The Lion's Toupe and Other Stories
If nothing else, see it for Mr Tumnus who is utterly wonderful.
Other comments: the movie looks good. Nice scenery, interesting interplay between the characters, amazing expression and gesture on the animated figures. I managed to scream like a little girl in one of the early scenes (I was surprised, okay? It could happen to anyone.) The crucifixion - er, sacrifice on the Stone Table - scene is seriously unpleasant in a way that makes film-makers feel proud.
The White Witch should have won. In the final battle, there is a big duel scene between her and Peter. What that means is a half-grown whelpling flailing away with his sword and swinging his shield out and away from the body in, I dunno, some pitiful belief that it makes his blows stronger (or perhaps he lost his balance) vs. a lady with style. She had two swords and time to pose. She was graceful; she was dashing; she would have won if it wasn't for that darn kitty.
The only blood is on Edmund's split lip. It felt wrong. Given, the movie is directed at little kids, but, in many ways, the movie is trying to scare us and tell us that war is horrible. I'm not particularly fond of scarlet gushers, but to remove all traces of wounds is like saying, "Oh no, it's all right really, we were just playing pretend..." Like I said, it felt wrong.
Gotta love Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan.
**
Oh, the toupe. The comment arose as we were waiting for the theatre to open and observed a very depressed lion couchant on a drinks dispenser. He had a two-tone mane and we were speculating about high-lighting, fashion-conscious felines, and other hair enhancers. That's all. Honest.
Other comments: the movie looks good. Nice scenery, interesting interplay between the characters, amazing expression and gesture on the animated figures. I managed to scream like a little girl in one of the early scenes (I was surprised, okay? It could happen to anyone.) The crucifixion - er, sacrifice on the Stone Table - scene is seriously unpleasant in a way that makes film-makers feel proud.
The White Witch should have won. In the final battle, there is a big duel scene between her and Peter. What that means is a half-grown whelpling flailing away with his sword and swinging his shield out and away from the body in, I dunno, some pitiful belief that it makes his blows stronger (or perhaps he lost his balance) vs. a lady with style. She had two swords and time to pose. She was graceful; she was dashing; she would have won if it wasn't for that darn kitty.
The only blood is on Edmund's split lip. It felt wrong. Given, the movie is directed at little kids, but, in many ways, the movie is trying to scare us and tell us that war is horrible. I'm not particularly fond of scarlet gushers, but to remove all traces of wounds is like saying, "Oh no, it's all right really, we were just playing pretend..." Like I said, it felt wrong.
Gotta love Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan.
**
Oh, the toupe. The comment arose as we were waiting for the theatre to open and observed a very depressed lion couchant on a drinks dispenser. He had a two-tone mane and we were speculating about high-lighting, fashion-conscious felines, and other hair enhancers. That's all. Honest.
posted by theamazingcatherine | 11:44 pm
6 Comments:
Yeah, we saw it last night as well.
My comments basically echo yours - I may be wrong, but it seemed to me that the White Witch and Boreas (spot those NZ actors...) were the *only* ones that looked like they actually knew how to hold a sword. And oh, did Ms Swinton look styley when she used hers!
Some part of me is vaguely miffed that they changed the quote when Lucy gets given her dagger (I guess they had to in order to have female centaurs in the battle). Then again, I'm only miffed because I was looking forward to debating it afterwards with other fellow female sword-y people
I was also vaguely amused that, except for the Witch herself, and for Boreas, almost *all* the good guys spoke with English accents, and all the bad guys with American ones.
I didn't notice the accents.
As for no consequences? Casting the unbelievers into the Outer Darkness in The Last Battle seems pretty consequential to me...
To be honest, the Christian imagery got me down after I was old enough and canny enough to notice it. They're still good stories - lots of plot, characters I like, colourful, but they made me feel like I was being got at.
I always wondered what Susan's life would have been like afterwards. With her entire family dead in the same entirely useless and preventable train crash would she have become even more of a girly girl in self defence? Become a Christian Fundamentalist and claimed it was all 'meant to be'? Gotten out of the party stage a little bit sooner? I just wonder what her life would have been like.
There's supposed to be some fanfic by Neil Gaiman called "The Problem of Susan" where she becomes an Oxford professor. 'Course, there's also supposed to be Aslan/White Witch slash, so I don't know how serious a story it's supposed to be.
"At the end of the book, when they leave Narnia, nothing has changed about them: they even revert to being little kids. That's one of the major reasons those books SUCK. Lewis was in denial of the Golden Rule of Children's books and movies, and that is that the children in them grow up. The book is a guide to HOW and WHY. "
You're referring to the Golden Rule of Children's Books Written In The '60s. Lewis was more linked into the Golden Rule of Children's Books Written In The Victorian Period, which were all about celebrating the innocence of childhood and wouldn't it be great if kids could stay that way forever. Reread The House at Pooh Corner - it starts and ends with a lament about Christopher Robin getting too old to stay in the Thousand Acre woods and how he's going away, and then finishes with the image of a small boy playing with his bear forever.
Stephanie
The ineptness of the fighting was second only to the ineptness of the tactics. I had a whinge about it on my blog which I'm not going to repeat here.
Although, I do wonder if the ineptness of the children's fighting might have been on purpose? i.e. it didn't matter how well Peter fought but that he was brave enough to fight at all and therefore provide a chance for Aslan to take out the Witch?
Oh, there are consequences in Narnia, if you betray your closest family and their friends then... you don't get presents from Santa.
Hmmm, actually this article in the Guardin summed it up pretty well. The last paragraph is particularly pithy.
"Children are supposed to fall in love with the hypnotic Aslan, though he is not a character: he is pure, raw, awesome power. He is an emblem for everything an atheist objects to in religion. His divine presence is a way to avoid humans taking responsibility for everything here and now on earth, where no one is watching, no one is guiding, no one is judging and there is no other place yet to come. Without an Aslan, there is no one here but ourselves to suffer for our sins, no one to redeem us but ourselves: we are obliged to settle our own disputes and do what we can. We need no holy guide books, only a very human moral compass. Everyone needs ghosts, spirits, marvels and poetic imaginings, but we can do well without an Aslan."
The the first thought that struck me after reading the Da Vinci Code was, "So what?" I mean, okay, there a people decended from Jesus, but that's only important if you think Jesus was someone other than a normal man (or gestalt character).
Same with The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. It's only allegory if you actually believe the Bible is truth, otherwise it's just plagiarism.
Further, most of the Bible stories are either directly ripped from other mythologies or merely relate universal motifs. Heck, the Aztecs have a story about the gods dying, spilling their blood for good of mankind, and then coming back to life.
I've never read the book, but I enjoyed the movie. It's a decent fable, well acted and well paced. Yes, it had a decidely 'Anglican' bent to it, but so did Tolkien. People write what they know. I'm a secularist myself, but in my opinion Philip Pullman deriding Narnia becuase it's polemic is the pot calling the kettle black.
Heck, there are some Christians on the internet who think Narnia is the tool of the Devil. Don't look at the Narnia movies as a attempt by the Christians to brainwash children, see as opportunity to teach children to look at symbolism critically. And, you know, a good holiday movie.
"The Problem of Susan" in an anthology called Flights:
http://www.bookslut.com/fiction/2005_09_006548.php
Post a Comment
<< Home