I really wish the film had started off with Doctor Cornelius telling Prince Caspian the legends about Narnia, to give context to the film. It pretty much drops you into the middle of the beginning of the story and lets you figure out what's happening on your own. I think those who love the book will be somewhat disappointed in the film. It is visually spectacular, but it lacks the purpose and uniqueness of the book. It lacks the journey of our heroes, so we are not able to see how they change and grow throughout the story. Each is supposed to come into relationship with Aslan on their own; but it happens in the film all at once - and at the end! That is a big part of the film's weakness.

And where is Aslan? He has two short appearances - three if you count a short dream-sequence. In the book, he is far more "present," the way he was in the first film. But when he's there, he looks great. My other big disappointment was the handling of the trees, which play a prominent and magical role in the book, but a very small and very clumsily handled one in the film. They actually dance and become silvan "people" in the book. And they are the ones who come to the rescue in the final battle. Giving the trees unique personalities and making them dance would have been something new in special effects, and would have made the film far more memorable.

Ben Barnes, as Prince Caspian, is adequate in his role, though not what I would call memorable. He basically has one expression: that of disdain. I'm glad that Peter and Susan will not reappear in future films because, quite frankly, William Moseley as Peter and Anna Popplewell as Susan were a bit flat - at least I don't think they will reappear. Edmund and Lucy were as good as they were in the first film, with Skandar Keynes as Edmund and Georgie Henley as Lucie. I'm not sure who the standouts in the supporting cast were. I liked most of the Hispanic Telmarines, who were the bad guys in the story (except for Prince Caspian, of course).

The creatures were okay. I think they were better in the first film. I know the mouse, Reepicheep, was supposed to steal the show. He did as far as the kids were concerned. Trumkin the dwarf was also supposed to be a scene-stealer, though I don't think he pulled it off. Overall, there were less cute or impressive creatures this time around. (It would be hard to beat the Beavers, the Wolves and the Polar Bears in the first one.)

So, what is the point of Prince Caspian? It is supposedly a parallel to the book of Acts, just as The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe is supposedly a parallel to the Gospels, though Lewis claims he had no Christian theme in mind when he wrote any of his Chronicles. Narnia has fallen to evil times under the rule of the Telmarines, an invading people, and the creatures of Narnia are all extinct (or, so it is thought). Prince Caspian calls Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy back to help save it and him. But they turn out to be less than satisfactory as saviors. Which brings us to Aslan. He is the only one who can save Narnia, but he takes his sweet time - with good reason in the book, but unexplained in the film.

The simple but satisfying story of the book is almost turned into Standard Plot #3 - basically the same plot line used in most Star Wars episodes: villain takes kingdom, hero is called in to save kingdom, hero fails, hero gets unexpected help, hero saves kingdom. That's not the way the book is. If that works for most movie goers, then fine. But I think CS Lewis deserves better. He put a lot of thought into Prince Caspian, and it should have been used.

In all fairness to the filmmakers, I do believe they fleshed out the story they came up with very well. The entire castle siege campaign, which was added, is exciting, and I love the castle as a set piece. But what does it add to the story? It was mostly done just to show off the special effects. The river god scene was also interesting - but, again, what did it add? Just more special effects. My favorite set piece was the underground temple to Aslan, which was called "Aslan's How" in the book - so he was there, sort of. Great design work.

I'm glad the film was made, but I don't think it will hold up over time - primarily because of the script and acting. I doubt if Chronicles will be like the Indiana Jones trilogy, where people will debate which one was best. [Everyone knows it was the third one. :) ] I would really like to see a more thoughtful version of Prince Caspian done some day. Maybe it's already out there. But there will never be a better CGI Aslan. If nothing else, this series has nailed him perfectly, and he will probably never be improved upon.



Waitsel Smith, May 16, 2008

Text © 2008 Waitsel Smith. Image © 2008 Disney/Walden. All Rights Reserved.