…I couldn’t tell the difference.
Warning: Spoilers ahead and a negative review from someone who hasn’t read the books.
Disclaimer: Last I checked, I am not a child, so perhaps the whole concept of Narnia is far below my reach for entertainment. I am partial towards Lord of the Rings because there is more depth than can be grasped in a lifetime of study. That is the kind of “entertainment” I love. I have no prejudice against the Narnia books since I have not read them. I will surely read them, and read them to my children. But for now, what you are reading below is shooting from the hip.
I must say that I was thoroughly annoyed with this movie/story. There were so many things wrong with it. Kalila and I went into it pretty jazzed to see a classic like this put to film, hoping that it would not be a cringing semblance to Lord of the Rings. We both have not read the books, as was the case with LOTR, but were anticipating the new fantasy experience. We were dissappointed. A movie/story like this puts a massive divide between Tolkien and Lewis, MASSIVE. Lewis is good, Tolkien is genius. Let’s explore why, though. I will begin with what was good about this film.
The Good. As a film, the CGI was great. It was on par with, if not superior to, any CGI out there. The cinematography was done very well and you could feel that it was another world. Aslan looked great, very realistic, as did the beavers. Tilda Swinton was very good for the part, she reminded me in many ways of the witch/queen from Willow. The children looked great for this role; classic British WWII era kids. They have/had so much potential to make this film great.
The Bad. The worst thing about the movie/story was that certain concepts were simply stupid, or didn’t make any sense. I’m sure this is because there is no narrator or simply that the filmakers did a poor job of portraying the story. For instance, the children are faced with crossing a river below a waterfall when the ice was frozen, but melting. The wolves cross on top of the waterfall because it is obviously sturdier. Why wouldnt’ they have done the same thing? Instead they are surrounded on the melting ice by wolves? Edmund had an opportunity to escape from the Witch when they were by the river, he could have just jumped in. With regards to things I know are in the book: Why is the winter ending before there is a battle or there is any “victory”? How come no one but the children know where the portal to Narnia is? Does the Narnia world have any concept of the human world? Obviously, they do, because they know of “Sons of Adam, Daughters of Eve”. What is the significance of the “table” breaking in half after Aslan is resurrected? “According to the Deep Magic, if an innocent gives their life for another on the stone it breaks in two”. So what? Dude, what in the world is Santa Claus doing in Narnia? That concept is completely stupid. Why does the witch come to call account with Aslan for Edmund as a traitor? Is not she a traitor and deserve to die? What are the consequences if Edmund or Aslan is not killed? It just seems very suspect that a lawless witch is holding people to the law. Why not capture/kill the witch when she comes to meet about Edmund? Moreover, there were chemistry issues also. Peter’s “General” has this allegiance that is completely contrived and is completely cheesy. “I’ll be with you to the end.” The same goes for Aslan and the children, very little foundation for their relationship.
Conclusion. The only conclusion for me is to shut my mouth till I read the books. That doesn’t mean I will like them all, but that will probably answer most of my questions. I still can’t get over Santa Claus though. That is just lame.
