Prince Caspian

[tealin]

I have to preface this by saying it was on Disney's dime – such is the vastness of the Company that they booked every cinema at the theatre (every theatre at the cinema?) to show their local employees this morning. Would my opinion be different if I paid full evening price for it? Maybe. I think it has to do more with never having read the book, being optimistic but not overly worked up for it, and just looking for a spot of fun.

And ... it was fun ...

I mean, understand here, I thought Pirates 3 was fun... it didn't make any sense whatsoever but it was a great time if you just gave up and went with the flow. Caspian makes significantly more sense than that, which might be a little bit of its downfall, because you're coaxed into believing it enough that when something unbelievable happens, a red flag comes up.

My main reason for not liking it as much as the first one is that it doesn't feel like it's about anything. The first one had its whole Christian allegory going on (subtly, which was a relief, but it was at least a unifying theme) and on the surface was about reawakening a land, instilling hope, and overthrowing an oppressor. Caspian seems like mostly a succession drama, which is not really engaging, with a dash of overthrowing an oppressor but not enough to convince you of its necessity. Just how bad were the Telmarines? They seemed to be absentee landlords for the most part; they hadn't even finished the bridge into Narnia and appeared to avoid the place, yet they've been 'ruling' it for hundreds of years? The White Whitch goes around turning people into stone! Now THAT's oppression! There also wasn't much by way of personalities working at cross purposes ... LW&W's strength was the moral fallibility of its characters, with Edmund's and Tumnus's betrayals and suchlike, whereas Caspian's characters were pretty evenly divided into Good and Bad with little or no crossover between the two. The closest we get to fallible is the number of times (possibly too many) that Peter learns his lesson for being cocky. The pacing was good, I never got bored, and the story fit together well enough ... the raid on the castle, which I just learned was added for the movie, seemed well-integrated into the plot as a whole and I find it hard to imagine the story without it, at least because this was the only time we really got to see characters bouncing off each other, even though the largest logic hole in the entire movie comes near the end of it. What annoyed me most about the plot was the deus ex machina at the end – can the Narnians ever win something on their own without running to Aslan? Or does this venture onto theological ground that the filmmakers didn't want to tread?

Cinematically, it all held together well enough ... there wasn't any terribly exciting camera work but it wasn't boring either. It all supported the story, no matter how much I am of the opinion that the follow-the-arrow-in-flight shot should be forbidden except in cases of parody. Also, the moral of the story appeared to be 'don't stand and look back regretfully/longingly/wistfully/angrily/with horror at any time.' There was an awful lot of that, and almost always it put the character at a disadvantage. Just GO! Stop staring and GO! Was this intended to provoke this reaction or does Mr Adamson have a soft spot for lingering?

The acting I find hard to comment on because I am no great fan of C.S. Lewis – all his dialogue sounds a bit stilted to me, so if it's delivered in a less than naturalistic way it just feels in style, whether it came from his pen or someone else's. It was stilted, but for what it was, it seemed fine to me, or at least was consistent. You'll just have to make up your own mind in that arena.

The effects, now, I can comment on, because wow. This movie may be the best yet for the seamless incorporation of CG characters. They were all lit, rendered, and composited beautifully. The only giveaway that they were CG most of the time (aside from being talking animals and suchlike, of course) was, I'm guessing, something about the rigging ... There still seems to be a bit of trouble with mammals, especially those with loose skin. Either they end up looking really overanimated (like the wolves in LW&W) or like a plastic model with a fur coat glued on, not something with bones and muscles moving underneath skin and fur. Is it because the skin/fur is tied to a specific spot on the body mesh? I noticed this especially with the badger, who in real life would look more like a fur bag full of muscle than a stuffed animal. I don't mean this to be too harsh a criticism; I know there's only so much you can do in CG. Goodness knows furry animals have come a long way in the last ten years. Mammals with tauter skin, such as horses, for example, looked a lot better, and the birds ... damn can they ever do wings. Props to the bird nerd at Framestore. And to everyone, really – for all Syd's stories of production hell they didn't let any of that show in their work. I was only disappointed by Reepicheep, and this is only because I'd come into the movie with swashbuckling rodents being the main thing I was looking forward to. Why did they style his facial fur like Puss in Boots'? Why? The swordfighting scenes I was hoping for were basically cancelled by him having no one his size to duel with. Oh well. I really liked the trees ... I thought they used their tree-ness (arboreality?) much better than the Ents in LotR which seemed like giant wooden (or foam rubber) people most of the time, though this is probably down to author's vision more than effects department. Speaking of which, and if you've read The Silmarillion you'll know what I'm talking about, Lewis and Tolkien were friends, but did their friendship extend to sharing mythological creatures, i.e. Ulmo? There is no way that isn't Ulmo. The feeling of shared universes isn't helped by the shared locations ... that's obviously Fangorn at the Prince's escape.

I think I've been unfairly critical so far – I did enjoy it as a whole. These are the things I enjoyed:

Oo pretty!
Siege weapons!
Somewhere in New Zealand that looks like Lynn Canyon!
Ruins!
Badgerland, Badgerland, Badgerlaaand (it's Badgical)!
Cunning plans gone wrong o noes!
Guilt re: above!
Costumes! (I hope Susan's dress comes to FIDM next year cos I want a good look at it)
Siege weapons!
Archery!
Chase scenes!
Siege weapons!
A great big army descending on the holdout of plucky good guys ... with their siege weapons!
Cunning!
Ulmo!
The Tube!
Artwork created for the film that actually looks medieval! (ahem Black family 'tapestry' coff coff)
Men bashing each other with swords!

That just about covers it. Except for this:

DON'T LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING IF a) you haven't seen Prince Caspian yet AND b)you don't want a major distraction through the whole movie.


I recently rewatched The Three Amigos while hunting for dialogue to animate. Little did I know it would bug me while watching Prince Caspian. One of the Bad King's sub-nobles looked so much like this guy:

Every time he appeared in a scene my brain said 'El Guapo!' I didn't even learn his name until I looked it up on IMDb. He's not the same guy – obviously, he'd look 22 years older now – but argh, distracting.

Comments

[wizardelfgirl.livejournal.com]

I totally agree with you in that they should have at least showed why getting Caspian on the throne was good to both Narnians and Telmarines. I mean okay, the Telmarines drove the Narnians away a thousand years ago, but the new generations believed them extinct so they can't be blamed. And while Miraz was indeed a tyrant and murderer and all that, it is never implied that he was a bad ruler or that the Telmarines were suffering under his reign, as stated in the book. As such, it looks more like the Narnians are imposing their presence on the Telmarines.

While I too get real bugged by the Deus Ex Machina, I'm afraid the books, being Christian and all, do have Aslan as the ultimate hero of all the adventures (the books even state he's the main character). The book focuses mainly on faith, which Lucy has and the rest have lost, and the filmmakers said in an interview that they wanted to convey this, thus justifying the need to find Aslan and have him solve everything. (At least in the next 2 books the characters are a little more self-reliant, which will be a nice change).

About the acting and dialogues, if you haven't read much of the books, then I can assure you that, compared to them, the dialogues in the movie are VERY natural. I like that they keep it neutral, not abusing slang, which would just not fit in this kind of movies. I liked the acting. The kids are more comfortable with their roles, and Ben Barnes, though a little stiff at times, delivers a good Caspian (and I obviously have to cheer Lord Sopespian, as Damián Alcázar is a fellow Mexican ;p). The action scenes were like, WOW. Very well choreographed and action-packed while not too long that they got boring (a flaw, to me, in the last 2 POTC films).

Reepicheep didn't bother me much in design except for the fact he's supposed to be very dark-furred and I was hoping to see an almost black mouse. That did disappoint me. I'm afraid they couldn't put enemies his size to fight with because one of the recurring "gags" in the book is the fact that he's so small that no one, not his enemies or even his allies, take him seriously as a fighter. He actually was given very good fighting scenes in the movie unlike in the book.

Man, I wish I knew so much about CGI as you obviously do! I can only review them as a common spectator, though maybe a little bit more knowledgeable since I love that stuff and have read about it. I think the main flaw with mammal charas is that their movements are a little bit slow. I noticed this whenever the mice ran: they just were too slow, as though they were running under water. The badger's movements had the same problem, they weren't fluid enough. This doesn't seem to apply to horses though.

I'm babbling too much, so I'll leave it at that.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I think they did a good job of conveying Lucy's faith by having her be the only one who can see Aslan, even before she goes looking for him to step in and solve everyone's problems. That strikes me as a very childish view of religion ('don't worry, God will sort it out' which leads to thinking 'where is God and why isn't he fixing this for me?') and contrary to what he said – twice – about things not happening the same way twice. It happened the exact same way, Aslan! You stepped in and made everything better, just like you did before!

I suspect the reason they lightened Reepicheep's fur was so you could read his expressions better (black eyes and black inside-of-mouth don't show up so well against dark fur) and also to make him more visible when shot against the dark brown forest floor. Camouflage is a wonderful thing in real life but not so much when you want your character to show up on screen.

C.S. Lewis' writing style was why I only read Magician's Nephew and, with a lot of effort, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe before giving up on the series, and is why I like the movies better: on film, no one has to read your patronizing and unrealistic prose! It's also easier to believe the world exists when I can see it ... in the books it just seems like he threw in whatever he thought was cool and didn't bother to make it all work.

As for the CG knowledge, that's mostly just stuff I've picked up by drawing for CG projects for the last four years. I have no practical knowledge of the programs and methods myself.

[poisonedwriter.livejournal.com]

The general stance with reading C.S. Lewis by his Narnia fans is that you should read the Narnia books in the order in which they were written. Thankfully, that is how they're making the movies. So you'd start with LW&W, then Prince Caspian, and so forth. Honestly, Voyage of the Dawn Treader and A Horse and His Boy are my favorite simply for being so different in the plot for the others.

And yes, PC always came across to me as more about inheritance and restoration than a religious allegory. Sometimes it's just easier to drop the allegory and go with the flow.

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I did read LW&W first and didn't enjoy it. My Grade 4 teacher read a bit of Magician's Nephew to us in class and I found it so much more enjoyable I checked it out myself, then thought I'd give LW&W another shot but could barely make it to the end. I read Magician's Nephew again before the first movie came out and was surprised how much less I liked it than I had before – the scenes with the professor and the Narnians, which I suppose are supposed to be comic relief, were especially grating. I tried listening to A Horse and His Boy when they had the radio play on BBC7, thinking that, like a movie, a radio play would cut out the irritating narration, but the dialogue was just as stilted and condescending as I'd remembered LW&W to be so that didn't last long. I guess C.S. Lewis and I were just never meant to be.

[wizardelfgirl.livejournal.com]

Yes, while I did enjoy the books and all, I never liked this "Aslan has to solve everything" business. And yes, things happened exactly the same way in both movies, so it's weird (I sort of recall that a similar phrase is used in the book, but I can't remember where or how it was used).

I suppose you're right about Reepicheep, but it's still too bad he couldn't be darker, heh.

Drawing for CG projects is still very cool and must give you a fair idea of how they work. As I work with post-production copies of movies when I translate them (with half-done SFX), I've been able to see the progress on CGI and other visual effects, which has been very educational, but that's the most experience I've had with them...

[beckychan.livejournal.com]

I enjoyed it! Not as much of the first, either. Caspian actually had MORE personality in the movie than in the book, but unfortunately, he and Peter had the SAME personality, and that got a bit old.

Also, the romantic subplot was tacked on. I think it would have worked better if neither of them had ever said anything at all about it to one another.

All in all, though, I had a lot of fun at the movie. ^_^

[ardys-the-ghoul.livejournal.com]

Man, I'm really looking forward to seeing this movie. I've been a fan of Narnia for a long time, although I totally agree with you about the stilted dialogue (I felt like they fixed that in the first movie, which made me happy)--although I do find Lewis's narration amusing rather than annoying. I think that's the reason the condescension doesn't bother me--I think it's funny.

Personally, Prince Caspian has never been one of my favorites, although I like it better than "The Last Battle." I prefer "The Magician's Nephew" and "The Horse and His Boy," partly because they're so different from the others I think, and I also really like "The Silver Chair," maybe because that was the first Narnia story I encountered (saw a film version on TV once). It also more closely fits the traditional fantasy quest story.

I kind of feel like the plot of Prince Caspian really depends upon the reader/viewer really connecting/identifying with Caspian. I know in the book it's introduced pretty early on that the king and queen, Caspian's aunt and uncle, don't care for him very much, and Caspian himself is presented first with an endearing sort of innocence and naivete. Then, of course, his life is put in danger when the queen gives birth to a son, so the whole winning-Narnia-back-from-Miraz plot is not just about overthrowing an evil king; it's also about saving Caspian's life, because you know now that Miraz has a son of his own, he wouldn't have any trouble getting rid of Caspian--I mean, this guy killed his own brother to get the throne.

This story really has shades of Hamlet in it, now that I think about it.

One thing I wouldn't mind knowing about that never gets addressed in the book (and I bet it doesn't in the movie, either) is what happened to Miraz's son after Miraz was overthrown. I mean, it wasn't his fault his father was evil.

[karalora.livejournal.com]

>One thing I wouldn't mind knowing about that never gets addressed in the book (and I bet it doesn't in the movie, either) is what happened to Miraz's son after Miraz was overthrown. I mean, it wasn't his fault his father was evil.

Actually, it does get addressed in the movie. :) That, and the Queen is a much stronger character.

[ardys-the-ghoul.livejournal.com]

Oh, cool, I didn't expect that.

Did they keep in the story about how mice came to talk? I always thought that was kind of cute.

[(Anonymous)]

No, they left that out. Of course, Lewis only included it in the book to forestall any protests from readers that mice weren't Talking Beasts in LWW, so why are they talking now?

[karalora.livejournal.com]

No, they left that out. I didn't miss it. Lewis only included it in the book so he wouldn't appear inconsistent in his world-building.

[pippins-nose.livejournal.com]

THERE IS NO WAY THAT IS NOT THE SAME GUY. He looks exactly the same.

My favorite part of Prince Caspian was the costumes. I thought that, while amazing, a lot of the visuals were extremely ripped off from LOTR (taking into account that a) everything since LOTR has ripped off LOTR because of its incredible awesomeness and b) the fact that Lewis and Tolkien swapped tons of ideas in the first place) but the costumes seemed so original! I don't know. I like costumes.

While he has always been one of my favorite characters, I could not enjoy Reepicheep, because when I was a young girl and my father would read the books out loud to me before bed, he would do this very particular voice for him. No mouse can be Reepicheep for me without that voice. ;)

[noodledaddy.livejournal.com]

Saw it last night. Liked it more than the first. The story flowed better that the first. There were some little surprises in the plot that I just loved. The CGI was terrific, I was watching for the "muscles under the skin" stuff and thought it was terrific. Performances were a little uneven, but generally good. Locations were stunning. Editing was good.

[karalora.livejournal.com]

Prince Caspian may be the weakest of all the Narnia books in terms of unified plot--it very much *is* a succession drama, and the movie actually improved on certain aspects by leaving out some extraneous plot points, adding new ones to take their place, and rearranging yet others. But then you lose out on a lot of the backstory: Caspian's childhood, with his nursemaid telling him stories about the Old Narnians and being fired for it, the history of the Telmarine conquest of Narnia, and so forth. It makes much more sense that Caspian would want to lead the Old Narnians against his uncle, rather than just fleeing, when you know that he's been longing to meet them all his life.

One way in which the plot of the book is superior to that of the movie is that in the book, Aslan doesn't so blatantly win the war for them. Lucy and Susan, forbidden to fight because they are girls*, both meet Aslan in the woods and witness the reawakening of the Trees and the return of the forest gods who had been suppressed by the Telmarines' contempt for nature. Aslan, the girls, and the gods then travel through the countryside from village to village, liberating the pure-hearted Telmarines and visiting karmic-style justice on the wicked ones. (They also destroy the bridge and release the river-god.) The Trees go to the battle front, but their arrival is just the final straw in a war which the other Narnians were winning on their own. The Telmarines panic and flee, but are prevented from getting very far by the loss of the bridge, so are forced to surrender.

Anyway, I am very much looking forward to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which is an entirely different kind of story--a journey of exploration rather than a war--and, most importantly, features lots more of Reepicheep!

*This, of course, is one area in which the movie is a *huge* improvement. Susan kicks ass!

[karalora.livejournal.com]

Other comparisons:

Trumpkin (the red-haired dwarf) is more likable in the book--he's cynical and sarcastic, but in a cheerful way rather than a surly one. I can't imagine the film character becoming Caspian's dearest friend and most trusted courtier.

The Witch-summoning scene is much weaker in the book. I prefer the film version, in which a) Caspian was actually *tempted* by the prospect of harnessing her power and defeating Miraz that way, instead of instantly rejecting the idea, and b) they actually did summon her, instead of just dropping broad hints for fifteen minutes and jumping right into a skirmish once the truth came out that that's what they planned. The best thing about it was the werewolf's introduction speech...which survived verbatim into the film!

Queen Prunaprismia (Miraz's wife) is actually a character in the movie. In the book she is briefly described, has a baby, and then is never mentioned again. Nor do we find out what happened to her (and the baby) after Caspian took the throne. I was pleased that the film addressed that.

[veronikamg.livejournal.com]

Is computer-generated Reep the cutest thing ever? Because I expect him to be! I even liked him in the old series, where I hated the Beavers (who I love in the 2005 version!). So I expect there to be a seriously adorable little angry mouse this time!

[veronikamg.livejournal.com]

OK, didn't see that last paragraph.... Puss in Boots??? I can't imagine cat facefur working for a mouse...

[ardys-the-ghoul.livejournal.com]

The beavers in the old version are the most hysterical thing ever. Watching them walk around...those had to be the worst costumes ever made.

Whereas in the new film, they actually look like beavers.

I think Warwick Davis played Reepicheep in the old version. The guy is a genius actor.

Prince Caspian

[(Anonymous)]

I enjoyed the film very much! Yet it's a little bit darker than LW&W, so I couldn't exactly watch without feeling that there was a feeling of tension and bloodlust in the air, even though there was no blood scenes throughout the whole thing. Lots of awesome sword play though, which I looove!
The only thing that distracted me throughout the whole thing was that Prince Caspian appeared to be impersonating Inygo Montoya, from "The Princess Bride": "Hello, my name is Inygo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die!"

That fake accent throughout the whole film just made me want to throw a shoe at the actor(though I cant remember his name)!

Also, the whole romantic subplot of the Prince and Susan was so brought in at the last minute. I was rolling my eyes so much that they could have fallen out of my head from having to listen to all that mushy lover's crap and that kissing scene!
A romantic scene in this series of Christian allegories is not necessary!

Yet throughout the whole thing, I enjoyed it immensley and I look forward to the next one

A Harry Fan

[aspectabund.livejournal.com]

Did you see The Other Boleyn Girl? Because I totally thought it was The Other Boleyn Girl at first, which the whole giving-birth thing. Except it was a son and everyone was "yay" instead of a girl and everyone being ">:(". I mean, they even had a guy running off the tell the king, using the same camera angel as he enters and the same king-turns-his-head-dramatically-back-at-the-camera-so-you-can-see-the-actor shot. It was total dejà vu.

Anyway, I thought the movie was pretty good, especially in the visual effects department as you mentioned. I liked the bad guys the best, because they weren't as flat as the main kids. In fact, I was happier that the General dude didn't die than I was that the good guys didn't die. Whoop. I was thoroughly distracted by Peter's perpetual idiocy and "Peter-the-Magnificent"-ness. Thank gods he won't have much of a role in the Dawn Treader, because I have always, always hated his character. Lucy and Ed are much more satisfying.

Chasing Chevy

[(Anonymous)]

I saw Three Amigos by accident somehow... sometime... meaning that I can't remember ever having a choice or deciding to watch it, but I LOVE IT. "Pruned!... the hedges... of many small villagers!"

[lilac-elf.livejournal.com]

My affection for LW&W started WAAAAAY back when I first saw the animated movie. Not bad drawing wise, acting was decent.

The newest version of LW&W was freakin' awesome! Really liked Kiran Shaw(hobbit scale-double) as Ginabrik. LOVED Liam Neason as Aslan.

in Prince Caspian I L-O-V-E the character Reepicheep!!!!! Yeah, he's a mouse! So what?! He still kicks ass!

I SO can't wait for Voyage of the Dawn Treader! Should be awesome