Reply to Topic
Here's my review of The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. I've got more thoughts, which I'll try to find time to expand on later. Suffice to say, I was pretty conflicted about this one. I genuinely love some of the changes made, and dislike several others. Most, however, I like as a moviegoer, but not as a distraction from what should have been a slower, more thoughtful film.
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian
Second films in any series have a number of built-in advantages. The most noteworthy is that we already know their characters, and can rush headlong into the developments of the story. It is not a guarantee of quality, but it can free a film of constraint. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian makes the most of this fact at times, but meanders at points and has the same tonal problems as its predecessor.
As you likely know, Prince Caspian is a follow-up to 2005's The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and the second film in The Chronicles of Narnia, based on a series of books by famed British author C.S. Lewis. That film, though true to the source material and well-polished, spasmed between candy like set pieces and weightless battles. Prince Caspian has a good deal more gravity, thanks in large part to the author's brilliant decision to leap forward in time: the children find themselves drawn back into the world of Narnia a year after the events of the first tale, only to find that 1,300 years have passed there.
Prince Caspian strays much further from its source than Wardrobe did; sometimes for good, and sometimes for ill. Entire sequences are added, others are significantly expanded, and a couple of relationships are fundamentally changed. Some of this is necessary, of course. There is a degree to which almost all adaptations must break off from their roots and establish their own identities, but that identity must stay consistent with the themes and tone of the source. There are times where Prince Caspian veers wildly off the tracks laid for it, but it always seems to do so for the sake of a remarkable spectacle.
Credit must be given for the mere attempt at continuity, as each departure from the book is done in such a way so that it interrupts the existing story, but does not fundamentally alter it. The additions are largely self-contained and episodic, so as not to overtly disturb the original story. This is far more considerate than many adaptations care to be, but Narnia devotees will still be taken out of the experience by the dramatic differences.
Some of the changes work, and even improve, certain aspects of the book. The children are, at times, more reflective and philosophical about their relationships and experiences. They behave in reasonable ways and have all the mental conflicts you'd expect out of children who've already lived for a lifetime.
These changes work largely thanks to the actors involved, all of whom feel at home. Though tentative at times in the first installment, all four children easily inhabit their characters this time around. William Mosely (as Peter) has the most to do of the four, as he continually butts heads with Ben Barnes (the titular Prince Caspian). Barnes is a Telmarine; a race of invaders who have all but eradicated native Narnians in the 1,300 years which have passed. He is heir to the throne, a fact which makes him a target of Miraz, who has Kingly aspirations himself and whose wife has recently provided him with an heir. Caspian's status as King-in-waiting creates a good deal of conflict with the formerly High King Peter, and their clashes represent exactly the type of shift in emphasis that all such adaptations should aspire to.
Barnes more than holds his own and brings a deadly seriousness to the proceedings that was largely missing from Wardrobe. Of course, the fact that this is far, far more violent than the last one probably has something to do with that. Many have said it's the most violent PG film ever made, and if one excludes those before the advent of the PG-13 rating, they'd be right. Though the violence is almost entirely bloodless, a good many characters meet their death.
The effects work is generally strong. This time around, the animals look more like, well, actual animals, and everything just feels a bit more real. One notable exception is Reepicheep, the surprisingly deadly, sword-wielding mouse voiced by Eddie Izzard. His design is adequate (and Izzard shows remarkable restraint in not turning him into a gag), but he never quite lives in the world we see.
A brilliant character in the original stories, Reepicheep was co-opted by the Shrek series' Puss in Boots, who was later chronologically, but first cinematically. The resulting character has to go out of his way to avoid obvious similarities, and is somewhat robbed of his bravado. Otherwise, one suspects this character would have stolen the film.
In the end, Reepicheep ends up being a microcosm of the series so far: brilliant books and incredible technical execution, belied by the fact that other films simply beat them to the punch. One can hardly blame Lewis for the fact that Dreamworks created a domesticated contradiction like Puss in Boots before his films saw the silver screen, nor for the fact that his living trees will still bring Ents to mind for some.
Still, Prince Caspian has the good sense to compartmentalize its departures, and it brings some new, interesting angles to what is one of the less thrilling books in the series. 2010 promises the release of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, often thought of by fans as the series' best book, and probably the most cinematic, as well. Better still, it lacks the sort of conflict which new director Michael Apted may be tempted to turn into another epic Lord of the Rings lite battle.
One does hope that they bring the same sense of boldness and emotion to the next adaptation as they did to this one. But as a lifelong admirer of the books, here's hoping that they bring the highlighter, and leave the scissors behind.
Second films in any series have a number of built-in advantages. The most noteworthy is that we already know their characters, and can rush headlong into the developments of the story. It is not a guarantee of quality, but it can free a film of constraint. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian makes the most of this fact at times, but meanders at points and has the same tonal problems as its predecessor.
As you likely know, Prince Caspian is a follow-up to 2005's The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and the second film in The Chronicles of Narnia, based on a series of books by famed British author C.S. Lewis. That film, though true to the source material and well-polished, spasmed between candy like set pieces and weightless battles. Prince Caspian has a good deal more gravity, thanks in large part to the author's brilliant decision to leap forward in time: the children find themselves drawn back into the world of Narnia a year after the events of the first tale, only to find that 1,300 years have passed there.
Prince Caspian strays much further from its source than Wardrobe did; sometimes for good, and sometimes for ill. Entire sequences are added, others are significantly expanded, and a couple of relationships are fundamentally changed. Some of this is necessary, of course. There is a degree to which almost all adaptations must break off from their roots and establish their own identities, but that identity must stay consistent with the themes and tone of the source. There are times where Prince Caspian veers wildly off the tracks laid for it, but it always seems to do so for the sake of a remarkable spectacle.
Credit must be given for the mere attempt at continuity, as each departure from the book is done in such a way so that it interrupts the existing story, but does not fundamentally alter it. The additions are largely self-contained and episodic, so as not to overtly disturb the original story. This is far more considerate than many adaptations care to be, but Narnia devotees will still be taken out of the experience by the dramatic differences.
Some of the changes work, and even improve, certain aspects of the book. The children are, at times, more reflective and philosophical about their relationships and experiences. They behave in reasonable ways and have all the mental conflicts you'd expect out of children who've already lived for a lifetime.
These changes work largely thanks to the actors involved, all of whom feel at home. Though tentative at times in the first installment, all four children easily inhabit their characters this time around. William Mosely (as Peter) has the most to do of the four, as he continually butts heads with Ben Barnes (the titular Prince Caspian). Barnes is a Telmarine; a race of invaders who have all but eradicated native Narnians in the 1,300 years which have passed. He is heir to the throne, a fact which makes him a target of Miraz, who has Kingly aspirations himself and whose wife has recently provided him with an heir. Caspian's status as King-in-waiting creates a good deal of conflict with the formerly High King Peter, and their clashes represent exactly the type of shift in emphasis that all such adaptations should aspire to.
Barnes more than holds his own and brings a deadly seriousness to the proceedings that was largely missing from Wardrobe. Of course, the fact that this is far, far more violent than the last one probably has something to do with that. Many have said it's the most violent PG film ever made, and if one excludes those before the advent of the PG-13 rating, they'd be right. Though the violence is almost entirely bloodless, a good many characters meet their death.
The effects work is generally strong. This time around, the animals look more like, well, actual animals, and everything just feels a bit more real. One notable exception is Reepicheep, the surprisingly deadly, sword-wielding mouse voiced by Eddie Izzard. His design is adequate (and Izzard shows remarkable restraint in not turning him into a gag), but he never quite lives in the world we see.
A brilliant character in the original stories, Reepicheep was co-opted by the Shrek series' Puss in Boots, who was later chronologically, but first cinematically. The resulting character has to go out of his way to avoid obvious similarities, and is somewhat robbed of his bravado. Otherwise, one suspects this character would have stolen the film.
In the end, Reepicheep ends up being a microcosm of the series so far: brilliant books and incredible technical execution, belied by the fact that other films simply beat them to the punch. One can hardly blame Lewis for the fact that Dreamworks created a domesticated contradiction like Puss in Boots before his films saw the silver screen, nor for the fact that his living trees will still bring Ents to mind for some.
Still, Prince Caspian has the good sense to compartmentalize its departures, and it brings some new, interesting angles to what is one of the less thrilling books in the series. 2010 promises the release of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, often thought of by fans as the series' best book, and probably the most cinematic, as well. Better still, it lacks the sort of conflict which new director Michael Apted may be tempted to turn into another epic Lord of the Rings lite battle.
One does hope that they bring the same sense of boldness and emotion to the next adaptation as they did to this one. But as a lifelong admirer of the books, here's hoping that they bring the highlighter, and leave the scissors behind.
Last edited by Yoda; 05-20-08 at 07:33 PM.
Reason: Fixing a typo.
In front of Iron Man, there were trailers for Indy 4, The Dark Night, The Incredible Hulk, The Happening, and I believe Prince Caspian, as well. My brother, for one, said that he couldn't remember any summer being packed with so many promising films.
.
so cheezy and retarded to me. All in all though, pretty entertaining film for sure, probably worth a matinee price to go see it, but definitely not worth much more.
