Film Review

[athersgeo]

Well, I'm spending today catching up on a few of my many unseen DVDs. To that end...

The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe. I won't say I hated it because I think that would be too strong, but I certainly didn't like it. Don't get me wrong, it's very well put together film and if it hadn't been based on a book that I loved as a kid and still love today, I'd have thoroughly enjoyed it.

But it WAS based on that book.

And while some of the thoughts were good in the adaptation (for example, showing the battle instead of relegating it to an aside, AND, for example, showing why the Pevensies had to leave London), some of the others weren't.

1) It's a period piece. This means that the children should at least SOUND like they might be from the 1940s. Unfortunately, the dialogue comes off badly on that count.
2) Mr Beaver as a cockney? Er, no. Really, no. I love Ray Winstone to bits, but just no.
3) WTH was with not actually showing all those rescued from the Witch's castle? It's in the damn book, for pity's sake. Why NOT include it? If you wanted to add humour (see point 4), why not have the scene with Lucy and Rumblebufin; that actually WAS funny...
4) The talking horse joke was a bad idea.
5) Why on earth was Mrs McCreedy played by someone who couldn't pick an accent and stick to it? Her first scene, she sounded like an American trying to do a Scot's accent. Then she sounded vaguely Irish (but still with the American overtones).
6) I know that Susan ends up not believing in Narnia, but there was no reason to beat us over the head with that fact before we get there. Really there wasn't.
7) Going back to accents, what was up with Morgrim? He sounded like a caricature of a Chicago mobster, or maybe a Batman villain from the 1960s TV show. He certainly didn't sound menacing.
8) I also have a whole bunch of nitpicks from the battle scene, but I'll trim those down to just one: How did the White Witch get her chariot down from that hunk of rock?

And the really anoying thing is, none of this (well, ok, maybe 8 would have done) would have bothered me had this NOT been based on a book I know so well.

The one thing I will say is that the casting of Liam Neeson as Aslan was probably the one really, GOOD note for the whole film. His voice has the perfect mix of gravitas and warmth that Aslan needed.

Overall, there are worse ways to spend the morning, but there are better ones, too.

Comments

[jonathlee.livejournal.com]

Huh. You have to be the first person I've run across who didn't like it, myself included (and yes, I read it as a child, too ^_~).

Even with nitpicks -- though I had far fewer than you -- I'm not disappointed with this film; far from, in fact. I rather thought it was the best -- and most faithful -- adaptation of a book I've ever see in film form. There was nothing really outright changed, and the few things added (like the opening scene, for example) added to the film, rather than taking away from it -- shedding more light on Edmund's characterisation, for example, in the case of the opening scene in London.

I do agree with the casting of Liam Neeson; I thought Tilda Swinton was fantabulous as Jadis, as well, and if they end up doing The Magician's Nephew, I hope they have her play Jadis again.

[athersgeo.livejournal.com]

I totally disagree. As a faithful adaptation, it was lousy. I counted maybe five lines of dialogue that were originally in the book. That's pathetic, really, particularly since many of the lines are actually rather important (zB why did it take until the very end for the "He's not a tame lion, you know?" to make it into the script; that should have been one of the things Mrs Beaver told them...along with, oh, I don't know, the fact that Aslan was a fricking lion?!).

For a really, REALLY good one, see the BBC's version. The effects maybe dated, but the overall adaptation of LWW and Voyage of the Dawntreader were superb. (Granted, they sliced up Prince Caspian rather nastily, but no-one's perfect.)

I think that's part of what I dislike about this version: It's not the BBC's version done with a bigger budget.

As I said, if it hadn't been based on a book I know so well I can practically quote it, I would have thoroughly enjoyed it. With the history...eh, not so much.

Rebuttal. ;)

[angel-negra.livejournal.com]

See, now me? I both liked and disliked it. I found that the actor who played Mr. Tumnus really made me like the character as a whole. From the book, I didn't really care for him all that much, he always felt more like a handy plot device than an actual 'person' in his own right, but his actor really sold me on the character.

Regarding your points:

1 - See, I didn't notice that so much. Either I'm too used to kids' movies and their formula of 'how kids talk' or it's because I'm not British. I have a very hard time distinquishing between British accents/lingo of the present day, never mind being able to spot language that wouldn't have been there in the 40s.

2 - Well, Lewis did intend for the Beavers to 'represent' the working class. Though my beef with them was that they were so movie stupid. Like, the kids are the heroes so they get to be the only smart ones. But in the book? the Beavers knew a lot more, were nice and calm and made good support/parental substitutes/guides for getting the kids to Aslan.

3 - Well, I bet budget played a part in that. Plus bookwise, the battle was an aside because Lewis was focused on the rescue of the animals of the Witch's castle. And with movie play time being a factor and the director picking the more dramatic move of focusing on the battle, I think they just had to cut something. As much as I love the scenes from the Witch's castle, drama/movie-wise skipping it keeps the urgency of the impending battle stronger.

4 - I don't mind it so much in the first half, when Edmund's still a kid. I chalk that up to Hollywood's idea of what kids would find funny, and it is kind of cute. Though the name. Oy. *Not* a Talking Horse's name damnnit. But carrying it over to the Stag hunt was a bad idea. Lewis stated in the 'Horse and His Boy' that Talking Horses were only ridden during times of war.

5 - Again, not something I'd noticed myself. But then, I don't get as much exposure to UK accents.

6 - I didn't notice that specifically, but I found her actress' lips rather distracting, so I might not have been paying attention. What times were they beating us over the head with it? I do tend to brush certain things off as Hollywood/America's belief that kids only pick up the obvious and so they spell things out.

7 - Oh, god. I know! Morgrim *scared* me in the book, even re-reading it earlier this year. He's a true villian. In the movie? Not so much. Ditto on the Witch's dwarf. Even Jadis felt a little softened.

8 - *giggles* I'd forgotten that. Though I did like how she'd made Aslan's mane into a trophy of sorts. To me, it saved the character. She felt way too nice and subtle, she had her moments, but on the whole, just no. And then she shows up wearing Aslan's mane and I'm like yes. That's something Jadis would do. She's that evil.

And I agree, Liam Neeson was a good choice. Personally, I was expecting a deeper voice, and when I first heard it was Liam Neeson who was voicing him, I had doubts. Then I saw the movie, and yeah. It fits. Beautifully.

Re: Rebuttal. ;)

[athersgeo.livejournal.com]

1) I read a hell of a lot of children's lit from the period. It sticks out (to me) like a sore thumb.
2) There's more to the working class than cockney. And yes, the lack of inteligence got to me, too.
3) Fair enough, but it still bugged the hell out of me.
4) It was just such a gratingly obvious joke and plus Philip? Not so much a horse name and not so much a Narnia name, either.
5) It's one of my frequent complaints with Hollywood. Can't they find a decend vocal coach? I mean, to take another example, Natalie Portman was audibly hanging out with Hugo Weaving off camera in V for Vendetta. In the scenes he wasn't in, her English accent was better than in the scenes they shared. It's a pet peeve. Particularly since I'd always read The McCreedy as educated Scots of the sort you get out of Edinbrough/the borders region.
6) Every single time she said "we shouldn't be here"/"let's turn back"/"we can't do this"... Susan was relucant in the book but not THAT reluctant!
7) I didn't mind the Dwarf so much but Morgrim really did bug :)
8) The costuming was very clever, yes, but the rest...meh. She seemed a little TOO determined not to go the scenery chewing route and it didn't work out that well for me.

Re: Rebuttal. ;)

[angel-negra.livejournal.com]

1 - And this is where we differ a bit. :) I read a lot of children's lit too, but most were more American/Canadian and usually more contempory. So yeah, I can see why you'd catch it when I wouldn't. :)

2 - True, there is more to the working class than cockney. If the Beavers had been written more intelligently, do you think the cockney would have bothered you as much?

3 - It bugged me too, but I can see how the scene wouldn't work on screen to drive the action forward. I loved Rumblebuffin, especially because he was a rare good giant.

4 - Yeah, very much an obvious joke, but I've seen enough kids movies that I'm getting used to them. You just have to roll your eyes and remember that to a younger kid it'd probably be a lot funnier. But yes, Philip was a horrible choice of name.

5 - I sympathise. It's got to be very annoying that no one can keep a good British accent, or Irish or Scottish. Canada's lucky that usually if any Canadians crop up in an American movie setting, they're played by Canadians. Plus most of our accents are a lot closer to American ones.

6 - True, now that you mention it. She was worse in 'Prince Caspian' than in 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe'.

7 - I found the dwarf so damned annoying. When his scenes were in, I was always eagerly awaiting his lines, because he was always so condecending and evil in the book and I always got disappointed by the actor's delivery.

8 - I know what you mean. Plus it kept throwing me that she was a blonde. It was not the Jadis I pictured. Someone more like Angelica Houston (I think that's her name) would have been closer too the book for me.

[kathy-s-32.livejournal.com]

I actually liked this movie, unusual for an adaptation of a book I know inside out, but Mr. Beaver was very, very annoying. It wasn't the accent. I have no feel for British accents. I just couldn't bear seeing him warped from self-deprecating countryman to immature smart-aleck. He wouldn't act that way! The other major issue for me was that, despite the usual Hollywood overemphasis on "action" scenes, it was never made clear that it was Edmund who broke the witch's wand. That was a critical plot element, for heaven's sake. :fume: I had plenty of quibbles, but overall I thought the movie retained a fair amount of the books's quality. Unlike, say, the way Harry Potter was reduced to a mediocre collage of special effects. The book is still yards better, though!

[athersgeo.livejournal.com]

Mr Beaver was a big problem for me. I think, possibly, my annoyance over the accent probably masked my dislike of the way the character was twisted.

I actually thought it was quite clear Edmund broke the wand - he was the one without the face plate on his helmet. Then again, as I was watching for it, it probably helped.

I think, though, that for a visual representation of Narnia, I shall stick to the BBC's adaptations, where they actually stuck to the books (barring the hash they made of Prince Caspian)...