Obviously, every Christian website and blog in the world is reviewing Narnia. I’ve read very few reviews at all, so if this is all repeat for you, forgive me. I’ll keep it short and sweet!Â
First, I think I’m going to a “rating” system. I’ll use a Zero-Ten scale, and I’ll give Narnia an 8.5. Now, on to the specifics. We’ll do the good, the bad, and then a summary.Â
The Good
The Talking Animals: Unquestionably, these were going to be hard to pull off. But Disney did it well, I think. It seemed quite natural (even though it shouldn’t have) to see animals walking and talking next to humans.Â
Mr. Tumnus: He was younger-looking than I expected, but he did an excellent job of catching the playfulness of Tumnus. Nicely done.
The Beavers: As comic relief, they were very humorous, though there was something a little too “Disney” about them. I have some bad stuff to say about the Beavers as well, but I did enjoy their banter.Â
The Pevensies: Especially Edmund; he was terrific.
Jadis, the White Witch: Easily the best performance of the movie.
The Stone Table: The death of Aslan was chilling.Â
The Bad
Aslan: I think perhaps if Liam Neeson’s voice was not so
recognizable, I may have been a bit more pleased. But if I’m looking
at Aslan and thinking about Liam, it hurts the movie. I really think
they needed to find an unknown to do his voice. The even greater
problem with Aslan was his normalcy. There was little to no buildup to
his appearance, it seemed, in terms of striking a mix of awe, fear, and
wonder concerning this name they keep hearing. While Mark may have posited a good reason for removing that dialogue to the end of the film
(and I think he’s on to something in this post, so it’s worth the
read), I think it ultimately took away from the buildup to the meeting
with Aslan.
The Beavers: These two make it into both categories. The use
of the Beavers for only comic relief is what really hurt the buildup to
Aslan. It is they who unveil the story of Aslan and the prophecy to
the Pevensies, and at this point, we should have become filled with a
great expectation of the coming story. Instead, it’s couched in so
much humor and banter between Mr. and Mrs. that we lose the story a
bit.Â
Peter Pevensie: Overall, I thought he was done well. What
was lacking was a significant change in Peter’s resolve, courage, and
ability to be king and command an army after he killed Maugrin. Taking
out the battle planning scene with Aslan also contributed to this
problem.
Summary
A great adventure film; a faithful retelling of Lewis’ story; and a
tremendous reference to Christ on the big screen. You just can’t be
too upset about that. Indeed, it could have been better. But it could
have been much, much worse. That company that makes the Left Behind movies could have picked up the idea after the obvious success of Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. Let’s all be thankful they didn’t.Â
I may change my mind about some of this upon subsequent viewing, but
I’ll probably forget to post about it. My recommendation would be to
not wait for DVD; it’s worth it to go see now.
Be sure to check out La Shawn Barber’s new Fantasy Fiction for Christians blog, where she’s gathering lots of good stuff on Narnia, as well as last week’s posts from Common Grounds Online, all centered around Narnia.
2 responses so far ↓
1 Gaines // Dec 14, 2005 at 8:48 am
Good stuff! I need to get another viewing in (probably during the holidays), but I think I’m at pretty much the same place with you. It was a “very good” film, but not quite the “great” one that I was awaiting.
I was very glad to see them stick to the book so well. Even some of the added parts fit in fairly well (like the opening scene during the blitz). But most importantly, I thought they did a great job with the Stone Table scene, which is obviously crucial to the whole story. That one scene was probably my biggest point of concern going into the film, and I was not disappointed by it.
There were a few nagging little “filmmaking” (for lack of a better word) details. I just didn’t like the music. It could have been better. I also felt like the director was trying too hard to make the movie “family-friendly.” That is, there were a lot of scenes with the kids hugging and crying. Obviously, there were plenty of places where this fit the story. But there were also some places (IMO) where they seemed artificial, like the director was trying to elicit an “awwww” from the audience, even when the scene didn’t necessarily call for it. But maybe I’m just a grinch.
I think my main issue, like yours, was with how they portrayed Aslan. I know Lewis was opposed to any kind of cartoon version of the book, because he was afraid that it would come across as something comic or silly (”like Disney,” ironically enough). I think Neeson’s voice helped Aslan come across as regal and dignified, but I just didn’t think he sounded as impressive and “un-tame” as I’ve always imagined. Even more troubling was the omission of a lot of the book’s dialogue describing Aslan as “son of the Emperor Beyond the Sea,” etc. I agree that the film just doesn’t communicate that sense of awe and wonder that Aslan is supposed to evoke, even at the mere mention of his name. And that’s a pretty significant strike against the film.
But it’s definitely not enough to ruin it. I still liked it a lot!
2 Travis Prinzi // Dec 14, 2005 at 9:13 am
Gaines, right on. I had planned to mention my disappointment with no reference to the Emperor over the Sea as well. I also thought it was strange that Aslan’s resurrection was not explained in terms of the “Deeper Magic from Before Time” but rather as a “different interpretation” of the Deep Magic.
I also was bothered by the music.
I did like the addition of that fox character, though (can’t remember his name).
Leave a Comment