how they will do Prince Caspian and the other Chronicles! I can't wait to compare the new Reepicheep to Warwick Davis and Miraz to Robert Lang...

rohirrim TR

12-10-2005, 10:00 PM

yeah, as great as Liam Neeson was, when i read aslan, i hear James Earl Jones.

the peter witch fight was so good because of the angles, crazy camera angles, can't wait to try them out myself, did you all like peter's matrix move?
the only weird thing about that fight was the witch pinning him on the ground,i just thought that realistically she would have just killed him at that point.

the fox did undergo and interesting character change, he was a pretty cool character though.

gotta say it one more time, the Centaurs rock!! :D

Lotesse

12-11-2005, 07:43 PM

I saw it last night. It was kind of too child-made for my taste, and the effects weren't that good at all; I expected so much more. They could have done WAY better, for instance, with Aslan's fur. His fur looked like a bunch of cobras constantly wiggling around, it did not flow like real fur. That Peter was really sweet, though! If i were a kid again, I'd so have a crush on that Peter, what a cutie. And little Lucy was really spot-on, wasn't she? Loved her! The witch was pretty convincing; I really wanted to bitch-slap that awful woman.
It was a nice movie for family entertainment, to be sure. If I had young children, I'd let them see it. Very tame & sweet.

durinsbane2244

12-11-2005, 09:51 PM

maybe it was me, but in the previews i thought aslan sounded like ian mckellon...i wanna go see it! waaah!

brownjenkins

12-12-2005, 11:51 AM

It was a nice movie for family entertainment, to be sure. If I had young children, I'd let them see it. Very tame & sweet.

my kids liked it, though my seven-year-old was somewhat confused as to why edmund would betray his family over something as minor as candy... he thinks too much for his age :p

RÃan

12-12-2005, 12:50 PM

did you explain that it wasn't the candy alone, but it was more because he was mad at Peter and wanted to "put him in his place", which the Witch plays on very well when she says Edmund would be king even tho Peter was older? Also, the candy was bewitched, which is clear in the books but not in the movie.

brownjenkins

12-12-2005, 01:36 PM

sun-star

12-12-2005, 01:44 PM

Harry Potter is "fun" great, and LotR is "dramatic" great, but for me at least, Narnia is just more deep and meaningful. I got pretty teary during Aslan's death and resurrection. No matter how it is done (and this was done very well!), this story will always have a special place in my heart.

That's really well-put... I feel the same way.

my kids liked it, though my seven-year-old was somewhat confused as to why edmund would betray his family over something as minor as candy... he thinks too much for his age

Tell him that poor Edmund probably hadn't seen any sweets for years, because they were rationed in wartime. Plus, Turkish Delight is really addictive... :eek:

Oh yeah, and the magic :D

brownjenkins

12-12-2005, 01:53 PM

Tell him that poor Edmund probably hadn't seen any sweets for years, because they were rationed in wartime. Plus, Turkish Delight is really addictive... :eek:

my oldest hardly eats candy at all, and my youngest likes it, but only if it's in front of him

my middle one however, loves candy... he typically asks "what's for dessert?" before dinner is even on the table... so it may have been an introspective comment on his part too :p

azalea

12-12-2005, 01:55 PM

My son now wants Turkish Delight for Christmas -- no idea where I'd get some!

When I read the books originally, I was in 4th grade, and I had a crush on Edmund, not Peter -- typical of me to pick the "villain!" But I think it was due to the fact that I always love the outcast/ underdog AND the fact that he goes through such a powerful transformation, making him more thoughtful and sensitive.

Elanor

12-12-2005, 02:15 PM

I don't think you can get Turkish Delight in the US except in specialty import stores. But something similar is "Applets and Cotlets"--fairly inexpensive and found in most grocery stores.

brownjenkins

12-12-2005, 02:38 PM

make it yourself! (http://www.christmas-joy.com/recipes/turkishdelight.htm) :D

most cities (i know in boston at least), have middle eastern restaurants that often sell it... along with baklava (my favorite)

azalea

12-14-2005, 10:52 AM

Thanks for the suggestions! :)
I think I'll try making it!

RÃan

12-17-2005, 03:13 AM

Just got back from seeing it with the whole family - the kids loved it! And I enjoyed seeing it again. My oldest son loved the Peter/witch fight, altho he was convinced he could have done a better job ... he was showing me the moves he thought Peter should have done. (boys! :D love 'em!)

The last sane person

12-18-2005, 12:16 AM

Saw it the other night with W.O. It was shiney...Though I didnt like what they did to the witch...Blah! Washed out skin with blond dreadlocks just dont work! She needed her contrast! But other than that, its pretty good.

me9996

12-18-2005, 08:54 AM

I saw the new movie yesterday and I think they lord-of-the-ringsed it... but not as much :)

Tessar

12-18-2005, 10:47 AM

No--I have to agree with him, Rian! :p Peter should have dropped his british notion of being a gentleman and just kicked her butt :D.

RÃan

12-19-2005, 02:39 AM

yeah, there were lots of moments that seemed to be copied from LOTR.

me9996

12-19-2005, 09:56 AM

what I mean is they messed around with the little detales that drive me crazy, just like they did to LOTR

inked

12-19-2005, 12:42 PM

Yes, minor muddling is annoying, and they did get in bit much beaver gab (but within the parameters of the text, it was acceptable - just a bit much), and the fights were a bit long, and the river scene was pure Hollywood.

Peter's ambivalence about the sword was consistent with the text though much over-emphasized, IMHO.

On the whole, I'd say it was more faithful than LOTR.

The Blitz scene was accurately done according to a survivor who was 4 - 5 yrs old at the time (only a year younger than Lucy!). She said she had to look away because of the intensity of the memories it engendered. But she agreed that it was essential for the audiences of today who had not experienced it to understand the evacuation policy.

more later ... duty calls me away! :(

edit: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=678 NOMINATIONS, London Film Critics

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=680 Nominations, Academy Awards "Achievement in Visual Effects"

So, some folks are looking at this as a noteworthy production. I would have to agree!

I have only been to see it three times so far and it has held up well ! :D

luvEyowen

12-19-2005, 01:32 PM

Saw it Friday and all I have to say is CCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLL

RÃan

12-19-2005, 04:01 PM

what I mean is they messed around with the little detales that drive me crazy, just like they did to LOTR
oh, I see.

But they also seemed to copy how some moments were staged from LOTR, too - there were at least 4 or 5 that looked exactly like LOTR, such as the bad bull guy :D standing up on the rock while you can't see the rest of the army, etc.

inked

12-19-2005, 06:18 PM

Yes, Rian, there were overlapping representations and images, but that was to be expected given the genre of mythic populations.

Rather than to note only similarities betwixt LOTR and CON:LWW, I enjoyed putting names to the creatures shown. They left out the witch's list as it is in the text when she tells whom to call for her army. But I think the chaps with the staffs at the four corners of the Stone Table were "people of the toadstools". They have a mushroom-y and wet appearance and the twinkle of the light on the drop of mucus glistening on the tip of one's nose is a perfect touch for a "person of the toadstool".

I also liked the Minotaur and the cyclops. In general, I thought the menagerie of myth was well done by WETA. I charged off the resemblances as inevitable, not because of lack of originality on WETA's part, but because there are only so many ways to represent a centaur, griffin, minotaur, etc.

I'll see it again, no doubt. :D

RÃan

12-19-2005, 08:44 PM

No, I'm not being clear - I don't mean characters, I mean actual positions on the screen that these characters are taking. I felt like several times, one could have yelled "Freeze frame!" and cut out the Narnia people and substituted LOTR people and it would have been the LOTR movie :eek:

sun-star

12-21-2005, 05:59 PM

Yes, I noticed that too RÃ*an. I would have thought they'd want to avoid those kind of similarities, but apparently not...

*eating chocolate-covered turkish delight*

Telcontar_Dunedain

12-22-2005, 07:04 AM

Saw it last night and loved it. I haven't read the books in years and seeing it really makes me want to read them again. I loved the Peter/Witch fight, although if I was Peter I'd have killed here when she was looking at Aslan.
When I saw the four of them hunting the stag I thought that Sean Bean would have been quite good to play an older Peter. What do you think?

hectorberlioz

12-22-2005, 09:03 PM

*eating chocolate-covered turkish delight*
*mutters* boastful blackguard....

Well, I havent seen it yet. From what I've heard it does stay very close to the book, at least more than LotR, which is goods news, because its shouldnt hard to keep close since the book isnt even half the length of FotR.

mithrand1r

12-29-2005, 03:04 PM

*mutters* boastful blackguard....

Well, I havent seen it yet. From what I've heard it does stay very close to the book, at least more than LotR, which is goods news, because its shouldnt hard to keep close since the book isnt even half the length of FotR.

I thought the movie is very good. (I will need to reread the books since I do not remembermost of the details, just the general story. :o)

I think the witch was very well done. (especially with her height.)

I think the movie may not be appropriate for some younger viewers. (especially IMO with the final battle and Aslan walking to his apparent doom at the stone altar.)

One minor quibble I have is the way that Edmound left for the Witch's castle.
I do not think the movie impressed well enough how the witch affected edmound with her magic candy. The movie left me wondering why he left his siblings.

Firekitten2006

12-29-2005, 04:05 PM

oh, I see.

But they also seemed to copy how some moments were staged from LOTR, too - there were at least 4 or 5 that looked exactly like LOTR, such as the bad bull guy :D standing up on the rock while you can't see the rest of the army, etc.
And the part when Edmund is going into the witch's castle, looks like the part in TTT...or something like that, just rang a bell from LOTR.

I think they could have done the death scene of Aslan better. It was nowhere as dramatic as I remember it in the book. I *loved* lucy and tumnus though. lol Is it strange that I think without the makeup I think he would be pretty cute? :D

Curubethion

12-29-2005, 11:11 PM

Very good movie! Although Susan wasn't as well done as, say, Lucy or Peter. Loved the huge battle at the end (you know, they used the same software to animate it as they did for LOTR!), especially Orieus with his two swords....SWEET! :D
I agree that some moments could have been done better, and a few parts somewhat seemed like LOTR...like the waterfall collapse was similar to Ford of Brunien...but a very good movie.

When I saw the four of them hunting the stag I thought that Sean Bean would have been quite good to play an older Peter. What do you think?
Mmm...maybe. I'd have Boromir going through my head though-I'll never be able to see any of the LOTR actors as anyone else, I think.

P.S. My sister thinks Tumnus looked like tobyMac :eek:
EDIT: I just thought of this: did anyone think the Minotaur's weapon looked suspiciously like some of the orc halberds glimpsed in LOTR?

Grey_Wolf

12-30-2005, 09:00 AM

I am going to see it, given opportunity. Is it too bombastic along the lines of PJ's LOTR-movies or is a totally different kind of movie? :)

mithrand1r

12-30-2005, 09:45 AM

I am going to see it, given opportunity. Is it too bombastic along the lines of PJ's LOTR-movies or is a totally different kind of movie? :)

I do not consider the movie to be "too bombastic" (ie ala LOTR) if I understand you correctly. It fits the book well, although I do not remember many of the details from the book.

In a way the movie just continues to build in intensity with little drop offs.

I think that if you remember the books very well you will have more issues with the film. Much less than LOTR, but you will still have some issues.

inked

01-02-2006, 02:00 PM

Here's the current state of the Lion versus the Ape.....

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=710

I, of course, am placing myself on the side of the Lion :D !

cee2lee2

01-02-2006, 11:51 PM

Saw it tonight with my husband and want to see it again real soon. It's definitely a movie I want to buy. Thought it was mostly faithful to the book, but I haven't read it in a couple of years so can't really compare. Except for that river scene. Couldn't resist leaning over and tellling DH: "THAT wasn't in the book! (Can't wait to get the books back from my friend. She, her daughter and husband are all reading the series. Thought they would have been finished before now :cool: :D ) Was quite impressed with the children.

Acalewia

01-03-2006, 02:20 PM

I saw it on Sunday.

I loved the way the characters were played. The atten to detail was great. The bluebottle fly in the window, the books on tumnus' shelf. The river scene was unnessery, imo. Jadis was quite intimidating. As was Orieus. I wouldn't want to get on his bad side :D. Aslan's death wasn't graphic and was fairly short. The battle scene was great. The phenoix caught me by surprise. The rock dropping by the Griffins was something I didn't expect at all. (Btw, they were very cool looking). The coroination of the children was incredable. all in all it was a great movie that I now cannot wait until it comes out on video.

hectorberlioz

01-03-2006, 06:54 PM

inked

01-06-2006, 12:11 PM

Good news on the sequel front!

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=720

This should be really good if LWW is any prognosticator! :D

RÃan

01-06-2006, 12:58 PM

The bluebottle fly in the window, the books on tumnus' shelf. I enjoyed all those little tributes to the book readers, too. For some reason, that bluebottle fly has always stuck in my mind - just one of those visual details that make a book seem more real.

Telcontar_Dunedain

01-06-2006, 01:36 PM

Haven't read the books in a long ime, but I'm hoping to read them again soon. And I'm off the see the film again tomorrow.

Acalewia

01-06-2006, 02:38 PM

I enjoyed all those little tributes to the book readers, too. For some reason, that bluebottle fly has always stuck in my mind - just one of those visual details that make a book seem more real.

It one of those things I think really only the ones who have read the books will notice

hectorberlioz

01-06-2006, 03:52 PM

Narnia stole the throne form Kong, once again! :) Bravo Pevensies! Long Live Aslan!

Nurvingiel

01-06-2006, 06:04 PM

This really sounds like a movie I'd want to see! :D I'll just plug my ears during the Beaver jokes. :rolleyes:

inked

01-07-2006, 01:59 PM

Nominated for score...relations to LOTR and its score...

http://www.tracksounds.com/specialfeatures/Interviews/interview_harry_gregson_williams.htm

:)

Nurvingiel

01-09-2006, 04:03 AM

In which Mrs. Pevensie realizes her children weren't paying attention during bombing raid drills, and sends them to the country to stay with a distant relation...

I have seen the greatness that is this movie, and I loved it! :D

SPOILERS FOLLOW

- The melting river/waterfall thing scene was dumb, but whatever. (The sword in the ice?)
- And I swear the reindeer's legs were white when Santa (who we thought was the white witch) was "chasing" the Pevensies and the Beavers. But whatever.
- And plus, and this is the last thing, the timing around the Wolves and the tunnel out of the Beavers' house seemed... odd. (Our heroes seemed to escape in the nick of time in the most convenient ways. Maybe the Wolves came down with a case of Villainitis*?)

*When villains are struck with a bout of incompetance when the heroes need to escape/win a fight/etc.

Those are my only nitpicks. I just wanted to get them out of the way.

Now on to why I loved this movie.

1. Aslan. He was incredible! Aslan was so real looking and yet larger-than-life. Liam Neeson was perfectly cast as his voice. Aslan was perfect!

2. The Pevensies. I loved all four of these brilliantly-acted wonderful children. They weren't just plot advancers. I really felt for them, especially Edmund and Susan. I think those two had the hardest time of it. I thought Lucy was incredibly endearing and awesome. Peter was cool.

3. Narnia. What a beautiful place! They did just a brilliant job on the scenery and all its inhabitants.

3.A. Especially Mr. Tumnus!! He was brilliantly acted and costumed. And the centaurs! And the minotaur general of the bad guys!

4. The White Witch. The quality of the villain can make or break a movie. Jadis was so incredibly awesome, she enhanced the depth and brilliance of this movie a huge amount. (By the way Jadis, you're supposed to take the hanger out of the dress before you put it on.)
She was just so awesomely badass she was a joy to watch. Only the White Witch can pull off lifting a manacled Edmund off the ground with one hand, wearing a dress of chain mail, and wielding two swords with ease. (And if you've read The Magician's Nephew you'll know why. :evil: ) Jadis was extremely great. (Was that Cate Blanchett? First a good powerful queen, then and evil powerful queen. That will look good on her resumÃ©. :D)

END SPOILERS

inked

01-09-2006, 11:23 AM

Nurv,

Your appreciation is obviously shared:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/international/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001807710

:D

rohirrim TR

01-09-2006, 03:54 PM

Nurv-Tilda Swinton played Jadis. Cate Blanchett played Galadriel. :)

RÃan

01-09-2006, 06:04 PM

I agree with your first and third nitpick, Nurv (didn't notice the second), and the Jadis dress thing (reminds me of a Carol Burnett takeoff of Gone with the Wind, where she forgets to take the curtain rod out of the fabric when she makes the dress out of the curtains :D ). I loved her snowflaky-cruddy eyelashes, too - did you notice that?

We might see it again this weekend, the kids want to. I've seen it twice now (once with a girls' night out with my sis-in-law, and once with my family). Hmm, just got a better idea - my bday is Saturday - I think maybe I'll see if hubby can take the kiddos to go see it, while I go kid-less shopping for a nice bday outfit ... :D

I liked the general look of Narnia, too - nice and green (when it wasn't frozen). I liked Tumnus in general, but to me, his movement was awkward sometimes, although I loved the little stampy-foot thing he did to get the snow off. He had a great expression when he said "I'm doing it now," or whatever - i.e., I"m betraying you now.

I'm looking forward to more movies! They better make Dawn Treader!!!!

Nurvingiel

01-09-2006, 06:58 PM

Nurv-Tilda Swinton played Jadis. Cate Blanchett played Galadriel. :)Whoops. Well, maybe Cate Blanchett has the whole powerful queen thing going on?? Tilda Swinton was excellent anyway. Excellent!! <3

I'll read your link later Inked, now I have class (in 10 mins).

RÃ*an, about your earlier post with the book-references, did you guys notice "Man, Myth or Reality" (<- I forget the exact title) on the bookshelf? That was AWESOME! I love whoever made this movie.

I really loved Edmund in the movie as well. I also felt more sympathy towards him in the movie than I did in the book. I think part of this is due to Peter being a bigger git in this movie.

For example, Peter says something like "No, until now I would say Lucy is the more truthful person" to the Professor in the book, but in the movie he says that this would be the "first time" Edmund has told the truth. That's a little harsh Peter, and it's not like Edmund doesn't notice your attitude. Git.

Oh, something I forgot to add about the first scene. My impressions... of Mrs. Pevensie. If two of my (hypothetical) kids ran back to the house during an air raid, I would have been after them before they could blink and they would have found themselves under my arm like I was that long-armed orc and they were Merry and Pippin.

Also, I felt something was missing. Why was Lucy asleep during the air raid? Because no siren went off. Did London ever get caught completely by surprise like that? :confused: The transition from that scene to the kids at the train station was utter brilliance though.

Lastly, I had such absurd thoughts during the battle. First, I did notice the parallel between the German bombing raid and the eagles dropping rocks. Secondly, I thought, "Good thing those are magical birds," immediately followed by "Look, a five ounce bird can't carry a one pound coconut!"

Oh my brain. :D

RÃan

01-09-2006, 07:20 PM

RÃ*an, about your earlier post with the book-references, did you guys notice "Man, Myth or Reality" (<- I forget the exact title) on the bookshelf? Yes - I enjoyed all those little book tie-ins very much!

Secondly, I thought, "Good thing those are magical birds," immediately followed by "Look, a five ounce bird can't carry a one pound coconut!" Good point! I hadn't thought of that .... :eek: But muscle-power must account for something, for birds of prey carry their prey, don't they? I never thought of the relative weights before, though - rats, now it will bug me!

Curubethion

01-09-2006, 09:58 PM

Lastly, I had such absurd thoughts during the battle. First, I did notice the parallel between the German bombing raid and the eagles dropping rocks.
Yeah-me too! What do you think was their intent? Because it was an obvious parallel. They used the exact same camera angles and everything.

Acalewia

01-10-2006, 02:37 PM

Wait! I thought those were Griffens dropping the rocks!

inked

01-10-2006, 04:37 PM

I will watch for the griffins dropping rocks = Nazi bombers, but I do not think they were as parallel as you suggest. I have seen the film 5 times and have not yet been struck by that parallel.

Nurv, it's swallows that have problems with coconuts - a la Monty Python and THG. Griffins are lion bodied and eagle winged with eagle heads in the rendition in Narnia as produced. (Griffins, by the by, are Christ symbols in medieval literature, Lord of Heaven and Lord of Earth! So I thought the profusion of griffins was a bit much, but then again, I am the one seeing so many Christ symbols, aren't I? :p Did I mention Unicorns in that regard, yet? And the hippopatamus? etc. etc. etc.)

Tilda designed the gown she wore. Maybe she likes curtain rods? I thought the effect was quite well done, though. It helped establish her "otherness" much the way Wormtongue's shaved eyebrows did in LOTR.

In Peter's defence, I think he was less adjuring in the text. The movie "polished" up the disagreements so that movie audiences wouldn't miss it. But Peter is not quite the "git" you seem to think him. Please re-read the book to clarify that point. Also, in Edmund's case, they made him look worse as he tried to scare Lucy when he entered the wardrobe. This was screenwriter stuff to punch up the character so audiences couldn't miss the characterization.

I think on the whole, screenwriters and special effects and all, it was very well done and not overdone. I'd give them all five thumbs up - if I were a five-thumbed person! ;)

RÃan

01-10-2006, 05:20 PM

Tilda designed the gown she wore. Maybe she likes curtain rods? I thought the effect was quite well done, though. I absolutely LOVED the dress - until I got that side view, and my practical mind kept thinking, "I bet lots of stuff drops down her dress!"

sun-star

01-10-2006, 05:30 PM

Tilda designed the gown she wore. Maybe she likes curtain rods? I thought the effect was quite well done, though. It helped establish her "otherness" much the way Wormtongue's shaved eyebrows did in LOTR.

I liked the way she was wearing clumps of Aslan's fur in the battle... very snazzy.

In Peter's defence, I think he was less adjuring in the text. The movie "polished" up the disagreements so that movie audiences wouldn't miss it. But Peter is not quite the "git" you seem to think him. Please re-read the book to clarify that point. Also, in Edmund's case, they made him look worse as he tried to scare Lucy when he entered the wardrobe. This was screenwriter stuff to punch up the character so audiences couldn't miss the characterization.

Indeed, film-makers never trust audiences to understand subtlety. :rolleyes: I think on several occasions they were trying to show that Peter was taking his role as older brother very seriously and lording it over Edmund a bit (in the book, Edmund feels this and resents it, but the audience perhaps doesn't agree with him).

sun-star

01-10-2006, 05:37 PM

Yeah-me too! What do you think was their intent? Because it was an obvious parallel. They used the exact same camera angles and everything.

They paralleled WW2 with the war in Narnia right through the film, e.g. Lucy telling Mr Tumnus about her father being at war just like his (or something), the children telling the beavers they've just escaped a war and don't want to be caught in another one etc. In fact, the film played up the WW2 angle from the beginning, whereas in the book it's just referred to in one matter-of-fact line, and is more a plot contrivance (to get kids alone to a place where they can have adventures) than a theme. The film used it as a foil to the war between good and evil in Narnia and as a way of encouraging the audience to take Narnia's problems seriously, rather than seeing it as a cute harmless fantasy land.

inked

01-10-2006, 05:57 PM

I don't suppose they could have meant that all wars participate in the battle of good and evil in their own way, could they?

sun-star

01-10-2006, 06:00 PM

Yes, and the children get the chance to fight for the good instead of only being victims of war.

hectorberlioz

01-10-2006, 06:07 PM

I absolutely LOVED the dress - until I got that side view, and my practical mind kept thinking, "I bet lots of stuff drops down her dress!"

But who knows how much stuff she NEEDS to drop down her dress, with that magic potion of hers....

Was it just me or did Peter call his own name when Edmund is wounded by the witch?

inked

01-10-2006, 06:12 PM

Yes, and the children get the chance to fight for the good instead of only being victims of war.

My, Sun-star, that sounds fantastically like JKR and HP. I mean, that people actually believe in the good and fight for it and that it is objectively existent and one may side with it (or against it).

Do you intend that individual's choices for good or against actually matter? :p

Hector, I think it was just you. I've seen it 5 times and not caught that! (Therefore, I must see it again!) :D

sun-star

01-10-2006, 06:15 PM

I know, isn't it shocking? :eek:

inked

01-10-2006, 06:18 PM

Why, it's positively POSTMODERNLY SHOCKING, IT IS!!!! :eek:

RÃan

01-10-2006, 06:23 PM

relatively speaking? ;)

sun-star

01-10-2006, 06:35 PM

Also, I felt something was missing. Why was Lucy asleep during the air raid? Because no siren went off. Did London ever get caught completely by surprise like that? :confused: The transition from that scene to the kids at the train station was utter brilliance though.

Interesting that you mentioned that. I was curious about the children living in Finchley (it seemed a random choice...), so I looked it up and it turns out (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blitz) that Finchley was one of the targets of the first raid on London on 24th August 1940. So I think this is meant to have been the first raid and that's why the children a) hadn't been evacuated yet and b) were in bed when the bombs came. There was little warning.

Maybe that's reading too much into it - in which case it may just be enough to say that yes, London was often caught by surprise. Also there were other reasons why Lucy could have been asleep, such as that people wouldn't wake their children up for every air raid because there were often false alarms.

inked

01-10-2006, 06:42 PM

Excellent facts and insight, Sun-star. Thanks for the information. I had meant to look up Finchley because I had puzzled why they mentioned it specifically. A tip of the bowler to you, My Lady! :)

tolkienfan

01-10-2006, 08:24 PM

I thought it was pretty good overall, but a few things really bothered me. Peter and Edmund were riding Unicorns and Talking Horses! That really annoyed me. Peter seemed kind of meaner in the movie than in the book to me too. Of course I loved Lucy, Aslan, the Centaurs and Fauns, and the White Witch. The scenery was beautiful too.

RÃan

01-10-2006, 08:34 PM

but it says in the books that for special occasions and needs, horses and unicorns will allow this.

tolkienfan

01-10-2006, 08:44 PM

But they didn't just ride them on special occasions or in great need in the movie. Why didn't they just ride regular horses? Talking Horses and Unicorns can fight perfectly well without someone on their back. This is just my opinion but I don't think training for battle or hunting is a good enough reason to ride one.

rohirrim TR

01-11-2006, 12:31 PM

RÃan

01-11-2006, 01:17 PM

unless they were friends, and Phillip (IIRC, that was his name) liked going hunting with Edward.

I can see the riding for the war (and necessarily, then, for the training, too), but I think the hunt scene was only in it for the Hollywood "fun" line.

But I see what you guys are saying, and I agree in general.

cee2lee2

01-11-2006, 06:01 PM

yeah that bugged me too, not during the battle but during the hunt riding a talking horse for something recreational like hunting would be unthinkable. :rolleyes: I hope they rectifie that problem in Horse and his Boy.

I hope they keep making the movies long enough to get to Horse and His Boy and beyond. With all the stats in the news about how much $$ they're making, it's seems to me to be a wise move.

I was startled too to hear Phillip speak in the hunt scene, but Rian's explanation that he may have liked hunting with Edmund makes sense, even if the Hollywood types didn't think of it that way.

RÃan

01-11-2006, 08:08 PM

and the fact that Phillip was obviously not as fast and fit as the other horses (he had to rest) also points to a friendship thing - if hunting was all that Edmund was interested in, he would have taken a younger horse. But the books definitely do say that it's an exception-type thing - one wonders if talking horses that like to go on hunts would just come along on their own, alongside people on non-talking horses.

rohirrim TR

01-12-2006, 12:44 PM

saw it again last night, and it was just as good, I hope they'll have an extended battle scene with more Orieus.

after seeing it 3 times i'm liking how the professor turned out I just re read the book a couple weeks ago, and the professor is really accurate to the book save for the "I already tried" line, thats one beef I got with him.

And why did they feel that they needed to do that whole break the window and run thing? the way it was in the book was perfectly good and would have been very easy to set up screenwise *sigh* :rolleyes: :D

inked

01-13-2006, 10:56 AM

CG and Aslan....very interesting!

http://www.indiantelevision.com/anex/y2k6/headlines/anex440.htm

Nominations....costuming!

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=740

Awards....won!

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=739

So, your grandparents don't have peer pressure, eh?

http://www.edmondsun.com/opinion/local_story_012130634.html?keyword=secondarystory

A movie may lead to reading...and that's a good thing!

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=736

Go Aslan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

Insidious Rex

01-13-2006, 02:25 PM

What a fan boy :D

Curubethion

01-13-2006, 07:15 PM

rohirrim TR

01-13-2006, 09:45 PM

They rode the talking horses for the whole book of Horse and His Boy, though...
true, but at the end of the book its made clear to Bree (the horse) that that is not at all customary in Narnia, but it was neccessary for the whole book of Horse and his Boy, so maybe its not that big a deal.

inked

01-14-2006, 11:51 AM

What a fan boy :D

YEssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!
Precious!
WE issssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!

:p

inked

01-16-2006, 04:48 PM

Fan boy strikes again......

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=743
KING OF the BOX OFFICE? Aslan! :cool:

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=744
to INDIA and many more languages Narnia, Awake! :cool:

And the Lion is beating the Ape, rather like The Last Battle (or NOT!) :p

sun-star

01-18-2006, 06:28 PM

Since we're posting links :D:

Shops delighted by the Narnia effect (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/26/narnia26.xml)

inked

01-18-2006, 06:31 PM

Lovely, Sun-star. Remember on the old thread where you had to enlighten us upon the nature of this concoction? Ah, the good old days.... :) !

sun-star

01-18-2006, 06:33 PM

Now the whole world knows what it is :D

inked

01-19-2006, 04:35 PM

inked

01-20-2006, 11:55 AM

And more movie stuff...

The DVD options: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=753

Visual Effects Society Awards nominations: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=754

enjoy! :)

EarthBound

01-20-2006, 03:44 PM

YES! Turkish Delight and Narnia! Chocolate bunnies and Jesus! :)

FYI,

Future movie news: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=751

and

3 BAFTA nominations: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=752

NOTE that WALDEN MEDIA, not DISNEY MADE THE MOVIES.

Great site, inked. My church was able to show a preview of the movie! Glad to hear there'll be more coming, as long as the budget doen't decrease it'll be wonderful.

inked

01-27-2006, 12:57 PM

And you thought the battles were on-screen!

http://magicstatistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/anti-religious-hysteria.html

For NARNIA and for ASLAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

inked

01-29-2006, 10:53 AM

Narnia goes to Sri Lanka!

A review... http://www.narniafans.com/lww_review/review.php?id=504

Want to speculate on the Academy Awards ignoring TLWW?

hectorberlioz

01-30-2006, 03:22 PM

Narnia goes to Sri Lanka!

A review... http://www.narniafans.com/lww_review/review.php?id=504

Want to speculate on the Academy Awards ignoring TLWW?\

Want to speculate on the Academy Awards unanimously choosing Bareback Mountain for Best pic?
Not me.

rohirrim TR

01-30-2006, 03:41 PM

\

Want to speculate on the Academy Awards unanimously choosing Bareback Mountain for Best pic?
Not me.

oh god I hope its not unanimous. :rolleyes: bareback mt. nice one there darth hectorus :D :D

inked

01-31-2006, 01:25 PM

NOW NARNIA NOMINATIONS..........

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=770

3 categories :) , but not best pix! :(

inked

02-04-2006, 09:33 PM

And for DVD seekers.....

pre-ordering info: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=775

and info on extended version:

http://www.narniafans.com/

:)

hectorberlioz

02-08-2006, 05:52 PM

NOW NARNIA NOMINATIONS..........

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=770

3 categories :) , but not best pix! :(

:D Hahaha...you seriously werent thinking they would even go near it, were you? :p

inked

02-08-2006, 06:29 PM

What?! Are you suggesting there is bias in the entertainment industry against films with moral content? or * gasp * Christian content? Even when it outperforms any other Disney release?

Be still, my beating heart! You mean that Hollywood has an agenda? :eek:

Could it be that prejudice and discrimination exist in that exalted home of the neurotically insecure in their gifts and they need to validate their myopic view of life by not honoring anything with moral and ethical compass?

Oh, HB, say it isn't so! :rolleyes:

hectorberlioz

02-08-2006, 07:07 PM

inked

02-09-2006, 02:22 PM

A very worthwhile review and perspective from HOLLYWOOD JESUS at

http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/comments/narnia_features/htdocs/2006_02_01_blog.html

teaser:
The Case of the Missing Narrator; Narnia without C.S. Lewis?
09 Feb 2006 Paul Martin | (Narnia Films)
Author Sarah Arthur has graciously written a guest analysis for Hollywood Jesus, taking a look at what The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe perhaps sadly lost in translation from book to screen. "Getting it right," Sarah suggests, means more than just nailing the visuals, plot, symbolism and characterization

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

encouraging words about LWW: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=781
IN the top 25 grossing films of all time! WOOOOOOO - WOOOOOOO!!!!!

*****************************

Oh, HB, I see. IT's only the Christians in Hollywood who have an agenda :p ! Or is it only they who have an erroneous agenda? :evil:

hectorberlioz

02-09-2006, 02:44 PM

Oh, HB, I see. IT's only the Christians in Hollywood who have an agenda :p ! Or is it only they who have an erroneous agenda? :evil:
No inked, the christians(!) in hollywood aren't allowed to have an agenda becuase they have an agenda to have an agenda that keeps people from knowing hollywood's MAIN agenda. Their agenda descriminates against other agendas that DONT have a moral core, so therefore, that agenda is descriminatory.:) It's that simple. Just ask Freud!

Lotesse

02-09-2006, 03:40 PM

Hollywood, per se, does not have any other agenda besides making huge amounts of money. That is the ONLY "agenda" that Hollywood has. The entertainment industry is a money-making enterprise, and cares little about actual art or integrity. The Disney corporation is a prime example; they are moneymakers pure and simple. They have NO integrity whatsoever; (and they are awful npeople, believe me - I walked out on a job there at Disney studios in Burbank, a few years ago, they were so unbelieveably awful to everyone there) they care nothing for protecting art or telling a story honestly and with style. All they want to do is garner revenue.

inked

02-09-2006, 05:59 PM

O, Lotesse, you make me laugh; honestly you do. No agenda driving the moguls of Hollywood. Ever heard of politically correct? Though I will concede that the primary agenda of hollywood is to make large amounts of money. That doesn't equate with no agenda, however.

And, thankfully, Walden Media made LWW. Disney merely dispersed it to outlets.

You mean that the company Walt and Mickey built isn't nice to the core and celebrating all sorts of family values in its workplace? :eek:

That sounds like a complaint I've heard against other agendized groups: they don't live up to their PR all the time, or some such. :D

edit: though I could have confused Hollywood with the liberal elite, I wonder why? http://magicstatistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/anti-religious-hysteria.html

Lotesse

02-09-2006, 07:15 PM

hectorberlioz

02-09-2006, 07:50 PM

Inked, you sound like a paranoid delusional, all flustered and flapping your arms! :D Look, Hollywood - the Entertainment Industry - could care less about anything except making money. Billions of dollars worth. Are you serious, do you really believfe the film industry cares about anything else BUT the business that they are in? And what's wrong with that? It's all about the money. No art, no message - it's what sells to the most consumers. You're incredibly naive if you actually believe it could be anything but. We must be misunderstanding each other somewhere... :confused:
Nevertheless, movie directors are inflecting their movies with "meaning". i.e., the meaning of Brokeback Mountain is that not only tight-jean-wearing, friendly-to-girl people are gay..that supposedly, some cowboys were or are.

But me and Inked are only having some fun jabs:) :D

Lotesse

02-09-2006, 07:57 PM

hectorberlioz

02-09-2006, 08:16 PM

It's because that's what will sell right now - not because of some noble reason or anything! Apparantly, crap like "Brokeback" is a hot commodity right now, so it's selling, and being "honoured" - what a bunch of hypocrisy and falseness!!! There's no wonderful message - it's just another 20 million dollar cartoon made to SELL, not to grace the world with a noble statement or work of art. Just more Hollywood product. Hollywood is the biggest American drug manufacturer, and the consumer who buys into it is the junkie.

It's not doing THAT well in theatres. :confused: but I guess they scrape up every million they can get...a million for them is like One Dollar for us :p

I don't doubt what you say, their money mongering...but they DO let loose their directors/philosophers.

The last sane person

02-09-2006, 09:02 PM

"Brokeback Mountain" Yes? I think it would have been better named "The Good, The Bad and The Fabulous!" Much better name for it. But blah, thats why I dont go to movies any more.

hectorberlioz

02-12-2006, 05:01 PM

"Brokeback Mountain" Yes? I think it would have been better named "The Good, The Bad and The Fabulous!" Much better name for it. But blah, thats why I dont go to movies any more.

I have a joke: why were Heath Ledger and Jake nominated for best actors, and not best actresses?

Valandil

02-13-2006, 09:12 AM

Oh my... I thought this thread would be about the new Narnia movie! :confused: ;)

Anyway - finally saw it yesterday, and loved it!

Have to admit that it was easy to be sympathetic toward Edmund. He reminds me of my middle son (who is only 5 now). Mine won't listen to much of what he's told to do, and can be very sensitive - but he really has a good heart... and if ANY of them would run into a house subject to bomb attack to grab a picture of daddy, it would be him. :p Somehow, I was more sympathetic to Edmund from watching the movie than from reading the book.

Valandil

02-14-2006, 08:45 AM

Oh - two other things:

I couldn't help but laugh out loud in the theater when the centaur general killed the minotaur general. Not that it was a funny incident - but the way the centaur used the two swords, and the way the minotaur fell, with the swords through the back of his neck - I think was mimicking how a matador kills a bull in the ring.

I also found it amusing that after Aslan killed the Witch, as he walked away, he said, "It is finished." - quoting the words of Jesus on the Cross, of course. I didn't recall that from the book - and sure enough, it wasn't there. Clever little add though. (although we could go ALL KINDS of directions theologically on that one - which was not my intent)

inked

02-14-2006, 11:47 AM

Interesting interview with Skandar Keynes at

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/entertainment/13854678.htm

ENJOY!
:D

inked

02-15-2006, 11:29 AM

Award nominations from Sci Fi, Fantasy & Horror ----- 8 ! :D

See story at : http://www.narniafans.com/?id=784

hectorberlioz

02-15-2006, 03:52 PM

rohirrim TR

02-16-2006, 11:39 AM

yeah it was Adamsons's idea, but when someone mentioned the religious symboolysim of that line to him he had no idea of trying to do that; he was just trying to give the scene "closure".

inked

02-16-2006, 12:41 PM

Info on Adamson, DVD's, Caspian, et alia

http://www.narniafans.com/?id=785

inked

02-17-2006, 11:41 AM

"To Kill a Mockingbird" as template for Aslan?

See here: http://www.narniafans.com/?id=786

hectorberlioz

02-19-2006, 03:38 PM

yeah it was Adamsons's idea, but when someone mentioned the religious symboolysim of that line to him he had no idea of trying to do that; he was just trying to give the scene "closure".
hmm....

Inked, those links arent working for me.

inked

02-20-2006, 12:23 PM

HB, the links seem to be working for me, but got to narniafans.com and check out the article from 16 Feb.

inked

02-20-2006, 04:20 PM

Narnia wins BAFTA award, as does MR. Tumnus (James McAvoy)! http://www.narniafans.com/?id=787

:D

inked

02-28-2006, 06:19 PM

LWW costume designer wins first ever award for fantasy by the Designers Guild:
http://www.narniafans.com/?id=791

and, unheard of co-operation for CGI among 3 rivals results in award nomination:
http://www.narniafans.com/?id=793

inked

03-03-2006, 06:27 PM

Multiple news items.

Last Narnia film in 2017? http://www.narniafans.com/?id=794

AWARDS http://www.narniafans.com/?id=796

Narnia and Penguins Awarded top honors http://www.narniafans.com/?id=797

:D

inked

03-08-2006, 05:25 PM

Narnia is numero uno in world:
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyID=2006-03-06T134501Z_01_N06224579_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BOXOFFICE-OVERSEAS.xml

:D

inked

03-08-2006, 06:31 PM

Narnia is numero uno in world:
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyID=2006-03-06T134501Z_01_N06224579_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BOXOFFICE-OVERSEAS.xml

:D

Hollywood and Christians and film: A review of interest
http://orthodoxytoday.org/articles6/KeatingFilm.php

inked

03-20-2006, 12:55 PM

Stats and figures: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?id=holiday05.htm

LLW/HPGoF/Kong

tolkienfan

03-20-2006, 03:45 PM

I went to see all of those movies! Harry Potter on Thanksgiving, Chronicles of Narnia on Christmas, and King Kong on New Years! I think The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was the best.

Valandil

04-13-2006, 12:12 AM

I picked up the DVD on Friday - but we still haven't had a chance to watch it.

My wife didn't see it at the theater with me, so I'm hoping to share it with her soon. She wants to give her approval before our oldest gets to see it (he's 8 in another week or so - she wants to feel confident he won't get bad dreams from it).

Our second is 5 - but he got scared when George got in trouble in "Curious George" - so we'll definitely let HIM get a little older. :p

GreyMouser

04-13-2006, 11:08 AM

Yes, it was a great movie; more faithful to the book than LoTR
Though of course the fun part is the nitpicking.

First shock- Lucy's golden hair- though theyoung actress was great.
Didn't like the Professor- "act like a family" instead of "I suggest everybody mnding their own business"- Disney vs. crusty Oxford Profesor (like Bilbo/Frodo/Sam in "The Fellowship")

Beavers- Cockneys?!?!?!- these are rural ,earthy creatures, not sharp-tongued Londoners.

Waterfall scene- To the directors (and Peter Jackson)- you have to take liberties to make it into a movie, not a film of a book, but one of the reasons these books are so popular is that their authors are supreme story-tellers- so, adapt, cut, even augment- but don't imagine that you can write beter scenes.

Aslan- agree with Rhirrim about James Earl Jones- Liam doesn't have enough thunder.

The Witch- didn't like her at first- my vision has jet-black hair, blood-red lips and snow-white skin (I think that is Jadis, after she eats the apple in "The Magicians Nephew")

Anyway, this is just picky- an excellent adaptation- I'm going out to get the DVD

RÃan

04-24-2006, 01:00 AM

yeah, the twitty professor was really irritating - but he redeemed himself somewhat at the very end bit after the credits - I like how he played that scene (roughly "you can't get back that way - I've tried ...")

me9996

04-24-2006, 12:09 PM

My family has the DvD now, every time I see it i worry about one of the kids sticking their toung to the lampost :) :p

Acalewia

04-24-2006, 04:40 PM

I bought the Collectors Edition the week end it came out. I love it. Great movie. It took me three viewing before I saw the ankleslicers. (petty cool but i don't remember them in the books). I have to say the extra stuff is nifty.

Rian, the quote is "You can't get back in that way. You see, I've already tried."

inked

04-28-2006, 06:08 PM

see here for an interesting link....
http://www.narniafans.com/?id=848

:)

inked

05-16-2006, 05:07 PM

The White Witch aka Tilda is actually arguing that Lewis wrote LWW as an anti-religious book.

See here: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06050810.html

Could you imagine a conversation between her and the anti-Lewis author of HIS DARK MATERIALS? Now, that could be entertainment.

Curubethion

05-16-2006, 09:19 PM

You've got to be kidding. Please tell me you're kidding. She actually believes that??

Acalewia

05-17-2006, 01:37 PM

:eek: :eek: :eek:

inked

05-17-2006, 10:03 PM

I am afraid that Tilda indeed thinks just that way. But you can backtrack to the original interview if you feel it may have been slanted.

My Pullman comment was intended to be disingenuous. He hates Narnia for explicit religious reasons: his own hatred of religion. He thinks Narnia full of Christian nonsense. That obviously would not accord with Tilda, would it?
Just the mental picture of that tea chat made me laugh!

Speaking of images, how's this strike ya?
http://www.narniafans.com/?id=860

Goooooooo, Aslan!

For the simpletons like meself, it's pretty obvious who gets beaten by whom and why, and it is NOT a matter of interpretation at all. :D

hectorberlioz

05-18-2006, 12:44 PM

Mercutio

05-26-2006, 09:53 PM

I (finally) saw Narnia. I can't comment about Aslan's voice, however, because I watched the German-dubbed version. (Interestingly, some of my friends informed me that in this version, a few scenes were missing little bits--like the centuar pulling out his swords from left and right and Aslan getting shaved).

This is from the weblog of the editors of a Christian journal:

Christopher W. Cowan of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood sent me the following observation about the upcoming Disney film version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe:

I just finished reading The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe to my four-year-old son, Zachary.

When Father Christmas presents gifts to the children, he gives Peter a sword and shield. To Susan, he gives a bow and arrows and a horn. He then tells her, "You must use the bow only in great need, for I do not mean you to fight in the battle." Next, he gives Lucy a bottle and a dagger and says, "The dagger is to defend yourself at great need. For you also are not to be in the battle."

Lucy responds, "Why sir? I think---I don't know---but I think I could be brave enough." To which Father Christmas replies, "That is not the point. But battles are ugly when women fight."

During the battle at the end, Peter and Edmund---not Susan and Lucy---are the ones waging war against Aslan's enemies.

I have read good reports from Gene Veith that Douglas Gresham (C. S. Lewis's stepson) has sought to keep the movie faithful to the book. I cannot wait to see the film. But I will be thoroughly shocked if Lewis's vision wins out over contemporary feminism (particularly since I have seen clips of Susan wielding her bow). I hope I am wrong.

I am more optimistic than Chris that the film will stay faithful to Lewis (if only to keep from offending Narnia-lovers everywhere), but his point is valid. How strange will such "mere Christian" notions seem to a film audience accustomed to seeing Warrior Princesses knocking the teeth out of their foes?

Thoughts?

Acalewia

05-28-2006, 03:35 PM

I'm glad they were true to the book.

inked

06-05-2006, 04:23 PM

Of interest, from narniafans.com ...

Adamson recognized for Services to Film
05 Jun 2006 by Paul Martin

New Zealand-born director Andrew Ralph Adamson has been recognised for his services to film. He has been made a Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit, in the Queen's Birthday Honours. Adamson inhabits a different world in the same industry. He now lives in Los Angeles and his last film, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, was one of the biggest box office hits of last year, grossing US$428 million ($679 million). The film earned a Golden Globe nomination and an Oscar for make-up. He also directed the animated box-office monsters Shrek and Shrek 2.

sun-star

06-07-2006, 04:24 AM

I have read good reports from Gene Veith that Douglas Gresham (C. S. Lewis's stepson) has sought to keep the movie faithful to the book. I cannot wait to see the film. But I will be thoroughly shocked if Lewis's vision wins out over contemporary feminism (particularly since I have seen clips of Susan wielding her bow). I hope I am wrong.

I don't see what's wrong with that, since Susan wields her bow quite expertly on several occasions in the books. Jill's even more ready to fight alongside the boys in The Last Battle. Lewis may not have believed women should fight in battles (though actually Father Christmas doesn't say that - and let's not get into the question of when a fictional character can be said to be speaking for his creator). But I think it's best to take our ideas about what's faithful to the books from the books themselves, rather than from what we would like Lewis to be saying.

tolkienfan

06-07-2006, 02:33 PM

Doesn't Lucy fight in The Horse and His Boy? I seem to remember someone saying that she did.

I found it:
"Oh what nonsense!" Corin burst out. "of course I'm going to fight. Why, the Queen Lucy's going to be with the archers."

inked

06-09-2006, 11:10 AM

I don't see what's wrong with that, since Susan wields her bow quite expertly on several occasions in the books. Jill's even more ready to fight alongside the boys in The Last Battle. Lewis may not have believed women should fight in battles (though actually Father Christmas doesn't say that - and let's not get into the question of when a fictional character can be said to be speaking for his creator). But I think it's best to take our ideas about what's faithful to the books from the books themselves, rather than from what we would like Lewis to be saying.

Oh, sun-star, you mean the author actually had a meaning which he intended to convey? Be still my thudding heart, sun-star has not caved in to modernism or post-modernism! How very medieval of her. :D

sun-star

06-09-2006, 11:11 AM

What can I say, I'm an Oxford medievalist. The most antiquated kind :D

GreyMouser

06-09-2006, 02:39 PM

Zilbanne

06-10-2006, 06:07 AM

They could have done WAY better, for instance, with Aslan's fur. His fur looked like a bunch of cobras constantly wiggling around, it did not flow like real fur.

My red Australian Shepherd dog has fur exactly like Aslan did in the movie. Respectfully, it's interesting what you said. I thought that they couldn't make it MORE like real fur for Aslan. :)

hectorberlioz

06-16-2006, 01:41 PM

What can I say, I'm an Oxford medievalist. The most antiquated kind :D

I love Antiques :)

inked

06-19-2006, 12:38 PM

Narnia DVD creates history in India

16 Jun 2006 Paul Martin | (Narnia Films)

The Chronicles of Narnia has created history in the growing home entertainment sector by becoming the highest selling Disney DVD since its release last month. The Movie acquired the feat by dethroning Lion King by over 30% in sales. Daniel Solnicki, vice president, Buena Vista Home Entertainment International says, â€œThe success of the DVD has been phenomenal in India echoing its success worldwide (as the highest selling DVD of 2006). The growing hardware (DVD / VCD players) penetration and the aggressive marketing efforts by our partner in India are taking the home entertainment business to new heights.â€

http://www.narniafans.com/

azalea

07-07-2006, 10:14 PM

Belated comment: It is a fact that Lewis did include some gender bias in the Chronicles. He held notions that were common in his time.
[Example: he, through his characters, states more than once that girls are poor at directional tasks ("can't carry a map in there heads" to which Lucy replies "because we have something in them", but doesn't argue the fact that girls are worse at directions than boys). Lewis obviously hadn't met my husband. ;) There are other examples.]

That doesn't undermine the books, IMO.

I would say that battles are ugly affairs, period, although sometimes necessary.

We do of course know that there are differences between women and men, but it doesn't mean that women shouldn't be afforded the same choices and opportunities as men, just as men should be afforded the same as women. All people should have (and technically, they all do have) the ability to choose their own actions.

The fact that Movie Susan and Lucy take on a small part of the battle at the end of it does perhaps compromise Lewis' views about women in battle, but the little boy and girl in the audience whose aunt is fighting in Iraq sees nothing amiss. Lewis would probably think they should, though.

sun-star

07-10-2006, 12:58 PM

I agree with all that :). Though I do think the comment Mercutio quoted misinterprets Lewis' brand of antifeminism. The attitude to women varies through the Chronicles - Jill and Lucy are very different from Susan (and from each other), and are allowed to play different roles.

azalea

07-12-2006, 05:36 PM

Right, and as someone else said, in HHB it is indicated that Lucy fights with the archers. I whole heartedly agree that different books in the series and different passages treat women's issues differently. Bottom line, I think that one shouldn't regard the omission of certain passages as having been done by design and/or a negative thing just because its inclusion would tend to support one's own views. Hope that makes sense.

Butterbeer

07-12-2006, 05:41 PM

well, i tend to agree, but mainly because on the evidence that the whole film was so apallingly shoddily done... it is clearly unclear to base any reading on the basis of it!

just to be clear are we talking about the books or that lamentable pile of pap that was the movie (with its subsequent arrogant tasteless commercial 'novelisiations') here ?

True fans of Lewis stand up and be heard, say I!

best, BB

azalea

07-13-2006, 10:20 AM

I was responding to the quote Mercutio posted above, in which the writer stated that he'd be disappointed to see Movie Lucy and/or Susan fighting in the battle. His point was that if they did, then Hollywood was pandering to modern feminist ideas rather than staying true to Lewis' ideas of women and war.

But as others stated, Lewis apparently didn't have a problem with adult Lucy being an archer in later battles. It just seemed to me that the writer of the above quote was placing too much importance on the matter.

Huorn

07-16-2006, 06:34 PM

I have always been an avid Tolkien fan, but the shortfall of Tolkien's books is that they are so dominately male, especially in the department of the characters that are appealing to my tastes. Lewis on the other hand does not have races where all their women have disappeared. Lewis' stories also have much more female representation. It is these aspects of Lewis stories that I find more appealing.

The movie is also a little more watchable for me then the LoTR film because it isn't as dark in tone.