Forgot-
Aslan is huge–much larger than a RL lion. I don’t understand how his size looks smaller than a real lion’s?
I saw it last night. I was very pleased.
Tilda Swinton’s performance was excellent, even if she did have some slightly goofy-looking costumes. She was absolutely chilling.
I thought all the kids were good, particularly Edmund. The sibing dynamics were well done. There was more questioning of whether they should be involved than there was in the books, which I liked.
Aslan was just perfect.
The Professor was a bit more odd, and less wise-seeming than I pictured.
I thought they pulled off the Talking Beasts very well, especially the Beavers.
I thought the music was alright, except for the song they played over the closing credits, which was wretched.
Best line in the movie.
I do hope they make Prince Caspian and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, at least.
Overall, I am very, very happy.
My one nitpick: the battle was supposed to take place at the fords of Beruna. I didn’t see any river. But it’s a small matter.
I liked the movie pretty well, but I thought it didn’t completely capture the emotions of the book. They did a fair job at showing Aslan’s own sadness and loneliness on his way to the Stone Table, but I thought they failed to show his joy after he is resurrected. Most of the happy bit where Aslan awakens all the statues at the witch’s castle was cut. Aslan looked pretty good, but I thought Liam Neeson’s voice didn’t quite fill him up. I’m not sure the sound was turned up enough in the theater I was in.
The children were well-cast. I liked Mr. Tumnus and the White Witch. The battle looked great, as did the sacrifice scene at the stone table, which was hard to watch with my kids.
Bestowing those titles on the children at the end, “Peter the Magnificent” etc., was silly. In the book they came to be known by those titles because of things they did during their rein.
And grown-up Edmund shouldn’t have been riding the talking Horse at the end. That isn’t done in Narnia, except during war.
Very enjoyable movie.
Only one thing I really missed that hasn’t been mentioned by others: Aslan chiding Lucy after the battle scene–“Must more die because of Edmund?”–due to her delay in using her healing cordial while she waited for it to work on Edmund.
I took my 8-year-old daughter. We both liked the movie.
I think I enjoyed it more than FotR, but I am a Tolkien fanatic and every change from the book detracted from the movie for me. With Narnia, I am not as attached to the story or characters so I could just sit back and enjoy. It was the same thing for Harry Potter, less attachment = more enjoyment of the movies.
The child actors were okay. My attitude was none were as annoying or as fake as Dakota Fanning. 
Special effects had some glitches and Aslan did not seem quite right.
I think I enjoyed the Father Christmas scene the most but Philip was funny.
My daughter loved the beavers; she wasn’t expecting that at all. She loved the unicorn, but she loves all and any unicorns. She thought the end was weird with the Kids age.
Jim
She DID have eyelashes. They were white on the tips, which I noticed specifically.
Yes, that dress was highly weird. It looked to be made of hair, some sort of composite fabric. If I were the costumer, I’d have had her in icy-looking silks and satin, but this designer went another way. I’m not sure I liked it. However, the crown of icicles that slowly melted were a nice touch.
Yeah, the hair choice was very odd. Did she have dreads because it was too cold for her to wash her hair for 100 years?
Finally saw it today -
Overall, I liked it.
Smaller things:
I really wanted the scene where Lucy & Susan play with Aslan after the resurrection. Also, more when he revives the stone animals - just seeing them alive, not quite enough.
I liked the opening. I was quite young when I first read this book, and I did not quite get a sense of why they were out in the country in the first place. I liked having it there.
The music was horrible, overdone, too blatant, too loud, incredibly annoying.
I did not like the way the white witch looked until the battle scene. Those were not shoulder pads as much as a humpback. Also, she should have been bigger. (Or maybe that’s just how I’ve always read her.)
And so should Aslan - of course, I’m not sure how to do that. But, he seemed tame. Despite the line “not a tame lion” making it into the movie, that’s almost exactly what that was.
Still, I had fun. Took a bunch of kids today, and they all loved it. I’ll probably see it again on DVD.
I haven’t read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, so my complaints are more about the story itself than they are about changes made in the film. I had two major problems with the movie:
-
There’s almost no dramatic tension in the second half of the movie. Aslan “sacrifices” himself, but then (in terms of screen time) almost immediately comes back to life. It came across as almost entirely meaningless to me. What’s worse is that once he’s back, Aslan starts reviving everyone else as well. Besides the fox, did any of the speaking characters stay dead? (The fox stayed dead, didn’t he?) Kinda ruins the tension of the big climactic battle when the casualties don’t matter.
-
The kids are totally useless. They’re supposed to come to Narnia and fulfill this prophecy to defeat the White Witch, but nothing is shown to indicate why they’re so necessary. Aslan had already returned and assembled an army when they kids got to him, and in the battle itself the kids do almost nothing. Susan and Lucy aren’t even there, having fallen asleep on Aslan’s corpse. Edmund signals the archer, which anyone could’ve done. Peter leads the charge but mostly looks overwhelmed in combat (which makes sense, considering that he’s had maybe a day or two to practice with that sword). Had the kids not been involved at all, Aslan wouldn’t have had to play dead for a night and could’ve simply led the charge himself. As it is, Aslan kills the White Witch himself anyway.
Overall, it was still an enjoyable way to kill a few hours. I think my favorite character was the White Witch, who somehow became progressively more badass as her influence was supposed to be diminishing. Speaking of the White Witch, I totally thought that that was Alice Krige during the movie. I was sorta waiting for somebody to get assimilated.
In the book, they are riding after a stag and re-discover the lamp-post. Perhaps in other books in the series, characters don’t ride horses, but in this one, they do.
Re the eyelashes–it seemed to me that in some scenes they were visible, in others non-existant (which is most likely the way she was lit). I liked her rendition of the WW alot–I just didn’t like the costume. And she needed to be taller. I also see her swathed in shades of icy gray blue silk frosted with white tulle or velvet–not lush, exactly, but imposing.
Catalyst --I’m no Lewis expert or Narnia expert, but IMO the tension comes from the choices made. Lucy’s choice to befriend Mr. Tumnus; Edmund’s lies, the Beaver’s opting to help the kids etc. It’s a simple story, really. Edmund makes a poor choice and is in ignorance of the Deep Magic of Narnia. Aslan offers himself in Ed’s place, much to the glee of the WW-who is also ignorant of a Deeper Magic. Edmund is redeemed, Love and Purity(?) save Aslan–but evil remains, hence the Battle.
I thought there was quite a bit of tension-more so than in the book. In the film, with the kids bickering and disagreeing, the chance that they may not work together was more prominent than in the book. And there is always the doubt of whether Good will prevail.
It’s not a typical Hollywood screenplay–it’s a children’s fantasy book with Christian themes. Certainly the broad theme of Good vs Evil is explored in alot of movies–this one does it without a whole lot of violence and an emphasis on the Goodness. It makes a nice change.
Dammit! hit post too soon.
the children are vital NOT because of anything they do–although one could argue that without Edmund, there would be no freeing of Narnia at all–but because of who they are.
They are Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve–that is enough for the Deep Magic Prophecy to be fulfilled. Anything else they bring to the table (sorry, bad pun!) is a benefit. I do doubt that any 4 would have done–4 pre-Witch Edmund-types for example, might not have been enough…or would they? All the kids have some of Edmund in them–oh, Lord, I’ll shut up now!
Funny how one can so easily get enmeshed in theology just by discussing this film. I am at most a nominal Christian (turning more agnostic every day)–but this movie shows one of the better sides of Christianity.
I think the point Eleanor of Aquitaine was making was not whether or not they were riding horses, it’s that they were riding talking horses. I remember the books being very clear that talking horses didn’t allow people to ride them except in cases of great need (ie: war, “Horse and his boy”, etc.)
As far as the kids not doing much of anything, interestingly enough that was my beef about Frodo in the first Lord of the Rings book. The first time I read it, I really didn’t like Frodo. He didn’t do anything, he just let other people (Gandalf, Aragorn) cart him around to where he needed to go. Once I got through the whole book, though, he started to do more towards the end. I think it’s sort of the same thing in Lion, Witch, and Wardrobe: the kids start out as just ho-hum, everyday kids, but as challenges are set in front of them, they rise to the occasion and become more than they started as.
So…wait a minute. It’s been at least 30 years since I read the series.
Not all the animals in Narnia talk?
That’s right. In Prince Caspian, Susan shoots a bear. She hesitated beforehand, because she was afraid it might be a talking bear. The horse in The Horse and his Boy is a Narnian horse resident in Calormen, where he never lets on that he can talk; other horses there don’t. Mice in Narnia do not talk until the mice gnaw Aslan’s bonds after the Stone Table incident (whereupon their descendants grow considerably bigger, which is why Reepicheep is waist-high to a preadolescent child). And Prince Rilian erupts in murderous rage in The Last Battle when he sees a horse being whipped and hears it complain - until it spoke, he deplored the cruelty, but naturally assumed it was not a talking horse.
Narnians, after all, eat meat (and hunt). They could hardly do so if all animals were elevated to speech and reason; or if they could, it would be a rather crueller world than we have generally believed.
SWMBO and I saw the movie last night.
Two thumbs-up. Excellent job. Great special effects and they stayed quite close to the story.
I had been given the impression (from the hype) that the Biblical themes would be overdone. I am pleased to report that this is not the case.
Thanks–I only read the series once through–I read and reread TLWATW many times.
[hijack]
(ps: how are you? I hope you are doing well. I think of your situation sometimes and hope it’s improving.)[/hijack]
How do the children get through to Narnia without the wardrobe? [/tangent]
Also, I am glad that Edmund is more misunderstood and allowing his feelings to rule his head in the film, rather than just spiteful and capricious like the book.
I guess it’s more of a problem with the book than with the movie (when I started reading the book as a youth, I felt it was too childish and stopped reading it), but this part of the story REALLY bugged me too. I mean, here are all these battle hardened warriors and we’re supposed to believe that they’re just going to put all their military senses on the back burner and follow some kid who’s never killed anything but a wolf that practicall fell on his sword? Sorry. NFW.
This completey ruined the film for me. That’s not to say it’s all bad. It certainly is beautifully filmed, the CGI was just about the most impressive I’ve seen to date, and that little girl was darn good, but I just couldn’t get behind this huge hole in logic.
Posted by Skammer:
Well, what is one to do? These are archetypal situations, and have probably appeared in stories since before written language.
Battle hardened warriors? What battle hardened warriors? The White Witch had ruled for at least a hundred years, and there is no mention of any wars previous to that either. The whole army was made up of people (animals?) who didn’t know much about fighting, and Peter was the person prophecied to come lead them. He was as good as any of them, really.
Saw it Friday night. I’ve never read the books, so I didn’t have that standard to hold it up to, or to fill in the gaps for me. And I have to say, I really didn’t care for it. Technically, it was great: all the various animals and monsters looked superb. The acting was top-notch, too, especially Mr. Tumnus and Lucy. They managed to find four really good child actors, when most movies can’t scrape one together. So full marks on that.
But, when all was said and done, I just didn’t care. The story didn’t emotionally involve me. Aslan dying, which ought to have been one of the most emotional parts of the movie, was just flat. We hadn’t seen the character long enough to care that he was dead, and it was pretty obvious that he was going to be coming back, anyway. (In part because the commercials for the movie always included that shot of him standing underneath the stone table’s dolmen with the sun rising behind him. Good job, marketing! Way to blow that plot point!) Same with Edmond. Oh no! They’ve stabbed one of the central characters! If only they had a magic potion that cures all wounds!
Speaking of which, when Susan tells Lucy not to bother giving the potion to Aslan because “he’s already gone?” Bitch, it’s a magic potion! What the fuck do you know about wether it will work or not?
Anyway, the movie didn’t suck, by any means, and is worth seeing just for the monsters and such. Loved the minotaurs, in particular. But, at the end of the day, the whole thing simply felt soulless. Which, for a movie that is supposedly a Christian allegory, strikes me as a fairly serious failing.
Oh, and I loved Santa Claus-as-arms dealer. That was a nice touch. 