Prince Caspian: Unexpected Blessings
Posted May 23rd, 2008 by Bob Thayne
image:
I was very excited at the chance to write a review of the The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. It's a movie I had eagerly awaited ever since The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe had shown 18 months prior. In anticipation I re-read Prince Caspian just before opening day. (This turned out to be a blessing and a hindrance.) Prince Caspian opened on the anniversary of the day I wedded my beautiful bride and, although it didn’t match our usual anniversary leisure, we easily managed to catch an opening-day matinée on our way out of town for the weekend.
(Let me here interject and state that I assume everyone reading this review is familiar with the original beloved children’s books The Chronicles of Narnia by well-known author C. S. Lewis. As a very succinct refresher of Prince Caspian, the four Pevensie children – Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy – return to the magical realm of Narnia, where they once ruled as kings and queens. They are called back to assist young Caspian in establishing his rightful position as the current monarch, despite the warring actions of Caspian's murderous uncle, Miraz. All the while they are wondering when Aslan, the powerful, loving, and enigmatic Christ-figure, would come to their aid. And now back to the show...)
In the first several scenes of Prince Caspian (the movie) it becomes apparent that there were some embellishments added to the original story and some rearrangement of the original storyline, both of which were to be expected. The book did not have enough content by itself to create a movie of such length (the longest movie of the weekend where we viewed it) and the book relied heavily on some internal storytelling that broke up the time line. The need for lengthening and for careful consideration of sequencing was clear long before filming began.
Continuing on to the next several scenes, there were more embellishments and more rearrangements, and then more, and then more. Nonetheless, the directing, acting, filming, costumes, special effects, and other elements (the scenery was breathtaking!) were all of the highest caliber. Still, with all the changes, however purposeful they may have been, it seemed to me that something was missing, something singularly Lewis-esque.
One of the greatest treasures of the Narnia books, in my eyes, is the presence of what I will call Lewis’s gems – numerous moments where Lewis sets up scenes so that the reader (young and old alike) can either know a hidden truth or strength or a bit of wisdom that the antagonist does not, or the reader shares with the protagonist in the learning or awakening of a great treasure or mystery. I cannot do these gems justice. The closest I can come is to say that they cause experiences deep within oneself, experiences that come from some other place.
Examples of such gems in Prince Caspian (the book) include: banners of amazement and confidence are raised as the star-reading centaurs arrive with prior knowledge of Caspian's sovereignty, offering their military support; the need for openness of heart is realized as the four children struggle to realize Aslan’s presence and leading, perplexedly only seeing him one by one; the free nature of Aslan's kingdom is seen as a young Telmarine student named Gwendolen instantly decides to join Aslan's ranks. Many of the gem scenes from the book appear in the film, but they feel muddled and altered or the point of the scene has changed to match the revised storyline. For one reason or another, many of Lewis's gems are lost.
Despite some missing-in-action gems, the movie increases the value of certain elements. For instance the partial summoning of the White Witch, despite the weaknesses in humanity that are portrayed in the scene, definitely adds challenging and spectacular drama beyond what is described in the book. As another example, the pervasive tension between Miraz and his military lords as portrayed in the movie is much better developed than in the book. Furthermore the one-on-one duel between Peter and Miraz exceeds countless other sword fights in known cinema with regard to realism.
I was very thankful to hear my favorite quote from the book included in the movie and surprised to hear it echoed in a later scene! The setting for the quote is when Lucy is questioning Aslan regarding why he hadn’t already shown up with a roar to save the day. As it reads in the book, Aslan responds, “It is hard for you, little one, . . . But things never happen the same way twice.”
This statement, “Things never happen the same way twice,” inherently stands in opposition to all things formulaic, and although there could be an immediate reference to certain aspects of screen writing, allow me to move past that to two other insights. It only took me twenty-four hours to realize that this statement could apply to the story of Prince Caspian itself. Lewis gave one telling of the story in the book; the movie gives a new telling with new facets of experience and truth. I should not have expected that the experience with the story in the book could have been repeated – something new needed to happen. This realization gave me some comfort.
A second application came to me another day later, and struck me deeper. While the wisdom and truth of Lewis’ gems are to be highly valued, I cannot stop there. I must keep listening as God continues to speak to me, to teach me, to bless me. The perfect lesson of one day must not distract from the perfect lesson of the next.
In closing, you can see that my reading of the book strongly influenced my viewing of the movie. The differences between my initial vision of what the movie should have been and what the movie actually was were magnified by the fact that I had just re-read the book. Yet still, good came of it. Without the review of Lewis’s writing, I may have missed the chance to put Aslan’s words into perspective in my own life and, looking forward, continue to find new gems.
Bob Thayne writes from Portland, Oregon where he is an engineer and an avid fantasy and science fiction reader.
Search
- Elaine Nelson on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- Aage Rendalen on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- Joselito Coo on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- Tom Zwemer on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- Aage Rendalen on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- gerhard svrcek-seiler on A Defense of Liberal Education
- Michael on Revisiting Ellen White on Masturbation
- Daneen Akers on A Review of Des Ford's Latest Book: For the Sake of the Gospel, Throw out the Bathwater but keep the Baby
- Michael on Revisiting Ellen White on Masturbation
- Nic Samojluk on Revisiting Ellen White on Masturbation
User login
© Copyright 2008 Adventist Forums 
Comments
Thanks for this review. I have been worried about the changes in the film--I was pretty sure there would be a lot. Your perspective about things not happening the same way twice (reminds me of the Bubble Trees in Lewis's Perelandra) is a very helpful insight. I think I'll have a much more open mind when watching the film now.
Thanks Bob for such a great review. We have a babysitter lined up for this Sunday afternoon so we can go see Prince Caspian. Looking forward to it even more after I read your review!
Interesting review Bob. I too sat through the movie and kept thinking "something is missing". The film was wonderful and the fight scenes were amazing, but I kept thinking there was more to the book. I think it did do a good job of portraying why God does not always rush to our aid and the sections on belief I thought were quite poignant as well. Deeanne reminded me that this was the weakest book in the series. I still found much to take away from watching it.
I thought some of the things that were added were some of the most powerful things in the film, making it a unique story in its own right. The rivalry between Peter and Caspian, culiminating in that incredibly powerful scene with the summoning of the Witch as she reaches out seductively first to Caspian, then to Peter (and ending with the fabulous scene of Edmund -- of course it would be Edmund -- shattering the ice screen from behind to reveal the image of Aslan on the wall!) was my favourite part of the movie. It summed up so well the struggle for power that both young men were going through ... each one's desire to win the battle and win the glory for himself. That was the Witch's appeal, and I thought bringing her back a little more in this movie (rather than just a reference to her as in the book) was very effective.
Am I alone in my uneasiness with how C.S. Lewis solves so much in these books with physical warfare? That the battle between good and evil is fought in violence? That evil is creatures that have to be killed. I know it isn't that simplistic but that just seemed to keep jumping out at me.
I really wanted to like these books and I really wanted my kids to as well but I just couldn't get beyond that. We read the first several together and then I just put them away - and they were fine to see them go actually. They got progressively more boring to all of us too.
It's not that I shun all violence in the books I read with the kids, not by a long shot, but for some reason, this really bugged me. I made the mistake of pointing out the Jesus as Aslan comparison early on and then I was stuck. I don't think they were bothered much by it but I had trouble with Jesus/Aslan bounding around the battlefield killing creatures. And the heros and heroines using violence so much too.
I know so many people love these books and I worry I'm missing something. Tell me I'm old and rigid - I can take it. I have tried to explain my discomfort to other people too and they look at me like I've grown a third eye so I really do think it is just me and that's ok. I also understand the time period around when the stories were written (WWII) and how that would affect an author's view of how one deals with evil but still. . .
I should add, in my own defense, that we read all sorts of fiction, science fiction, fairy tales, mythology from all sorts of religions etc. and I love exposing my kids to all sorts of different thoughts and ways of thinking. Maybe I'm overly sensitive right now to Christians killing "evil doers" given our own war, I don't know. But these were books I just couldn't swallow. I read them some of them as a younger person too and lost interest then as well. I loved science fiction and fantasy as a young teenager but never made it through these. I loved, and still love LOTRs and can't wait for my kids to be ready for those (we've already done the Hobbit). And those aren't exactly pacifist :) Maybe someone else can articulate better than I if they share any angst over them too.
Thanks Bob for that excellent review. I am looking forward to seeing a ripped version of this movie in a few months. We don't get much new stuff down here in South America.
I'm trying to remember the story. It seems that it has just been too long since I've read the books for me to remember any poignant lessons learned it it. So, I'm ripe for learning!
As to the commenter on the violence. I remember having the same sort of 'Whoa' feeling when I read the series. It is the same sort of feeling I get when I read the Old Testament and realize that before Christ died for us the world was a very severe place. The allegory in the series is, if my hazy memory can serve me, that this parallel world of Narnia represents the spiritual battle in our hearts with the evil animals being treated as un-sanctified thoughts, habits, actions etc. But also because that is what stories in the 40's were about. Grand themes of ships, battles, bravery, heroics, clear lines of good vs. evil. It was material meant for the 4th stage of moral development. If you ascribe to Kolberg's Stages of Moral Development.
Cheers,
John
That's an interesting point you bring up, Beth. The Narnia books were so influential to me as a kid--I'm not sure I can overestimate how much I loved them. When I recently re-read them as an adult, they were still magical, but I noticed the warrior-tones, the hypermasculine tones, and the Anglo-centric nature of the books in a way I did not as a child. Lewis was clearly a product of his culture, and the books, amazing as I still think they are, reflect that. It can be a challenge to still acknowledge the greatness of a work of art and yet still quibble with a few things based on concepts that have evolved in our culture since it was written (even the Bible gives us this challenge).
I agree with John that the 1940s were a time of clear moral imperative--there had just had/were having, world wars with quite clear good guys and bad guys. Our more slippery "War on Terror" doesn't fit this mold at all.
I also have had issues with the atonement model presented by Lewis, especially in The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. However, I have to remind myself that this same pattern of a hero sacrificing himself/herself selflessly on the behalf of others does indeed call up a "deeper magic" in the myths of the world (and even in my current favorite series, Harry Potter). There is something there that I don't always understand on a rational level that resonates as truth (if not necessarily true) on a spiritual and emotional level.
I think it's going to be an interesting challenge to me as a parent to figure out how to navigate the joys of the Narnian myth even though there are a few elements I'd love to have a chat with Lewis about today.
Beth, thank you for your comments regarding violence and Christianity. It definitely provides food for thought and discussion. Personally I have a much harder time stomaching some of the stories and records in the book of Joshua and other neighboring books in the Bible. The violence and destruction recorded seems atrocious, and I ponder again and again what it is that I am supposed to learn about God from these stories. Amongst the many descriptions and names for God in the Bible, quite clearly one of them is Warrior. In our current culture and time period we (I) struggle with that portrayal, sincerely asking the question, "What does that mean?!" I trust that God chooses all of his actions wisely and lovingly, seeing a far bigger picture than we can; but it is hard not to second guess him and be confused along the way. I know I have a lot to learn still. Back to the Narnia series, I see Lewis as presenting his best view of the implications, effects, possible growth, results, roles, etc., that surround the themes of both conquest and submission that appear in the Bible. His writings have broadened my interpretations and views of many things. And as has been pointed out, he too was influenced by the world in which he lived.
When someone says "Prayer Warriors" it seems an oxymoron.
Does one not pray in meekness and humility, but in a demanding state as what warriors do? We sing, "Onward Christian Soliders, marching as to war" and it seems so out-of-place, and out of character to have Christianity and militancy combined. WDYT?
(Sigh.)
The film is a miserable failure in my eyes. Violence is glorified from beginning to end with interminable fight scenes, the pacing plods, the dialogue is in spots laughably wooden, the trumped-up romance is odious, and the characters are opaque and flat, particularly the professor, who puts to mind Doc of the Seven Dwarfs, and the celluloid Prince Caspian, who reminds me of Prince Humperdink in The Princess Bride.
Because of its unbridled and excessive violence (where the special effects shine), I would definitely not take a child to see it; as an adult I spent much of the time cringing at its ineptitude, along with the row of teenagers in front of me who literally guffawed.
Where Lewis's highly nuanced book works superbly, this film fails exceedingly. Unfortunately, I'm not looking forward to more installments.
The movie opens in HK next week (we're always late because of dubbing and subtitles). I have a group of students who are very excited about it coming. I will probably not pay the ticket cost to see it in the theatre--as I didn't to see the first movie. The first movie was not true to the spirit of the book, IMO. The BBC movies, while they are laughable in their "special effects" and costuming, were much more true to the spirit of the books. My children watch the BBC movies. They have not seen the recent Lion. I was concerned with violence in that first one (yes, I do tend to be careful about what my children watch, and I felt that one was over the top for their age at the time). From what Chris says, it sounds as though the next one is not much different (which I had guessed from the trailers). Shame, really, but not a surprise.
However, the books haven't changed and are still as magical as they ever were. My boys have loved them (my youngest tried to get to Narnia by hiding in his wardrobe for a while--he knew it wasn't "real" but it was so real to him that he had to find it).
M
"Mom",
Sorry about the loss of 70,000 of you "fellow countrymen" by the earthquake on the mainland.
I saw the movie over the weekend and despite the occasional "slow" moments I appreciated Aslan's "destructive,protective love" when he "finally" appeared.
pat
Mom2twoboys,
I always wanted to go to Naria too, but I couldn't find a wardrobe! Considering your comments regarding the movie's predecessor, my advice would be to not show this film to your children either. It has been quite a while since I saw the 2005 movie, but the current thought in my head is that this release of Prince Caspian exceeds it in violence.
In the book, it is apparent that Peter (having arrived in the middle of a war) challenges Miraz to a duel in order to REDUCE bloodshed and stall for Aslan's arrival. (I'm not saying that was his best option.)
In the movie, Peter definitely has the appearance of one taking things into his own hands by choosing violence. Instead of having the appearance of one who waits upon the Lord, he looks more like Samson, of whom we have many violent stories with very little commentary.
---
Chris Blake,
I get your complaints. Personally, I think I'll go see future installments, but my expectations will not be high.
the makers of Prince Caspian kept to the original story in some ways and strayed in others... i heard they were going to make it into a silly pure-action flick, but thankfully this was not the case
Having not read any of the Narnia books, I was able to view "Prince Caspian" without prejudice. Though I was constantly looking for spiritual comparisons which may not have been intended, even by Lewis, I thoroughly enjoyed the film. The battle scenes did not concern me, mainly due to the fact that violence has, beginning with Cain, always followed closely with the enemies of God. Were it not for the evil efforts of God's enemies, violence would not be necessary. Moreover, consider the battle of Armageddon in the Valley of Megiddo upon the Lords return. Just as Aslan battled on behalf of his "people", Jesus will destroy His enemies, as well.
Post new comment