New to the Big Screen

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #60 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:07:43 PM

No, "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe' is actually the first book. It's that a dumb publishing company rereleased the books in a new order so that the chronologically first "Magician's Nephew" would be first. Everyone who knows anything about Narnia knows that.

Anyway, the plot for the film isn't something that you can type up in a summery. You'll just have to see it, Littlefoot.

F-14 Ace · **Reply #61 on:** December 19, 2005, 11:07:21 PM

I saw the Chronicles of Narnia and thought it was great! I haven't read the book but the movie was so good, I may go see it again. It was great. Had a lot of Biblical stuff in it. Go see it if you haven't already.

Malte279 · **Reply #62 on:** December 20, 2005, 07:29:33 AM

I plan to see it, but I don't want to go on my own. Until I get someone to come along I'll have to wait.

Petrie. · **Reply #63 on:** December 20, 2005, 10:01:10 AM

Quote from: F-14 Ace,Dec 19 2005 on 10:07 PM

I saw the Chronicles of Narnia and thought it was great! I haven't read the book but the movie was so good, I may go see it again. It was great. Had a lot of Biblical stuff in it. Go see it if you haven't already.

Interesting you bring that up since CNN gave a report how a lot of churches want their patrons to see this because its religious in some way. That won't stop me from seeing it, but I don't think everyone assumes that these books were written with a religious message.

F-14 Ace · **Reply #64 on:** December 20, 2005, 06:21:41 PM

Some of the stuff was probably religious stuff. Our church was advertising it. C.S. Lewis, the author was a Christion and that reflectid in many of his works.

Malte279 · **Reply #65 on:** December 20, 2005, 06:56:23 PM

J.R.R. Tolkien (a good friend of Lewis) was a very devoted Christian too. Maybe that is why I never heard about the kind of radicals who think they do God's bidding by burning Harry Potter books <_< burn the Lord of the Rings or the chronicles of Narnia. Anyway there is one funny thing about Tolkien and Lewis. Tolkien created the Ent treebeard in "The lord of the rings" as a parody of his friend and colleague Lewis. Treebeard shows similar habbits in talking and acting as Lewis did

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #66 on:** December 20, 2005, 10:59:49 PM

I sometimes wonder how Lewis felt about that.

Liews: *blinking* Uh...gee, thanks.

(*snicker*)

Yeah, expect some religous allogory, because the filmmakers do not exclude any of it. Nor do they sugar-coat the story. The movie, itself, is a bit nitty-gritty, and the witch IS nasty! I know the book is not that dark, but when a filmmaker is striving to represent this particular story, properly, it's going to get a bit dark, and it does.

Nick22 · **Reply #67 on:** December 21, 2005, 11:33:05 AM

Having a truly evil villian makes the film that much better.. It sets a large contrast between the forces of good and evil...

Malte279 · **Reply #68 on:** December 21, 2005, 12:38:30 PM

I for my part find it much more fascinating when the villain is not just a dark gloomy person while the heroes are the noble utopian characters. Villains like Darth Vader are certainly impressive, very impressive indeed.
But how about villains who seem to be alright, who seem to be even admirable, villains whom the heroes trust and who rarely grant any glimpse at something that allows the reader of a story or watcher of a movie to suspect that something is not alright at all. If such a character finally drops the mask one can really feel with those who are affected by the consequences.
I also find grey characters very interesting. Characters in whose case it is difficult to decide whether they are to be counted as "goodies" or "badies".

Nick22 · **Reply #69 on:** December 21, 2005, 04:31:44 PM

Indeed, most villians in the greay area, they seem to be decent, and they may even earn the hero's trust, but in the end they reveal themselvves. Take Gollum in LOTR for example.He earned frodo's trust, yet turned on him in an attempt to gt the Ring back...

Malte279 · **Reply #70 on:** December 21, 2005, 05:33:54 PM

Yet gollum was sort of on the dark gray end. In the book it was not exactly a surprise when he lured Frodo and Sam into Shelob's lare. In the movie he came across somewhat kinder. The are better examples for the "unexpected villain", though I confess I cannot think of one right now.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #71 on:** December 21, 2005, 07:01:57 PM

A few unexpected villains that I can think of.

That guy inpersonating Madeye Moody in "The Goblet of Fire" is one.

The witch in the film "Sleepy Hollow".

Malte279 · **Reply #72 on:** December 21, 2005, 07:26:30 PM

There are other examples from Harry Potter. Professor Quirrel in the first book. And also Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail). I wonder how a book about James Potter, Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, and Peter Pettigrew would read. Most likely Pettigrew would be the cute little fool that had to be protected from harm while he seemed to mean harm to nobody.

Nick22 · **Reply #73 on:** December 24, 2005, 11:22:56 PM

Yes that is my impression as well. the comic relief who didn't reach the talent level of his friends.

Malte279 · **Reply #74 on:** December 29, 2005, 06:41:16 PM

Today I watched "The Chronicles of Narnia". I like the movie in general and enjoyed watching it.
The religious, Christian paralels are very distinct indeed. Too distinct to be overlooked. There are some points about the movie about which I am in a split mind. Though they frequently say that war is bad (something I consider a kind of eternal truth) they don't really show what is bad about it. No matter how grievously characters are wounded there is hardly any blood in the entire movie (a tiny trickle of blood on Edmund's lip being one of the very few exceptions). We see very few of the cruel results of war except for those which are relativised by the fact that the "goodies" are being revived (and who cares about the "badies" anyway). Even if the failing to show the realities of war may be founded by the fact that the movie is made for a younger audience as well, I think it may send across some wrong messages very much depending on who is watching the movie.
As many (not all) fantasy stories there is this black and white sceme of characters either being good or bad with hardly anything in between (Edmund is good but just being "misled").
As I said I like the movie and I consider several of the negateive critiques I read exaggerated. The same goes however for some of the positive critiques which ignore some points which at least deserve to be not just ignored.

Littlefoot1616 · **Reply #75 on:** January 02, 2006, 07:22:51 AM

I thought Narnia was very good considering it had very strong rivaling competition from Harry Potter to win people's attention. I'd say Narnia is a little slower (in terms of plot development) than Harry Potter but that's not saying that it's boring. I liked the tactics used in the war scene and the way it was constructed. As for the biblical side, there isnt a massive amount. A few references but nothing that you have to attend Sunday school to recall LOL. I'd recommend seeing it

I also saw King Kong. That's a good one too but it's probably moreso for those who are into serious in-your-face action. The battle sequences are big, bold and gruelling (and somewhat gruesome in some cases). I was a bit wary of the film before I went to actually see it coz it sounded a bit dodgy about a woman loving a 50ft gorilla monster LOL but it's not sappy or sickeningly love-dovey. It's also quite funny in places too.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #76 on:** January 02, 2006, 09:27:47 PM

Alright, Malte, I'm going to be blunt in saying that I think you're being too picky with Narnia.

Quote

The religious, Christian paralels are very distinct indeed. Too distinct to be overlooked. There are some points about the movie about which I am in a split mind. Though they frequently say that war is bad (something I consider a kind of eternal truth) they don't really show what is bad about it.

It's a PG rated kid's movie. Were you expecting body parts and gore? The point of the story wasn't the hell of war, thus, there was no need to go over it in detail.

Quote

No matter how grievously characters are wounded there is hardly any blood in the entire movie (a tiny trickle of blood on Edmund's lip being one of the very few exceptions). We see very few of the cruel results of war except for those which are relativised by the fact that the "goodies" are being revived (and who cares about the "badies" anyway). Even if the failing to show the realities of war may be founded by the fact that the movie is made for a younger audience as well, I think it may send across some wrong messages very much depending on who is watching the movie.

I think you're overthinking this and putting too much on the shoulders of this film. Oh, and why would you want blood in this film? There was no need for blood to be shown, and I consider the claim that blood=a good war movie to be utterly moronic. No offense, Malte, but that's the truth. And how do you know that the 'baddies' weren't revived? They showed Aslan getting reinforcements, Edmund getting revived, and then Lucy running to the nearest to help him. So, apparently, if it wasn't shown, it didn't happen, eh? And the reality of war is that you're going to help your side revive, first. "The baddies" can wait until your comrades are healed. That's how it works. And the only people this movie will be sending the wrong message across to are naive morons.
Forgive a kid's movie for not going over all the issues you apparently wanted it to. They had 2 hours and 20 minutes to tell the story. That's pushing it.

Quote

As many (not all) fantasy stories there is this black and white sceme of characters either being good or bad with hardly anything in between (Edmund is good but just being "misled").

May I ask where a middle line could possibly have gone? On one side: you have the White Witch and those who chose to follow her, and on the other, you have Aslan (the rightful ruler) and those who stayed loyal to him. It's melodrama. You don't want to over-complicate a child's story.

Quote

As I said I like the movie and I consider several of the negateive critiques I read exaggerated. The same goes however for some of the positive critiques which ignore some points which at least deserve to be not just ignored.

What points would those be?

Forgive any offenseive things I said, but I very strongly disagree with every one of the negative critiques concerning this movie, and I consider most of the positive ones spot on.

Malte279 · **Reply #77 on:** January 03, 2006, 04:54:39 AM

Nothing like honest bluntness Weird Raptor. There is nothing offensive in disagreeing or criticizing

I must stress once again that I like the movie so don't you take offense in my critique of the movie. We tend to praise a good movie to heaven forgetting about negative aspects, so I meant to point them out too. It is with movies just like it is with characters, they are hardly ever just black and white.

Quote

I think you're overthinking this and putting too much on the shoulders of this film. Oh, and why would you want blood in this film? There was no need for blood to be shown, and I consider the claim that blood=a good war movie to be utterly moronic. No offense, Malte, but that's the truth. And how do you know that the 'baddies' weren't revived? They showed Aslan getting reinforcements, Edmund getting revived, and then Lucy running to the nearest to help him. So, apparently, if it wasn't shown, it didn't happen, eh? And the reality of war is that you're going to help your side revive, first. "The baddies" can wait until your comrades are healed. That's how it works. And the only people this movie will be sending the wrong message across to are naive morons.

Maybe I am overthinking it. Probably I do, as this is difficult to bring accross to children anyway. But keep in mind that there ARE quite a few morons (be they kids or grownups) out there who will unconsciously draw exactly the conclusions from the movie I named. I'm not being paranoid if I say that the influence of the medias, and medias of entertainment perhaps even more than news reports (which many a moron doesn't bother to watch anyway) can hardly be underestimated. They strongly influence our thinking in particular about thingse we've never seen in real life.
As for the revival of the badies I can just turn around the tables. Why would you think that there was such a revival when there was not a single winterly or ugly character to be seen after the battle? And as for the reality it would not have hurt if there had been just a single character whom the audience loves who died "beyond repair". A parting like the one of Littlefoot and his mother after her being killed by the sharptooth might have given a glimpse at the pain war causes.

Quote

May I ask where a middle line could possibly have gone? On one side: you have the White Witch and those who chose to follow her, and on the other, you have Aslan (the rightful ruler) and those who stayed loyal to him. It's melodrama. You don't want to over-complicate a child's story.

Just a character who just wants to be left alone and doesn't really care about whether it is summer or winter or if a Witch or a Lion is sitting on the throne. If a character doesn't care too much about cold weather and is not interested in politics that character won't be too interested in who is succeeding to a throne (preferably a throne far away) either. That would probably not be a character we would like (though he might be hospitable and friendly to anyone who doesn't mean to drag him along into a war that is not his own) neither would it be someone to dislike (not a supporter of the bad side either and clearly a peace-loving nature). It would be a grey-zone character.

Quote

What points would those be?

Most of them the very same I listed though I kept out some which I suppose would only be provoking.

WeirdRaptor · **Reply #78 on:** January 03, 2006, 06:49:02 AM

Quote

Maybe I am overthinking it. Probably I do, as this is difficult to bring accross to children anyway. But keep in mind that there ARE quite a few morons (be they kids or grownups) out there who will unconsciously draw exactly the conclusions from the movie I named. I'm not being paranoid if I say that the influence of the medias, and medias of entertainment perhaps even more than news reports (which many a moron doesn't bother to watch anyway) can hardly be underestimated. They strongly influence our thinking in particular about thingse we've never seen in real life.
As for the revival of the badies I can just turn around the tables. Why would you think that there was such a revival when there was not a single winterly or ugly character to be seen after the battle? And as for the reality it would not have hurt if there had been just a single character whom the audience loves who died "beyond repair". A parting like the one of Littlefoot and his mother after her being killed by the sharptooth might have given a glimpse at the pain war causes.

Well, they did have the centar general, the fox, and Mr. Tumnus, although they were all repaired, it did make for a very clear point that anyone who got involved was in deep trouble if they were caught, and it was only by the miracle of Aslan that they were revived, which is what it would take to bring those ones back, so I can see how the hell of war is personified there.
I think for anyone to get the wrong message from this film: you'd seriously either have to have very incompetent parents, or you have serious observational, deductive, and logical problems, yourself. Any film can send the wrong message if it is taken the wrong way, but films, itself, cannot be blamed for people's actions.
As for no winterly or ugly creatures seen after battle, well...they really didn't show us much of what happened after the battle, actually. Just a ceremony and the kids, some years down the line, chasing a stag.

Quote

Just a character who just wants to be left alone and doesn't really care about whether it is summer or winter or if a Witch or a Lion is sitting on the throne. If a character doesn't care too much about cold weather and is not interested in politics that character won't be too interested in who is succeeding to a throne (preferably a throne far away) either. That would probably not be a character we would like (though he might be hospitable and friendly to anyone who doesn't mean to drag him along into a war that is not his own) neither would it be someone to dislike (not a supporter of the bad side either and clearly a peace-loving nature). It would be a grey-zone character.

A character like that would seriously have to have a large degree of indifference towards Narnia, his fellow Narnians, and how his country is run in order to be even be like that. How would this character have a peace-loving nature if he/she did nothing about it. Every day this character would hear about more and more Narnians dying, getting turned to stone, being tortured, etc. for doing nothing more than not accepting the witch as queen, when it's their right to do so, because she is clearly not the queen of Narnia. No, if you cared about Narnia at all, you sided either with Aslan, or with Jadis, because this was everyone's war. Just like WWII.

Malte279 · **Reply #79 on:** January 03, 2006, 10:59:47 AM

Quote

Well, they did have the centar general, the fox, and Mr. Tumnus, although they were all repaired, it did make for a very clear point that anyone who got involved was in deep trouble if they were caught, and it was only by the miracle of Aslan that they were revived, which is what it would take to bring those ones back, so I can see how the hell of war is personified there.

The damage of war is spotlessly cleaned away there. However much I like the movie I can't help seriously questioning that message. I suppose that this is simply a point we're disaggreeing on. We'll get over it I suppose. The same goes for the question of the "baddies". I don't believe they were taken care off without anything indicating they were; you believe they were taken of taking the mere absence in the few post war scenes we saw as no indication of the contrary.

Quote

A character like that would seriously have to have a large degree of indifference towards Narnia, his fellow Narnians, and how his country is run in order to be even be like that. How would this character have a peace-loving nature if he/she did nothing about it. Every day this character would hear about more and more Narnians dying, getting turned to stone, being tortured, etc. for doing nothing more than not accepting the witch as queen, when it's their right to do so, because she is clearly not the queen of Narnia. No, if you cared about Narnia at all, you sided either with Aslan, or with Jadis, because this was everyone's war. Just like WWII.

I never said we had to like such a character. In real life with almost no war being fought only for selfless reasons such gray zone people of differentiated mind may come accross kinder. The character would be peace-loving as he wouldn't want himself to be dragged into a war. Again this appears more indifferent in a black and white story such as Narnia than it does in real life.
There were countries not involved in WW2. Many countries were dragged into the war by being attacked when they would have prefered to stay neutral. Others managed to remain neutral to the end. Countries such as Sweden and Switzerland have been seriously critizised for their "indifference" in WW2. There is no "true" judgement about this as there were people in these countries who profited from the Holocaust. On the other hand these countries were a last save harbor to many jewish refugees. Had either country declared war on Germany they would have most likely been overrun and suffered from the nazi terror themselves. How harsh can we judge them?
Or what about Finnland that actually fought alongside the Germans against the Soviet Union who had occupied large Finnish territories before and later fought alongside the Soviets against the Germans in Lapland. Finnland did not allow its democracy to be destroyed by the Germans. Each of these examples could fill many books and threads, but I'm coming of from the topic.
What about the followers of the Witch. Do you really think they are all just evil? Or may it be that quite a few of them are too are scared of the Witch aware that they will be killed the moment they don't follow the Witch's command? There is a scene indicating something like this on the DvD version of "The two towers". Such a scene would have been quite appropriate in "Narnia" I think.