11:33AM
Voyeur of the Dawn Treader
Saturday, June 19, 2010 at 11:33AM | by Otter I have to admit, I haven't been crazy about the Narnia films, but this one looks better than the first two. I think I already know what its major weakness will be, though: it's trying too hard to find a Really Big Purpose for the voyage ("You are all about to be tested... you've got an extraordinary destiny! The fate of Narnia depends on you!") instead of just going with the book: honor, its difficulties, and its costs and rewards.
Time will tell...
Reader Comments (4)
That does look good. This is the first time I've seen a trailer for this movie. I like that it looks to be more adventure based than battle based (ala Caspian). It's cool that special effects have evolved to the point that so much of this is possible, and much of it looks similar to the way I've pictured it in my mind.
Like you, I hope they stick with the motivation in the book. Life tends to be that way: we set out to do the right thing, and testing comes along the way as doing the right thing turns out to be harder than we had anticipated.
Stephanie, yes. It's kind of shocking how little they trust kids to pick up on a well-detailed theme like "doing the right thing" or "honor." You've got to have some character saying "You will all be tested! Oh, thanks, we would have missed that...
I forgot to mention that it's in 3D. I'm a little bit of a movie-whore: if it flickers on a screen I'll watch it. But I admit that I have a fondness for 3D. Avatar was a bit of a recycled story for me (Pocahontas in space) but the visuals were outstanding.
Oh, I do NOT like seeing Lucy with a bow.
That's one of the problems I had with the second movie: Susan was supposed to be Queen Susan the Gentle. Why the HELL did they put her in the middle of a battle? Even from a strategic standpoint it made no sense to have an archer in the front lines.
I suppose some feminists must be fussing about the stereotypical damsels in distress not being able to take care of themselves, but they miss the point. Putting the girls in battle loses a bit of their . . . I suppose innocence. (Not that they were totally innocent or clueless: they did run a kingdom for years, after all.) I always thought it was very important that Lucy NEVER shed blood, and when Susan did, which was rare, it was completely necessary and not quite as personal if it would have been had she used a blade.
Okay, there's my rant for the day. We will now return to our regularly scheduled comments, already in progress.
Victoria, I'll have to re-read it, but I _think_ that in _TVOTDT_ Lucy does carry a bow on at least one occasion. But I agree with you about Susan and the battle in _Prince Caspian._
That's the most difficult thing about films. Directors are forced to make creative decisions about what they want to portray. And I think rather than focusing on character they focused on balances in those films: to have the others fight but Susan sit it out would have felt odd and unexplained.
You might well have just tapped my major disagreement with _Prince Caspian_: I'm not sure they really loved the characters very much.
I'd think it'd be the hardest of the books to film, really, because so much of it is just wandering through Narnia, and much of what happens in that wandering is the revelation of character. (Truthfully, I think it's the weakest book because I'm not sure Lewis really _did_ reveal as much as he intended about character. The children's trip through Narnia with Trumpkin feels incredibly pointless to me.)
But if you watch that movie again with an eye on Peter Dinklage as Trumpkin, I think he's marvelous, and one of the best actors working in America. He was fantastic in _The Station Agent._