The Chronicles of Narnia

[MoTo^]

Im not sure if theres going to be a films sections to these forums yet, if there is itd be nice if this could be moved there.

Just seen the post about Kong and as that was the second option we were thinking about going to see so I thought id post how disappointed I was with Narnia. I didnt want to see it to begin with but everyone force me to go

It was just the most cringing film ever, the four kids were just terrible actors and the story was so predictable and linear, and boring. I can see a 5 year enjoying this film but other than that it was a total failure.

But I have to give credit to the CGI and special effects. It was all very well made and the whole world of Narnia was beautiful and believable. If only I could say the same about the story.

Overall I'd give it 3 stars out of 5, and it would only be a 2 if it wasnt for the CGI.
Go see Harry Potter intead

I haven't read the books myself so It'd be interesting to see from those who have if the story was as bad as this or if it's just me.

Spoiler

for those of you whove seen it, why was santa in it? that was just unbelievably bad. and that girl with the bow and arrow (ive forgotten her name already), she used it only once to kill a little dwarf at the end, what the?! that is just poor.
Also I'm sure you've noticed the Christian influence on the whole story? As in Aslan = Jesus and Edmond = Judas?

 

[Ronin Storm]

I'm off to see Narnia this evening, and I have read the books. I wonder if it'll work better for me than for you, MoTo... have to see.

It is, after all, a children's story. I seem to remember reading The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe in school when I was twelve. I think my biggest concern, in advance of seeing the film, is that it's going to be exceedingly twee.

 

[Ronin Storm]

Well, it sure wasn't as twee as I expected. As MoTo says, the special effects are excellent. I'd have real trouble telling you whether any real animals were used in this film at any point, and I'm usually amongst the first to know when something is CGI.

I can't remember the specifics of the story very well, but it does seem to track my very vague recollections.

It does a decent job of being heroic, though there are a couple of times when they just don't quite make it. The actors for the children are, well, children and as such haven't the experience to really carry off some of the upset that can be in the film, but they give it a good shot. At times, it is almost endearing to see them trying so hard against the odds.

Basically, the story is really pretty old, was written for children, and is a little dated. Bearing that in mind, the transition to film feels really well done to me and the scenery, colours, and digital production quality are excellent. As regards the CGI, I think it benefits from being broadcast in digital rather than reel -- I look forward to future digital films.

I particularly enjoyed the soundtrack, which was a Gregson-Williams (heard in Spy Game and Man On Fire). I think I'll probably be picking that up post-Christmas.

All in all, I'm glad I've seen it and the effects and soundtrack will live on for me -- centaurs and fawns were excellently done! Harry Potter, in comparison, felt rushed to me -- as if too much had been missed out (but I haven't read the books for that one...). Harry Potter also benefits from older actors and a story written for a more modern audience.

Spoiler

My biggest down for the film were the actors they chose for the older version of the children, right at the end. My partner commented they could be an Abba tribute band. I couldn't tell Lucy from Susan... Fortunately, they're not on screen long. Also, don't leave immediately it fades to black -- there's a little more yet to see.

A quick reply to MoTo's spoiler comments:

Spoiler

I'd have to check, but I think Father Christmas was in the book. It's a children's story after all -- more a The Hobbit then a Lord of the Rings, but not as well crafted as either. If we accept the book was written in the Swallows and Amazons or Famous Five era then weak female characters really isn't a surprise -- girls were all dolls and giggling and boys were all mud and cricket. So Susan (the girl with the bow) coming across weak is just faithful to the era of the story, unfortunately.

Broadly, I think the film was pretty much relying on you having read the book in advance. Some of the emotive portions of the film, such as Aslan going to the Stone Table to die, you'd know were coming and make the lead in terribly sad and majestic, rather than enigmatic and confusing.

Finally, on the Christian sympathies, I think one can just ignore that stuff. It's not really shoved down your throat by the film, I felt. Judas didn't get much chance to have a reprieve... Edmund did, however. Jesus didn't get many asskicking moments, either. *grins*

 

[MoTo^]

hmm ye i guess if id read the book beforehand as well i could relate back to how the transition was done, but i was looking at it from a purely critical point of view and unfortunately the story just didnt do it for me

lol and ye i agree with your spoiler comments

 

[Fuzzy Bunny]

About the CGI animals and real animals, I know that there were some real dogs mixed in with the CGI wolves chasing the children. I'm not sure if there were any other real animals or not. I thought the CGI was very well done.