Roger Ebert likes it — though once again he gets something very wrong: "Aboard the sailing vessel, Lucy (Georgie Henley), her brother Edmund (Skandar Keynes) and young Eustace (Will Poulter) ask no questions. They're too blissful to be back in Narnia...." Um, yeah, Roger... Eustace has never been in Narnia, and certainly does ask questions.
Michael Medved loved it, and says it is "easily the best" of the Narnia movies thus far.
We're just too packed this weekend, and likely won't be able to see it.
If you do, what did you think? Please be sure to add whether or not you've read the book.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
20 comments:
I've not seen it yet. With Mrs. Squirrel's migraines, we don't go to theaters often, and mostly wait for the dvd release to see films we want to see.
HSAT, I did just read this review by Dave Miller.
Miller writes, "This was one of my favorite books in the series (along with “The Silver Chair”) and I was probably a little more judgmental because of that. I wanted the makers of the movie to stick closer to the text of the book than they did. They produced an NIV translation and I wanted something a little more NASB."
Squirrel
heading out in about 20 for the matinee... 3D or no?
al sends
Medved says the 3D is very good.
I saw the movie last night. Zzzz...
If you watch this movie, just think of it as a different story - that helps when you keep seeing changes from the book. I saw it in 3D - liked that.
I thought the first of the 3 Narnia movies was the only good one.
Saw it in 3D this afternoon. I was ambivalent - I think they made Eustace far too likeable at the beginning. It was a good film, but I'm not sure how much I would say it was Dawn Treader. And yes, I've read the book. I think it works, as Tina said, if you don't think about the book going in.
I've repeatedly listened to the audio versions. Both the straight text, as well as the dramatized version done by Focus on the Family. Does that count?
Anyhow, I really enjoyed the movie. As far as acting, production values and humor, this was the best so far. I thought the opening moments captured the whimsical quality of the books in a way the previous films did not. It's pretty impressive what Apted was able to accomplish with a smaller budget than Adamson. Makes you wonder...
Admittedly, some of the changes were disappointing and cringe worthy. Also, there were some seriously missed opportunities along the way. Nevertheless, I really enjoyed VDT and I will see it again.
The final moments of the film, after the return from Narnia, were incredibly bittersweet.
Saw it today with the grandkids. It was ok. Loved Eustace. Reminds me of a student of mine who is going on his second year with me. I hated the sea monster. It was a cross between an alien and a giant centipede. Why?
I think the special effects were pretty nice, and the temptations that were confronted interesting and thoughtful. I still think Aslan is wimpy.
My grandsons thought it was pretty cool and actually agreed with me about the weird sea monster.
This was a great movie! Eustace was exactly who I thought imagined him to be.
Highly recommended!
One catch, as any movie, it follows the basic story line and main characters, then there is liberty to make a fast moving childrens book into a heart-racing, full-length adult/childrens movie.
The kids and I read the book before seeing the film and left feeling good about the experience. Hmm... Maybe "Prince Caspian" just made this one seem much closer to the book for us. It does help to anticipate change; I've never seen a movie that follows a book perfectly, but this one does a good job with the changes.
If anyone is interested, I posted a review over at http://gospelliving.blogspot.com/
My favorite movie of the three. I don't believe it stands on its own like the other two. The story and acting are better here. Good use of CGI, but over used, like I think it was in the first two. Eustace was amazing, wonderful little actor. Didn't see the 3D.
Oh ya...read all the books shortly after becoming a Christian, so over 30 years ago.
If my moving loving father in law gets it for me for my birthday, I will be very upset.
It was so bad I felt compelled to post a blog about how much I didn't like it, which is rare.
I would rather have watched Ms. Doubtfire, or Unbreakable, or heck, even Ishtar rather than this one.
They took more creative liberties than I would have believed, whereas in the other two movies the atheist writers impressed their worldview upon the script but largely left the story alone, this time around they didn't hold back.
My blog post is spoiler filled, so don't read it if you want to see the movie, however, I would not recommend doing so.
And read the book, perhaps which is what makes it so much worse.
Another post, why not- Tina is exactly right. If you think of it as C.S. Lewis' book come to life you are going to be upset. If you expect the Christianity to remain you will be upset. If you care about a clean plot with no glaring problems, you will be upset.
If, and big if, you like to turn your brain off and have never read the books, you will enjoy yourself. Mostly.
I've read the books many times, and don't really plan to see this movie adaptation; when it comes out on DVD and available on Redbox I may watch it, not sure though.
I was disappointed with the changes done in the movie version of Lion, Witch and Wardrobe - wimpy kids frequently whining about how they missed mom and dad; and the treatment of Aslan was too casual and flippant. I know a lot of people criticize the original BBC productions because of their cheap effects quality etc., but at least those versions were generally faithful to the original stories, and when I feel like watching the Narnia stories again I get out those DVDS.
Haven't seen it yet, not sure I will after just seeing Prince Caspian (and hating it) this weekend.
But the main reason I'm commenting is because the verification word is: cloaking. Sweet...
I liked it.
The book is very episodic (is that a word?), which likely made it more difficult to adapt. Any changes were likely made to make the story flow a little better.
As mentioned, Eustace stole the show...making his conversion from dragon back to boy (one of my favorite parts of the book) very powerful.
Outstanding. Powerful imagery and allegory. Loved it.
Just back from VDT in 3D, with the the younger Grasshoppers (9, 12 and 14) and Gramma Grasshopper (age unrevealed) and everyone loved it.
We're not a terribly critical audience - didn't expect it to be exactly like the book, and it wasn't.
On the plus side... You can't get inside people's heads in a movie, as you can in a book. Still, I thought they did well with the temptations the different characters were facing, and with showing that Edmund and Lucy are growing up. Loved cheeky little Reepicheep.
They (obviously) had to compress several of the events, but I thought they stayed true to the core of the story.
On the down side... I would've liked more explanation as to Eustace's 'un-dragoning'. And I've never thought Aslan was sufficiently impressive or magnificent in the movies. I've always wanted to hear a voice like James Earl Jones' coming out of his mouth.
Still, thumb up from the Grasshoppers :D
Thanks. We may find (make?) time to see it this weekend.
Post a Comment