the_gneech: (Boromir battle)
[personal profile] the_gneech
[livejournal.com profile] lythandra and I finally got to see Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. It was an okay movie, but after Lord of the Rings it seemed altogether flat, perfectly-done CGI furries or no. If the editing had been 15% tighter, it would have been a 150% better movie. I've never read the book, but I certainly hope it was better. I got the distinct impression that the centaur was an important character who mostly got edited out; the film sure could have used a lot more characters interacting, and a lot less panning and zooming around snowswept mountain peaks.

Tempo, people! Tempo!

-The Gneech

Date: 2006-06-13 12:03 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] softpaw.livejournal.com
The centaur got added actually. As did the Mino on the witch's side.

I really recommend the books. IT wont take you but an day to read it. The Chronicles are no where near as thick or hard to get through as the Rings. Heck all 7 of them combined are less reading then just one of the three LOTR books.

Date: 2006-06-13 12:30 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kheetor84.livejournal.com
Well, it distracted me enough while I was in the beginnings of a crohn's flare up (I saw the movie with [livejournal.com profile] goodluckfox the day it premiered in theaters). I didn't think about the pain that much.

And...

And....

CHEETAHS! GRIFFINS! CENTAURS! Really, when are we fantasy geeks goin' to see all of those cool fantasy creatures on the silver screen and done well in CGI?

Date: 2006-06-13 01:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kesh.livejournal.com
Narnia's certainly not the epic that LotR was. But I agree, the pacing was a bit off.

Date: 2006-06-13 01:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bailiff.livejournal.com
Actually, C.S. Lewis created the same "epic" feel of TLotR in barely 200 pages... I've often wondered how he accomplished that. Sadly, none of the other Narnia books (besides TLTWTW) accomplished this - though "The Last Battle" came close, but only because it had a big Armageddon plot.

Of course, I may be misremembering the epic feel because I was 12 or so when I first read the series...

Date: 2006-06-13 02:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dslartoo.livejournal.com
The centaur was actually a character invented for the films (rather curiously, since there were plenty of strong characters to concentrate on in the book. Some of them could have used more screen time).

I love the books and the film was.........okay, but not the unmitigated triumph that the LOTR films were for me.

cheers,
Phil

Date: 2006-06-13 02:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jamesbarrett.livejournal.com
I thought it was rather well done myself. The story was properly told, events went in the right order and weren't mucked about with, and the creatures were uber cool getting to see them move about on the screen. Since I was only there to really see how well it came out for itself, I didn't lose anything despite the sweeping scenes. In fact, I was more impressed that they got most things right. But I also watch movies differently than you do, so...... -Frisk

Date: 2006-06-13 05:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rigelkitty.livejournal.com
Yeah, when I reviewed the film I said it was basically the prep and climactic battle scenes from LotR - with furries. They might improve with the upcoming sequels, tho.

Date: 2006-06-13 06:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stilghar.livejournal.com
I actually enjoyed Narnia, the movie, as much - or perhaps more, as a lot of detail was added in certain places, than the book.

I know that seems a bit backwards, but in this case, it's true.

I was also thrilled that the effects did the characters justice, unlike the crappy 4-hour-long BBC production of LWW released years ago.

The Centaur Colonel, Oreius, was just flat-out awesome. ;)

And I caught a massive gaydar *ping* off that fox. ;)

Date: 2006-06-13 07:13 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ski-fox.livejournal.com
While I agree that Narnia was not LotR caliber, I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless.

I appreciated the fact that they stayed fairly true to the book, and that the changes they did make were not huge, plot-altering ones.

I think the thing that hooked me the most, though, was the score. Gregson-Willams did a fantastic job with it, but maybe I put more weight on the music than most, being a musician and all.

As to all the landscape sequences, I think maybe they were just trying set up Narnia's geography now so they don't have to bother too much with it in the rest of the films. Hopefully, the next six, assuming of course that they do make all of them, will put a little more emphasis on the story itself and the rapport between the characters.

Date: 2006-06-13 11:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grifter-t-wolf.livejournal.com
I loved the Narnia movie, I had never read the books, but I hadn't read the books for LotR either. Just wish people would stop comparing the two, they're very different genres outside of the fantasy creatures in it and from what I hear they had 7 Narnia books so I'm sure that has something to do with the particular pacing of LW&W

Date: 2006-06-13 12:55 pm (UTC)
ext_76029: red dragon (strength/freedom/imagination)
From: [identity profile] copperwolf.livejournal.com
I read and loved all seven Narnia books in grade school. In college, my boyfriend gave me the boxed set, and while I still loved them upon rereading, I found that they were much shorter than I had remembered! :)

In my opinion, the movie had too much snarky banter between the children. Yes, it greatly expanded on the part in England, at the beginning. I thought that was rather nice, but the time spent there comes at the expense of something else, I'm sure.

Date: 2006-06-13 03:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] iamertai.livejournal.com
I seem to recall reading that Tolkien himself wasn't satisfied with the Chronicles, he thought that Lewis wasn't trying hard enough and was capable of better.

On the other hand, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe was originally meant to be a present for Lewis's Goddaughter (Lucy Barfield,) so perhaps it's understandable if they were all a bit slapdash.

And don't go hating on the BBC versions! They were cutting edge for their time, and they had Tom Baker as Puddleglum the Marshwiggle! Anything that causes Tom Baker to wear a goofy hat is pure genius.

Date: 2006-06-19 08:50 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] briarthorn.livejournal.com
Disclaimer: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe is my LEAST favorite children's story I've ever read. Nothing anyone says will change this.

The book itself is flat. The dialogue is clumsy. The kids take there being a secret universe a little too well. The characters are flat (there's the greedy pig, the little sister, and the mature, resourceful older siblings.) It doesn't even work allegorically - Aslan comes back through old magic, the same sort of magic the snow queen uses (would have worked better had he not explained.) And the characters are SO STINKIN' FLAT! It's no wonder the pacing is off - they would have to change SO much to make it a half decent movie.

April 2025

S M T W T F S
  1 2345
6789 101112
13141516171819
20 212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 21st, 2025 05:31 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios