in the middle of "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" movie

[timepiececlock]

"Please sir, he's our brother."
"I know. That only makes the betrayal all the worse."


Now that right there? That just reminded me of something that really bugged me about the book, too. Way back in elementry school when I read it. Yes, Edmund is a whiny brat. But his only real mistake was to take candy from a stranger, if I recall. And Lucy herself took tea from a stranger. The witch is the first person Edmund meets in Narnia, and he's no more to be blamed for trusting her than Lucy is to be blamed for trusting the fawn. But does Lucy get badmouthed when the fawn betrayed her trust? No.

And after he eats the food the witch gives him, Edward's free will was pretty much gone, if I recall. And there's the fact that he is what, 11? 12 at the most? An 11 year old is not capable of the adult reasoning that ends with people being called traitors and then executed. Not when you're talking about war and death, which is a bit more overwhelming for a child than betraying who broke the downstairs window. If Lucy had been in his place and listened to the authority figure, the "adult" that was manipulating her and feeding her mind-controlling drugged food, I don't think they'd all turn around and call the 8 year old child a traitor. Edmund's not THAT much older.


Edit: Oh come on kid, don't put the sword back in the scabbard without cleaning it!

Edit2: Is he riding a unicorn? Oh that's hilarious. And stupid. But mostly hilarious.

Edit3: Is it wrong of me that I see the four adult versions of them horse-riding through the woods of Narnia and I think "Well, considering they're the ONLY humans in Narnia, at the age they're at right now... they're either bestiality deviants, incest deviants, or completely asexual..."

Final thoughts:

-Mr. Tumnus & Lucy win for the strongest and most moving scenes of the film.
-Tilda Swinson wins for looking coolest in her Witch costumes.
-Peter loses for being a bore
-the giant army cats win for being giant army cats
-the director loses for making a movie that sounds good in pieces but the whole is less than the sum of the parts, by quite a bit.

But it could have been worse, I suppose. And it might be argued as unfair to hold every epic fantasy film to the LOTR standards. Then again, why is that unfair? LOTR set the fucking standard, not just in size and scope, but in power and depth of storytelling for fantasy films. And yes, I am going to hold would-be epics like Narnia to the LOTR standard.

That's what standards are for.

Comments

[donna-c-punk.livejournal.com]

I never read the Narnia books. And the movie didn't spur me into wanting to read any of them, whereas The Fellowship of the Ring film finally made me crack open the LOTR books which had been sitting in my possession for almost two years. I just sat through Narnia, thinking, "Man, even Tolkien would complain about the overt Judeo-Christian crap in here. I wonder if he ever mentioned it to Lewis?".

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

Frankly, some of the other books in were more imaginative than this one. The Silver Chair was pretty good (very much like a classic fairy tale), and I think I enjoyed The Magician's Nephew too. There were strong Christian allegories in those too, but the adventures were more interesting (a prince held hostage, a forest full of magic ponds that lead to other worlds) than the "hero and rightful king" thing this first book has.

Although I did enjoy the books in my memory a lot more than this movie. I don't know if I'd still enjoy them now, but at 8 they were very good and I remember them fondly, for the most part.

This movie, though... certain parts are charming on their own (Mr. Tumnus the fawn, the White Witch), but as a whole the movie doesn't really grab me. I'm not particularly attached to the children, and in particular Peter bores me horribly. Also... the roles and themes are so much more obvious (and dare I say it, tired) when viewed in the film from an adult perspective. I imagine the books are still a good read, but what magic they retain past childhood didn't make it to the screen version. I'm just kind of bored.

Whereas LOTR is, actually, my all-time favorite movie (as a whole). I cried at the end of Fellowship and in the middle of Return of the King. I don't see myself crying for this movie any time soon.

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

The problem with this movie is that we just haven't spent enough time with these characters and this world for me to really buy into the entire package. I mean, with the LOTR films, you were given this rich and detailed immersion into Middle Earth, primarily from the hobbit's culture and upward from that. When Gandalf gave his life to fight the Balrog they didn't just lose a wise and powerful leader-- they lost the funny old man who makes fireworks for village children and smokes a little too much pipe.


I'm watching the into battle sequence now, which mostly consists of two armies running toward each other for about 8 minutes, maybe 10. This is like the LOTR battles but for kids. No blood, no gore. No excessive violence and no shots of people being speared for dragged into the sky by Nazgul.

Though the cats tackling people is cool. There's something about a pouncing giant cat-- you can't take away the coolness of that, even in this.


Watching this all, though... what I really feel between this and LOTR is the lack of depth in the cause. Both are very clear-cut good against evil, with a light side and dark side which are each at the extreme. However, in LOTR there was all this middle ground, this gray area. There were the races neither human nor elf, and there were the constant themes of human greed and good-intentions-gone-wrong that undercut the out-and-out heroism stuff. We get some of that with Edmund and Tunmus, but in Middle Earth it's not just a few-- every person has the capacity to be a force of good or ill, and several go back and forth or toe the line.

[grlnamedlucifer.livejournal.com]

>Edit3: Is it wrong of me that I see the four adult versions of them horse-riding through the woods of Narnia and I think "Well, considering they're the ONLY humans in Narnia, at the age they're at right now... they're either bestiality deviants, incest deviants, or completely asexual..."<

Well...technically they're the only humans in *Narnia*, but not in Archenland and Calormene and all that...

[clodia-risa.livejournal.com]

I watched it recently as well. I feel like the movie would have been ten times better if they hadn't tried for the epic movie feel. If they had had more whimsical music, and didn't beat us over the head with "look! It is epic! And cool! Look at us!" I would have liked it better.

Yeah, LWW, there's a few times where the story falls subject to the allegory, and those are its weakest moments.

Another problem I had with the movie, and this ties into my "tried to make it too epic" criticism, is that they left out most of the "cute" moments, and "teaching" moments. The time where Peter messes up and reinserts his sword without cleaning it, and Aslan calls him on it? Not there. I wanted Aslan as a teacher, not as Gandalf.

I enjoyed the movie, and will likely watch it again. But it just makes me want to re-read the books and remember what they're actually like.

The Witch was fantastic. The kids (grown up) are totally asexual.

And Prince Caspian is supposed to come out in 2008! I'm hoping that it will be better.

[sub-divided.livejournal.com]

I didn't like this movie either. he scenes before the credits rolled were promising -- some great sibling interaction, plus it's set during the Blitz -- but the further the movie went, the more it was supposed to be picking up steam, the flater it fell.

My biggest problem with this movie is that it's too Calvinist. All the centaurs are good, all the wolves are evil. Beavers are good, polar bears are evil. Edmund is destined to fall, but he's also destined to be redeemed by Aslan. Etc. How can it be epic when there's no room for human choices?

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

That's the same feeling I was trying to describe in a comment above:

Watching this all, though... what I really feel between this and LOTR is the lack of depth in the cause. Both are very clear-cut good against evil, with a light side and dark side which are each at the extreme. However, in LOTR there was all this middle ground, this gray area. There were the races neither human nor elf, and there were the constant themes of human greed and good-intentions-gone-wrong that undercut the out-and-out heroism stuff. We get some of that with Edmund and Tunmus, but in Middle Earth it's not just a few-- every person has the capacity to be a force of good or ill, and several go back and forth or toe the line.


Everything felt too controlled.