![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sepdetSo I went to see The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe with a few bards from my RL guild. I had been bracing myself for the possibility that battle sequence might have been expanded to gobble up huge chunks of the film, cutting out most of the plot and character development for the sake of dramatic epic battle sequences (see: ROTK).
I was pleasantly surprised!
Of course, it helps that these books are quite short, so one doesn't have to worry much about abridgement in order to make them fit two hours.
My general impressions (Disclaimer: I use "witch" because, well, that's what she's called, even if she's nothing like RL witches any more than fantasy wolves are like real wolves):
~ Tweaks and additions to the sequence of events were made to make circumstances more dramatic and suspenseful. But all the key plot points remained, including certain small but memorable moments. I can think of only two memorable moments that were dropped. (see hidden "spoilers" lj-cut below.)
~ A few gratuitous action sequences were added, and yes, the battle was Big. But it was the climax, rather than the whole, of the movie.
~ Minor tweaks to characters made them more complex than they were in the books, adding a bit of a sub-plot and giving them character development arcs, which seems to be a requirement of films these days. However, they were still essentially the original characters, and I do not recall any additions that betrayed or utterly reversed their natures (cf: "go home, Sam" and Aragorn, Reluctant Heir of Isildur).
~ Some of the silly cute bits were removed, but I only found myself mourning the loss of one cute line.
~ I cannot think of anything important that was left out. Which makes me fairly forgiving of additions!
~ The ages of the children were a slightly wider spread than in the books, but one got used to it fairly quickly.
~ The animals and animation worked-- not just in terms of looking reasonably believable. At all times, the FX were in service to the story or at least in service to narrative choreography. There were no "gee, wow, look at our cool FX" moments purely for the sake of showing off the FX, but instead, "gee, wow, look at this cool idea/tactic/situation". A subtle but important distinction.
~ The performances could've been better in places, and the whole film felt to me more like an excellent TV miniseries than an Epic Blockbuster Film, but I'd rather have a slightly tentative production than one so full of hype, over-the-top sequences, and gratuitous stunts that the story is lost.
~ Most of all, I never once had the sinking feeling of, "parts of this are fabulous, but I really hate the thought of people watching this who haven't read the books, because they're going to get a completely wrong idea about X, Y, and Z."
**** SPOILERS ****
The two "memorable moments" I alluded to above were:
~ The witch turning all the little partying animals into stone, and exciting Edmund's pity for the first time. This was replaced by the fox and badgers.
~ Edmund being rescued just as the witch was preparing to kill him, sharpening her knife.
Neither one are really vital to the plot. There are other scenes that establish Edmund waking up to the feelings and predicaments of others. I'm not sure why the rescue was altered, except that there needed to be time in the film to show where she got her army, and having Edmund spirited away from camp guards is a bit more plausible than having a dozen or so animals mug the witch and snatch Edmund out from under her nose. That would have made her look far less threatening.
The cute line I missed was Mrs. Beaver saying, "what a mercy I remembered to bring the bread knife" or some such, when Father Christmas provided them all with a several-course breakfast. But that was a punchline for a minor sequence that was in no way necessary for moving the story forward.
Of course, major things were invented: the three children chasing Edmund almost to the Queen's gates, the sly fox, the tunnels, the frozen river sequence, rather more Peter Angst, Edmund being a bit less priggish and asinine, Susan and Lucy having a bit more of an active role with the tree-message (foreshadowing the trees in the next movie), info about the children's family, and Peter's subtle but obvious glance at the soldier only a few years older than himself. But I don't think any of this changed the heart and core of the story.
I especially approved of the neat way in which the Blitz and evacuees were explained at the beginning of the film. I hadn't thought about the fact that most moviegoers, especially children, would not have the faintest inkling of the historical context. The London sequence at the beginning was quite effective in explaining this whole situation without recourse to boring Expository Dialogue. As a matter of fact, I found myself tearing up several times at the start of the film, and it is extremely rare for me to cry in films. What a fabulous way to establish audience sympathy for the characters! I think it was also a stroke of genius to show how Peter and Edmund, even though they were children, could have come up with at least one effective military tactic with which the witch's army would have absolutely no experience.
I also appreciated that Peter was NOT a superhero. It's a real problem in these stories that the Narnian air magically makes humans stronger, faster, and more skilled than they are at home. Peter was visibly inexperienced in combat. You could see him doing his best and putting up a tremendous effort, but clearly not as good a fighter as the witch, who seemed to be toying with him for a while rather than finishing him off. Susan and Lucy got a touch of godmoding/twinking-- Susan shoots like Legolas, NOT very likely-- but it didn't occupy too much screentime, and I confess to a certain hypocrisy in being grateful that the girls do some useful deeds instead of the boys doing everything that matters while the girls are Somewhere Else.
Tumnus was delightful. He's not at all what I've imagined, mind you: I think of him as older and more fussy, somewhat colored by the BBC version. Obviously the casting director was looking for a way to slip in a token Hot Actor for fans to swoon over. But I could really believe in his ability to charm Lucy (which, come to think of it, may be why Lucy was so young; this story was written in a different era, and it's sad but true that nowadays even fairly young kids know not to go off with strangers.) His performance was not simply that of a pretty boy, however; he was thoughtfully nuanced from his initial vacillation between appealling and slightly ominous, to his later fear, pain, bravery, and worries about Lucy when he was in the dungeon. Too often, characters which are supposed to be appealling are given Cool Moments To Show Us Why They're Likeable, like Legolas' impassioned outbursts on behalf of Aragorn, or Merry and Pippin dancing and singing in the inn. Tumnus simply conveyed that he was a decent fellow during the scenes where he appeared.
I'm glad they gave him that extra scene in the witch's castle. Again, it's an addition which did not fundamentally change the plot; it simply developed the characters a little more than they are in the books, gave a little more excuse for interaction, and made Edmund less of a passive pawn who does very little until the end of the book apart from whine.
The White Witch felt just a little weak to me. I would've played Peter more bold (even rash) and less angstful, but reluctant heroes are in fashion these days, and for me the changes were within an acceptable range of deviation.
I think the best thing about this movie was, strangely enough, the plot. The plot elements and character arcs were very simple and straightforward, but they tied all the action together into a coherent narrative. Lots of little elements like the bombers, Edmund's tendency to run off, Peter's job in taking care of the younger ones, or tiny details like the talking trees were picked up or expanded on or played with later, woven together, or used to foreshadow future or past events outside the scope of the film. The battle sequence was memorable in that there were coherent, obvious, and original tactics and strategy (apart from the White Witch pulling up her chariot right at the edge of a drop-off just before the battle commenced... I would like to know how those bears got her down off that outcropping without cracking an axle!) Some of the invented elements like the tunnels and Father Christmas chasing them seemed a tad forced, but they were still enjoyable and inoffensive.
***END SPOILERS****
Verdict: Good enough. I have no fear now that these people will mangle Narnia for all time if they tackle the rest.
I was pleasantly surprised!
Of course, it helps that these books are quite short, so one doesn't have to worry much about abridgement in order to make them fit two hours.
My general impressions (Disclaimer: I use "witch" because, well, that's what she's called, even if she's nothing like RL witches any more than fantasy wolves are like real wolves):
~ Tweaks and additions to the sequence of events were made to make circumstances more dramatic and suspenseful. But all the key plot points remained, including certain small but memorable moments. I can think of only two memorable moments that were dropped. (see hidden "spoilers" lj-cut below.)
~ A few gratuitous action sequences were added, and yes, the battle was Big. But it was the climax, rather than the whole, of the movie.
~ Minor tweaks to characters made them more complex than they were in the books, adding a bit of a sub-plot and giving them character development arcs, which seems to be a requirement of films these days. However, they were still essentially the original characters, and I do not recall any additions that betrayed or utterly reversed their natures (cf: "go home, Sam" and Aragorn, Reluctant Heir of Isildur).
~ Some of the silly cute bits were removed, but I only found myself mourning the loss of one cute line.
~ I cannot think of anything important that was left out. Which makes me fairly forgiving of additions!
~ The ages of the children were a slightly wider spread than in the books, but one got used to it fairly quickly.
~ The animals and animation worked-- not just in terms of looking reasonably believable. At all times, the FX were in service to the story or at least in service to narrative choreography. There were no "gee, wow, look at our cool FX" moments purely for the sake of showing off the FX, but instead, "gee, wow, look at this cool idea/tactic/situation". A subtle but important distinction.
~ The performances could've been better in places, and the whole film felt to me more like an excellent TV miniseries than an Epic Blockbuster Film, but I'd rather have a slightly tentative production than one so full of hype, over-the-top sequences, and gratuitous stunts that the story is lost.
~ Most of all, I never once had the sinking feeling of, "parts of this are fabulous, but I really hate the thought of people watching this who haven't read the books, because they're going to get a completely wrong idea about X, Y, and Z."
**** SPOILERS ****
The two "memorable moments" I alluded to above were:
~ The witch turning all the little partying animals into stone, and exciting Edmund's pity for the first time. This was replaced by the fox and badgers.
~ Edmund being rescued just as the witch was preparing to kill him, sharpening her knife.
Neither one are really vital to the plot. There are other scenes that establish Edmund waking up to the feelings and predicaments of others. I'm not sure why the rescue was altered, except that there needed to be time in the film to show where she got her army, and having Edmund spirited away from camp guards is a bit more plausible than having a dozen or so animals mug the witch and snatch Edmund out from under her nose. That would have made her look far less threatening.
The cute line I missed was Mrs. Beaver saying, "what a mercy I remembered to bring the bread knife" or some such, when Father Christmas provided them all with a several-course breakfast. But that was a punchline for a minor sequence that was in no way necessary for moving the story forward.
Of course, major things were invented: the three children chasing Edmund almost to the Queen's gates, the sly fox, the tunnels, the frozen river sequence, rather more Peter Angst, Edmund being a bit less priggish and asinine, Susan and Lucy having a bit more of an active role with the tree-message (foreshadowing the trees in the next movie), info about the children's family, and Peter's subtle but obvious glance at the soldier only a few years older than himself. But I don't think any of this changed the heart and core of the story.
I especially approved of the neat way in which the Blitz and evacuees were explained at the beginning of the film. I hadn't thought about the fact that most moviegoers, especially children, would not have the faintest inkling of the historical context. The London sequence at the beginning was quite effective in explaining this whole situation without recourse to boring Expository Dialogue. As a matter of fact, I found myself tearing up several times at the start of the film, and it is extremely rare for me to cry in films. What a fabulous way to establish audience sympathy for the characters! I think it was also a stroke of genius to show how Peter and Edmund, even though they were children, could have come up with at least one effective military tactic with which the witch's army would have absolutely no experience.
I also appreciated that Peter was NOT a superhero. It's a real problem in these stories that the Narnian air magically makes humans stronger, faster, and more skilled than they are at home. Peter was visibly inexperienced in combat. You could see him doing his best and putting up a tremendous effort, but clearly not as good a fighter as the witch, who seemed to be toying with him for a while rather than finishing him off. Susan and Lucy got a touch of godmoding/twinking-- Susan shoots like Legolas, NOT very likely-- but it didn't occupy too much screentime, and I confess to a certain hypocrisy in being grateful that the girls do some useful deeds instead of the boys doing everything that matters while the girls are Somewhere Else.
Tumnus was delightful. He's not at all what I've imagined, mind you: I think of him as older and more fussy, somewhat colored by the BBC version. Obviously the casting director was looking for a way to slip in a token Hot Actor for fans to swoon over. But I could really believe in his ability to charm Lucy (which, come to think of it, may be why Lucy was so young; this story was written in a different era, and it's sad but true that nowadays even fairly young kids know not to go off with strangers.) His performance was not simply that of a pretty boy, however; he was thoughtfully nuanced from his initial vacillation between appealling and slightly ominous, to his later fear, pain, bravery, and worries about Lucy when he was in the dungeon. Too often, characters which are supposed to be appealling are given Cool Moments To Show Us Why They're Likeable, like Legolas' impassioned outbursts on behalf of Aragorn, or Merry and Pippin dancing and singing in the inn. Tumnus simply conveyed that he was a decent fellow during the scenes where he appeared.
I'm glad they gave him that extra scene in the witch's castle. Again, it's an addition which did not fundamentally change the plot; it simply developed the characters a little more than they are in the books, gave a little more excuse for interaction, and made Edmund less of a passive pawn who does very little until the end of the book apart from whine.
The White Witch felt just a little weak to me. I would've played Peter more bold (even rash) and less angstful, but reluctant heroes are in fashion these days, and for me the changes were within an acceptable range of deviation.
I think the best thing about this movie was, strangely enough, the plot. The plot elements and character arcs were very simple and straightforward, but they tied all the action together into a coherent narrative. Lots of little elements like the bombers, Edmund's tendency to run off, Peter's job in taking care of the younger ones, or tiny details like the talking trees were picked up or expanded on or played with later, woven together, or used to foreshadow future or past events outside the scope of the film. The battle sequence was memorable in that there were coherent, obvious, and original tactics and strategy (apart from the White Witch pulling up her chariot right at the edge of a drop-off just before the battle commenced... I would like to know how those bears got her down off that outcropping without cracking an axle!) Some of the invented elements like the tunnels and Father Christmas chasing them seemed a tad forced, but they were still enjoyable and inoffensive.
***END SPOILERS****
Verdict: Good enough. I have no fear now that these people will mangle Narnia for all time if they tackle the rest.
