Well thank goodness, Ben Barnes is at last old enough that I don't feel bad about fancying him.
Oh - you think a movie review should contain a little more than that? Okay; picky picky....
The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is the third in the Narnia series of movies, and unfortunately the first one that I've been disappointed with. Prince Caspian (film 2, introducing Barnes' character) was by far the worst of the books, but made what I thought was an absolutely blistering fantasy/kids' movie: dark, complex, full of character development and laden with themes of despair and genocide. The writers and director put in a ton of work to make it more than its source material and I loved it to bits.
Dawn Treader, conversely, is one of the best books in the series but is basically a travel story where they sail from interesting magical island to interesting magical island: it's episodic and fluffy. The movie makers have tried to rework it into a film with an actual story-arc and plot, with some success, and they've certainly dumped some of the wince-making original material (Cousin Eustace is characterised as a repulsive brat in the book because he is a vegetarian and an anti-monarchist, for example). However, the plot they've given it is a cheap "collect the seven plot tokens and cash them in for an ending" type, the Big Bad doesn't make any sort of sense (the Dark Island sends out tacky green mist to kidnap sailors. Not consume them or kill them, just kidnap them and keep them. Um ... Why? If this is a metaphor for the world being enslaved by nightmares and fear, it could be conveyed with more clarity.) Plus the direction seems just a tiny bit half-hearted. Like there are noticeable continuity errors (Eustace zaps from being barefoot to wearing shoes, and back) and errors of scale. Three of what I considered the most memorable scenes from the book (Lucy creeping, terrified,through the wizard's house: Eustace trapped in a cave with a dragon and then being transformed: Aslan changing Eustace back to his proper form by tearing off his skin) just didn't happen in the movie.
Basically, it's a nice harmless fantasy movie, but it's got no depth and is a bit short on atmosphere. I think they scared too many Family/American Christian moviegoers off with Prince Caspian and they've been trying to back-pedal with the new movie. It might even work, but I'm disappointed.
I will say that it looks beautiful however, and the sea serpent rocks.
As I feared, Janine.
ReplyDeleteBen. Barnes. Not only older but *so* rocking that sexy scruff. I'm with you Janine, could have saved yourself the bother - the first part of the post said it all.
ReplyDeleteKat - now attempting to dry off her keyboard.
How can you say Prince Caspian was the worst of the novels.
ReplyDeleteThe only explanation is that you traumatised the god-awful Last Battle from you mind altogether.
As a child, I didn't dislike the Last Battle, because although it was traumatising (Narnia is destroyed) it has a happy-ever-after-nothing-is-lost-all-is-better-than-you-could-possibly-imagine ending. Also it was about what happens after you die, and I've always found speculation on that subject fascinating.
ReplyDeleteI think if I re-read it now I'd hate it a lot more.
I stick by my assertion that Prince Caspian is the worst of the books, because it is the dullest. After the first arrival in Narnia there is a loooooong trudge through a particularly empty bit of forest. Followed by a fight. Fights work well in movies but Lewis didn't really write them in an interesting way. It all just seemed a bit empty.
And I'm pretty sure that PC is generally regarded as the least popular of the books, if not the worst. My fave was The Silver Chair, and I do hope that gets to he big screen!
About fancying teenagers.
ReplyDeleteEmma Watson went from "she's going to be pretty when she grows up" to "this is so wrong, WRONG WRONG WRONG, brimming over with WRONGABILITY" to finally "oh, thank god for that"