Prince Caspian
The Chronicles of Narnia is an old favorite book series of mine, which I still enjoy despite its strong Christian message, and the current series of movies is spectacular. Today I saw Prince Caspian for the third time, and I just placed an Amazon order for the soundtracks of the first two movies. (The closing theme of Prince Caspian is my current earworm, but it's a good one.)
Below, some criticisms of the movie. I will say that the world and several of the characters are worth visiting despite these issues.
SPOILER WARNING.
Having recently re-read The Romantic Manifesto, I've changed my mind about the portrayal of Reepicheep: Although most of the time, he comes through very clearly, the attempt to give him a sense of humor about himself is wicked. The Chief Mouse is an intensely serious character--largely because others ("who weigh worth by inches") would make him a butt of jokes if he did not guard his dignity very carefully. To have him laugh at himself undermines his character severely; yet that's what the screenwriter did here. The sharp contrast between how others see him--as a cute, amusing talking mouse--and how he acts and understands himself--as a heroic knight--is meant to be inspiring. Having him make excuses for wanting his tail back--having him say that it's not just the honor involved, but balance, grasping things, etc.--takes away from the point.
I remain disappointed by the very limited attention given to the confrontation between Trumpkin and Aslan. Trumpkin is the Narnian equivalent of an atheist--he doesn't believe in Aslan, at least until he meets him. Nor does he believe in the ancient Kings and Queens, until he meets them. Yet he is among the bravest, most committed fighters for the right side. When Aslan meets him, he demonstrates his power in a playful sort of way, then says, "shall we be friends?" Thus C.S. Lewis makes the point--as he does repeatedly, throughout the series (besides Trumpkin, the most notable and clearest case is Emeth in The Last Battle)--that it is not religious belief, but noble action, that makes a person meritorious, even in the eyes of God.
This point does not come across in the movie--in fact, the movie seems to make the opposite point. In several places it stresses the idea that faith in Aslan (i.e. God) is vital, and that human beings (and talking animals, dwarfs, etc.) cannot be efficacious on their own. For example, the film adds a whole extra battle to show that Peter and Caspian can't win the war till Aslan intervenes: Peter is asked whether he hasn't forgotten who really defeated the White Witch. Although Aslan's help is indeed important in the novel, human action is not disvalued in this way.
There are, of course, also philosophical problems in the novels that carry over to the movie. Aslan is very much the sort of god who makes things happen at his whim; Narnia is a world of non-A, in which if Aslan wants the trees to dance, they dance. The law of causality is broken as casually as the speed limit, and no one ever gets a ticket for it. Nevertheless, it is a world of adventure, and Aslan always holds back enough for the humans' (and other mortals') actions to make a difference.
Below, some criticisms of the movie. I will say that the world and several of the characters are worth visiting despite these issues.
SPOILER WARNING.
Having recently re-read The Romantic Manifesto, I've changed my mind about the portrayal of Reepicheep: Although most of the time, he comes through very clearly, the attempt to give him a sense of humor about himself is wicked. The Chief Mouse is an intensely serious character--largely because others ("who weigh worth by inches") would make him a butt of jokes if he did not guard his dignity very carefully. To have him laugh at himself undermines his character severely; yet that's what the screenwriter did here. The sharp contrast between how others see him--as a cute, amusing talking mouse--and how he acts and understands himself--as a heroic knight--is meant to be inspiring. Having him make excuses for wanting his tail back--having him say that it's not just the honor involved, but balance, grasping things, etc.--takes away from the point.
I remain disappointed by the very limited attention given to the confrontation between Trumpkin and Aslan. Trumpkin is the Narnian equivalent of an atheist--he doesn't believe in Aslan, at least until he meets him. Nor does he believe in the ancient Kings and Queens, until he meets them. Yet he is among the bravest, most committed fighters for the right side. When Aslan meets him, he demonstrates his power in a playful sort of way, then says, "shall we be friends?" Thus C.S. Lewis makes the point--as he does repeatedly, throughout the series (besides Trumpkin, the most notable and clearest case is Emeth in The Last Battle)--that it is not religious belief, but noble action, that makes a person meritorious, even in the eyes of God.
This point does not come across in the movie--in fact, the movie seems to make the opposite point. In several places it stresses the idea that faith in Aslan (i.e. God) is vital, and that human beings (and talking animals, dwarfs, etc.) cannot be efficacious on their own. For example, the film adds a whole extra battle to show that Peter and Caspian can't win the war till Aslan intervenes: Peter is asked whether he hasn't forgotten who really defeated the White Witch. Although Aslan's help is indeed important in the novel, human action is not disvalued in this way.
There are, of course, also philosophical problems in the novels that carry over to the movie. Aslan is very much the sort of god who makes things happen at his whim; Narnia is a world of non-A, in which if Aslan wants the trees to dance, they dance. The law of causality is broken as casually as the speed limit, and no one ever gets a ticket for it. Nevertheless, it is a world of adventure, and Aslan always holds back enough for the humans' (and other mortals') actions to make a difference.