Moviepro (www.moviepro.net)

We have taken some photos of "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian". They represent actual movie quality.

• "Narnia might be a more savage place than you remember." posted on 31 Aug 2009

  As stated in the quote above, don't expect to experience the same Narnia you saw in THE LION, THE WITCH, AND THE WARDROBE. There's far less light-hearted fantasy and a lot more darkness, so to speak, with action aplenty and a faster paced storyline (if not a bit drawn out).
  
  
  Thousands of years have passed in Narnian time as the creatures that reside there come out of their "extinction" with the hopeful arrival of young Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes). He is on the run from those who want his rightful place at the throne and unknowingly summons the return of the pevensie children who are magically transported from a subway station in London. There's even a brief appearance from the White Witch (Tilda Swinton) which I'm not sure was featured in the book or not but added a nice touch to the film nonetheless.
  
  I don't want to give too much away, nor do I want to repeat what other reviewers have articulated far better than I can already, but please not that this is NOT a childrens movie. Just because it's by Disney you shouldn't automatically assume it's 100% appropriate for the kiddies. There's a lot more violence in this sequel (minus the blood, mind you) and is a bit too heavy a subject for real young ones to enjoy anyway. I notice some anger with the parents who have expressed leaving the theater with upset kids but I for one am glad Adamson or Disney didn't compromise Lewis' vision by making it more "kid friendly". Perhaps PRINCE CASPIAN is indeed shy of an actual PG-13 rating but it wouldn't hurt you to do your research first if your wanting to take your kids to see it.
  
  I just bring this up because it's a stupid reason to bash an otherwise great film adaptation of a classic story many people have grown up with and love.

• If you liked the book, you'll hate the movie posted on 30 Aug 2009

  I'm obligated to say that this review contains "spoilers," but I use this term reservedly since I'm not sure this movie can really be spoiled. At least, I'm not sure how you would be able to tell.Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2, part of his theory of relativity, explains how it is physically impossible for the opening chapters of Lewis' "Prince Caspian" to be rushed through any more quickly than was done by Adamson's abomination of the same name. It literally made me dizzy. I'll just lay it out there and get it over with; Adamson follows the storyline of the book very well. In the book, the Pevensies come to Narnia, help Caspian gain his rightful throne, and then go home; Andrewson has all three of these things happen in the movie. That's about where the similarities end. In a pathetically feeble attempt to keep fans of the book happy, Andrewson plugs in a few scenes or references from the book that don't interfere with his plot. At first, it's kind of interesting to see what kind of events he makes up to tie in the other events he made up with the events from the book. We miss this later in the movie, though, as he pretty much abandons the events from the book until the end. All this happens because he really wants the Pevensies to meet up with Caspian earlier; I have absolutely no idea why this was so important to him. It doesn't really add anything and it wreaks havoc with the storyline. In his determination to be as faithful as possible to the spirit of the book, Adamson hacks out all the events in Narnia that lead up to the blowing of the horn and almost all of the Pevensie's journey to Aslan's How. Shockingly, cutting out the first half of Lewis' story and replacing it with his own leaves the scenes taken from Lewis' story, both those later in the movie and the few scenes randomly inserted in the beginning, seeming somewhat incongruous and forced. You can almost tell what scenes or dialogue are from the book even if you haven't read it, simply by noticing the discontinuity. Whenever, a character seems to be acting out of a character or a scene seems to have little to do with the plot, it's probably from the book.I can't imagine what could make this Andrewson character (his real name is Andrew Adamson, by the way) think he has the artistic credentials to make such a massive revision to such a great work. It's not like he's on the short list for a lifetime achievement award here. Does he honestly think he can improve on Lewis? Does he realize that the whole reason this movie is being made is because so many people love Lewis' story? Does he think Lewis' plot isn't good enough? It's not like Lewis' story lacked dramatic tension or action or character development. Andrewson didn't supply what was lacking, he just changed for no apparent reason, exhibiting monumental arrogance in the process. I'm going to harp some more on this because it really baffles me, what was gained by all these revisions? Did Andrewson just decide to use Lewis' story as a platform for his own ideas because he has no respect for a great author, or did he actually have the arrogance to think he could somehow improve on or tell Lewis' story better than Lewis could? I wish I could know what was going through his mind… "hey, I just read this book by a guy named Siyes Lewis, or something like that. Alright, I really just skimmed it. The point is, it gave me some great ideas for a movie"… "Look, Lewis spends way too much time with the Pevensies once they get to Narnia. This movie is not about the Pevensies. I'll have them immediately find Cair Paravel, immediately recognize it as Cair Paravel, immediately rescue the dwarf (whatever-his-name-is) and leave Cair Paravel, and almost immediately get to Aslan's How. That way I can spend more time with the central characters, the Telmarines, who Lewis barely even thinks to mention during this time. Plus, I really need to develop the Telmarines for the viewers since I cut out the whole beginning of the book where Lewis did that." If Andrewson feels no ethical constraint to respect the integrity of another artist's work, you would think he would at least be bright enough to realize that the easiest way to make a brilliant movie is to stick as closely as possible to the brilliant book. That's what Peter Jackson did with Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, and it worked out okay for him.

• glorious. posted on 30 Aug 2009

  I just came back from watching it and it's OH MY GOD SO AMAZING. seriously, best thing I've watched in a LONG time. I even dare to say that it's better than the first one.Not a single boring moment, loads of action and magnificent stunts, full of magic -couldn't expect less-, music that makes you feel Narnia.William Moseley: Totally hot. His character shows a lot of braveness, leadership and attitude that makes him oh-so-attractive. Ben is too sexy. Like too sexy. And Skandar... *sigh* I don't know if it's because he looks a little too much like H -gotta stop thinking about him though- but he totally stole my heart in this movie, I couldn't stop myself from drooling at his beauty, even if he's way younger than me.But OK, leaving aside the hotness of the cast, it really is an amazing movie. If I had to use a word to describe it, it would be nothing less than GLORIOUS.It redefined my concept of hyper-ventilation.

• More Entertaining Than Its Predecessor, Though Not Nearly as Engaging or "New"... posted on 30 Aug 2009

  I thought The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was a very good film, tough full of character flaws, and a few gripes about the music, it was all-together an enjoyable experience. Prince Caspian, however, was far more entertaining, though not nearly as engaging. As with the acting in the first, all the roles were chosen very nicely, yet character development is sparse, the action is far more broad than the first, and once again the music is less than impressive.Andrew Adamson, returning as director, is and was a fine choice to helm the film, yet his incorporation of slow motion felt overwhelming, similar to the experience I had in 300, where there's just too much of it (i.e. the scene where Susan yells for everyone to brace themselves was pretty corny). The writing is pretty good, yet the story seems to revolve more around the giant battle sequences, rather than focusing on Caspian reclaiming the throne. I haven't read Prince Caspian, so I don't know who to fault: Lewis or Adamson. The ending is incredibly rushed, and did not have any profound affect on me, only hoping there's a combination of what worked in this and the previous film incorporated into The Voyage of the Dawn-Treader. There's also a few confusing parts that warrant this movie to be played with subtitles... just so that there's a better understanding.Now, I'm well aware that Tolkien and Lewis were dear friends and that there's underlying connections between The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings (and The Hobbit and The Silmarillion), but some of these connections are so plainly obvious, that the omission of them would've provided a better sense of originality from the filmmakers (for example, the trees helping the Narnians win the battle, and when the army is swallowed by the river).The acting, just like the first, is quite well done. Everyone does a fine job, and Ben Barnes' choice of using a Spanish accent (inspired by Mandy Patinkin's in The Princess Bride) was a good idea in my opinion -- seeing how the Telmarines had a LOT of Spanish/Mediterranean influence on their appearance. There seems to have been a huge rush job on the writers' part to include as many pausing moments between Susan and Caspian -- and to be all honest, I would've preferred some intimate scenes to actually show that these characters liked each other, rather than seeing minotaurs get bludgeoned. Eddie Izzard is a bit disappointing as Reepicheep (who reminded me of Puss-In-Boots every time he appeared on screen) and Sergio Castellitto as King Miraz was actually quite good.Down to the special effects: they're slightly sub-par compared to The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The armies are only realistic here and there, but the river scene reminds me of the scene in The Mummy Returns, and Aslan seems incomplete in detail. The vast armies, as mentioned earlier can thank the cinematography for some pretty cool scenes.The music by Harry Gregson-Williams is terrible. There's hardly anything new or original about this "score". Mainly, to sum up the music, imagine the first film's score, only tweaked a bit to sound more intense. Not only is there nothing new, there is absolutely NO COMPLEXITY whatsoever. This is just one redundant piece of "work" I cannot advise or recommend anyone buying.All in all, while definitely losing focus on the story's intentions, and with some awful music, Prince Caspian is far more visually-entertaining than the first. With good performances, adequate special effects, and lots of eye-candy, I'm sure the family will enjoy this, as there is minimal bloodshed, no vulgarities, and no sensuality. I highly doubt this will earn even the simplest of the Academy Award categories, as there's really nothing impressive, especially after some of the films that have come out in recent months after this film's release. I recommend this for a family looking for something to watch on a weekend night.

• Another Fine Addition to the Narnia Movies posted on 30 Aug 2009

  I almost missed watching this marvel on the big screen. But I'm happy I did: Prince Caspian combines a delightful storyline, imagination and extraordinary special effects to create a magical movie that alternates between the dramatic and the epic.Prince Caspian is a movie for children and for any adults who don't have a desert for a soul and want to relish in the pleasure of sheer fantasy. It's superior to the also thrilling The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe: it has sharper, smarter dialog; more heart; a more elaborate story; better acting, no doubt helped by a bigger number of adult actors this time (although Georgie Henley still steals the show every time she's on screen: one look at her and you know she's loving every minute on the movie); the special effects are better; the battles are bigger (still too bloodless); the music more intense (glad Harry Gregson-Williams is still aboard); and the fantasy is wilder: in addition to talking lions and centaurs and minotaurs there are now walking trees and sword-wielding mice. Magnificent! The plot is straightforward: Prince Caspian, the rightful heir to the kingdom of Narnia, claims the help of the Pevensie brothers to defeat a human who has usurped the throne and launched a war of extermination against the magical creatures of Narnia. The sense of dread, the atmosphere of doom in this movie is far more intense than in the first one. The action is also faster: I was amazed at how quickly the Pevensies were sent back to Narnia, and I was glad to see their reaction was the same as mine: time to have fun again! I recommend Prince Caspian to anyone who wants to have a good time.Unfortunately now begins the long wait for the release of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

• should be PG-13 posted on 29 Aug 2009

  parents take note. even though this movie was made by Disney like its predecessor THE LION THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE doesn't mean that it's still appropriate for all ages. the storyline is much darker as it deals with treachery and treason and the thirst for vengeance. the fight scenes are pretty intense as there are numerous casualties. those expecting Aslan to be in the whole movie might be disappointed but he does come back at a crucial point. The brothers/sisters are left on their own as they forge an uneasy alliance with Prince Caspian. Parents should see this movie first before deciding on whether or not to allow children aged 12 and under to go. if it was up to me i'd rate it PG-13 like the Pirates Of The Caribean movies were. thank you for your time in reading this.

• Wow. Just.......Wow posted on 28 Aug 2009

  Let's get one thing perfectly clear. You could make a good film out of a literal retelling of "Prince Caspian." The film diverges from the book in some major ways. The Pevensies meet Caspian much earlier in the film than in the book, there's no night attack on Miraz' castle, and there is no hint of an attraction between Caspian and Susan. Apparently the producers wanted to punch it up a bit.That said, the divergences make a more engrossing film and do no violence to the essential story. The night attack is suspenseful and absolutely thrilling, and heart wrenching when some of the attackers are trapped in the castle and have to be left to their fate. The recriminations between Peter and Caspian afterward allow both characters to be portrayed in depth instead of as flat caricatures, and unlike a lot of fairy tale battles, we see the grief of the families when loved ones don't return.The scenery surpasses the first film. Caspian's night ride from the castle after being warned to flee, and the seaside ruins of Cair Paravel are set in the most wonderful locales imaginable and enhanced with great camera work.The Telmarines are Spanish in appearance, style and accent, but there are no explicit Spanish references, vocabulary, or names. This actually makes a great deal of sense given that the Telmarines are descended from pirates of Earth. I liked the fact that they had crossbows, a logical progression from ordinary bows. The repeating catapults in the final battle are very nifty. If they're not historical - and I've never seen references to anything similar - they are ingenious inventions.The final battle scenes are as rousing as any ever filmed. The twin finales, where the trees attack and the water spirit demolishes the bridge, are stand-up-and-cheer moments like we used to get when the cavalry came along in the nick of time, or when Theoden and Aragorn ride out of Helms Deep and Gandalf appears to save the day.There are a few classic dialog moments that were cut short but could have been shown in their entirety without overly lengthening the film. I missed Aslan telling Reepicheep that mice gained the ability to talk as a reward for chewing off his bonds on the Stone Table, for example.Susan and Caspian's "romance" amounts to a few flirtatious moments and a not even PG kiss on the lips at the end. Totally harmless.Next up: Voyage of the Dawn Treader, my favorite. I sure hope they can keep it up at this level.

• Basically Nowhere Near the Book's Storyline posted on 28 Aug 2009

  Well, I just saw this last night. Basically, from the previews of the movie I knew I would not like it and knew it had just about nothing to do with the book. I only went because my husband wanted me to. I was right. The thing that made me most mad, was that as usual, Hollywood will NOT make a movie without throwing some sort of sex or romance into it, even if there were NO signs of it in the books. They've got a 26 year old playing a character that is supposed to be about 11-13. Obviously, they've changed him into a character of about 17-19, and had him "yearning" for Queen Susan, and of course she kisses him in the end. That's Hollywood for ya. If she had done that in the book, she would have SOOOOO been a "child molester", because he's just a little boy in the story. That was just the biggest horrible part. The rest of the movie, well, maybe 10% of it followed the story of the book. The other 90% was totally not there. From what I saw, I'm really quite surprised that they kept the main characters' NAMES the same! This is just really NOT a good one for any of the book's fans to see if they're hoping for a good film version of the book.

• LOVED IT! Much Better than the book! posted on 28 Aug 2009

  I really liked this movie. Its an exciting sequel to the Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe. Its much more of an action movie than the first and the tone is darker, but its still the Narnia we all love.Story: In Narnia, Caspian, a Telmarine Prince, is wakened by his mentor, Doctor Cornelius, who explains to him that his aunt has just given birth to a son, meaning that if his treacherous Uncle Miraz killed Caspian, he would be the sole heir to the throne and his son would be his successor. Caspian, realizing that his life is in danger, escapes with his horse and a small ivory horn given to him by Dr. Cornelius, who says not to blow it except in great need. Followed by several Telemarine soldiers, Caspian encounters two Narnian dwarfs and a talking badger in the woods. Terrified, he blows the horn. One of the Narnian dwarfs, Trumpkin, goes off to stop the soldiers and gets captured, while the other dwarf, Nikabrik, and the badger, Trufflehunter, carry Caspian inside their house. Back in England, the four Pevensie children are heading into a subway station to depart for school, one year having passed in their world since they first entered Narnia. Just as the subway train pulls into the station, the walls start sucking in, and the whole station tears apart to leave the Pevensies in a large cave by a beach in what they immediately recognize as Narnia. After playing in the waves of the sea, they discover Cair Paravel, their castle, has turned to ruins.Meanwhile, Nikabrik is all for killing Caspian because he's a Telmarine, but Trufflehunter reminds him that Caspian, having blown the horn of Queen Susan, will lead the Narnians to freedom. They lead Caspian to the Dancing Lawn, where all the old Narnians have assembled, including the swashbuckling mouse, Reepicheep, who offers Caspian his services. However, the Narnians are disgruntled at the Telmarines and don't want one of them to be their leader. Caspian, however, convinces them that if they help him reclaim his throne, he can bring peace between them.Trumpkin is taken by Telmarines to the waters near Cair Paravel to be drowned, but the Pevensies save him. After proving to the dwarf that they are the Kings and Queens of old, they set off to find the others. Lucy glimpses Aslan and tries to convince the others that she's seen him, but only Edmund believes her. After many twists and turns, they eventually encounter Caspian and his troops. After that the five heroes must fight several battles to save Narina from the evil Miraz.Here are my overall reactions to the movie:Script: Its very exciting and it keeps you interested. It has good themes about returning to Narnia after a year, and myth becoming reality. It its a bit convoluted at times so younger audiences may have a hard time understanding some things. Also some parts of the story seemed a little rushed. But overall it was good.Acting: The acting was good in the first, but its excellent in this. William Mosely plays Peter well, we really understand how he feels being treated like a kid on Earth after being a King in Narnia. His fights with Caspian are also well done. Anna is completely in character for Susan, and she manages to foreshadow her fate in The Last Battle. Skandar does well as Edmund. He has kind of a quiet and cool personality unlike the little brat he portrayed in the first. Once again Georgie captures the innocence and spirituality of Lucy. Though because she has grown, she isn't as little and cute as she was in the first. Newcomer Ben Barnes does well as Caspian. But in most of his scenes he seems like a confused boy that is just trying to stay alive. Trumkin was also acted well as a cynical dwarf. And the guy that portrayed Miraz was good at playing a sinister villain. I thought him even more chilling then the White Witch. Speaking of the White Witch she makes a ghostly appearance when a Hag and a Werewolf try to resurrect her. I will say no more about her.Directing: I have nothing to criticize. Though I will say some scenes/themes felt a little rushed, the directing was pretty good.CGI: It has majorly improved from the first. Everything looks realistic. Reepicheep, the Wer-wolf, the River God, the dryads, and Aslan. The only time it didn't look real is the first shot of Aslan when Lucy dreams about him. But aside from that it was perfect.Music/Score: It was very good except for the song that plays when the kids leave Narnia.Overall: A fun exciting family the whole family will enjoy. And I mean the whole family, not just the kids. The tone is darker, the battles are more violent, and the kids are older which will make the film more enjoyable for adults and teens. This was great and it made me want to see more Narnia. I hope that the release date for The Voyage of the Dawn Treader(which is May 2010), is pushed up to Christmas 2009 so I don't have to wait as long.

• Great movie; take the kids! posted on 21 Aug 2009

  This is a very nice action/adventure movie which is another volume in the C.S. Lewis Narnia series.
  
  
  There's nothing not to like; nice scenery, nice props, nice characters, nice lion, nice voices, good dialog.
  
  
  The plot is fairly simple; bad guy wants the throne, and tries to kill the rightful heir.
  
  
  Rightful heir blows on the magic horn, and the kids from the first movie show up to help (they are, after all, the Kings and Queens of Narnia).
  
  There are a series of adventures, character development, and a rousing hopeless battle of good against evil.
  
  And good triumphs, and it's a good day!

• Good, but not as good as the first. posted on 21 Aug 2009

  I really like it. Of course I am a sucker for these fantasy movies. I even liked Golden Compass. This one was better quality than the first. But just didn't move me as much. I have only seen it once in theater and once on disc. Maybe as I view it more, it will get me.

• Great movie! Great story! posted on 21 Aug 2009

  My 7-yr-old daughter and I had loved the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and we were looking forward to watching Prince of Narnia. This movie does not disappoint! We loved the story; it even has a romantic element in it, which surpised me, but it's all innocent. Lot more fighting scenes than the first movie, but my daughter didn't mind at all. We were disappointed, however, due to the fact that this DVD didn't have any fun special features, such as bloopers, like the LWW DVD had.

• Doesn't live up to the hype posted on 20 Aug 2009

  This movie was pretty interesting to watch, but it had a lot of faults. Yet again, I feel like this movie had so much more potential- just like the first one. It often feels like I am watching a child's version of Lord of the Rings. Yes, I know it is directed towards children, but kids don't need cheesy comments or cheesy acting to enjoy a movie. Also, I don't understand the dramatic female vocals towards the end of both movies. I don't feel like it goes at all with the movie. This movie seemed to have something missing. All there was to it was the kids came back to Narnia, found out what was going on, fought a lot, and then left. The whole "romance" between Susan and Caspian was absolutely pointless. First of all, I think they spoke to each other about two or three times, and kept it brief. Then she left? They made it seem like all it was was two teenagers full of hormones...and it was like the creators of the movie decided to throw that in there last minute to attract a broader audience. I think the lack of blood during battle is pointless. There's no need to hide the fact that people have blood running through their veins. A child learns that the first time he/she scrapes their knee. As long as it isn't excessive in a "Kill Bill" way, I think it's appropriate. On another note, why was Edmund put into the background so often? He hardly spoke 5 lines!

• One word: AMAZING! posted on 19 Aug 2009

  I saw "Prince Caspian" immediately after watching "The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe" on TV. I was blown away by LWW, and I knew I had to watch Prince Caspian.
  
  Get this, I wasn't a fan of Narnia (or didn't even knew about Narnia, for that matter).
  
  So I decided to watch trailers for Prince Caspian, and it looked AMAZING!
  I watched it in theater, and I was just blown away. So, I saw it three more time in theaters.
  ANYONE will like this movie... It's just beyond amazing.
  
  I own the DVD now, and I surely will be watching this just about every weekend!
  Buy it...

• better as a book *contains spoiler* posted on 18 Aug 2009

  I just got finished watching a preview of the movie for the employees at the movie theater that i work at. i have to say it was very disappointing. i've read all the books and i will tell you that if you have read the book recently you will probably be disappointed also. things that should've happened in the middle of the movie happened at the end and things that should've happened at the middle happened at the start. they never establish the connection between caspian and his tutor, nor the connection between him and his uncle until half way through the movie. you don't know why caspian is living with his uncle until almost the end of the movie. they never show that caspian loved the stories of old narnia and wanted to find the talking animals and dwarfs nor do they tell you his tutor is 1/2 dwarf until the end. they led you to believe that caspian doesn't believe in the narnia stories or even think the talking animals still exist. in the book caspian blows the horn during battle knowing what it is, who it belonged to, and having a fairly good idea as to what it will do. in the movie however he just blows it in about the first 15min with no idea as to what it is. which also screws up the soldiers taking to dwarf captive which in the book they do when he is going to look for the help that is supposed to come from the horn and he gets taken to some random soldiers fort and they send him off to the ghosts in the movie they take him to miraz who is not king but in the book he was, after killing lots of people and threatening the rest. also they attack the castle in the movie WHAT!?!?! there is no way that would have happened in the book. AND for all of you complaining about the white witch barely making an appearance in this movie, lets hope you don't read the book because she NEVER shows her face in the book and i wish they wouldn't have put that in this movie. aslan came in way to late, and whats up with that. i wanted so badly to see the party with Bacchus and all the crazy stuff they did in all the towns to "free the people" and how the nickname "DLF" was established was just all wrong, edmund was supposed to give him that nickname b/c dlf kept calling edmund little.i think that if you haven't read the book then you will enjoy this movie BUT if you've read the book then you will probably be disappointed. i wish they would make movies out of the rest of the books. magicians nephew is so great all about how narnia was formed and it seems to have been overlooked along with the horse and his boy. so sad.

• Even better than the first! posted on 18 Aug 2009

  Haven't read the books, but saw this anyway because I found The Chronicles of Narnia 1 enjoyable enough. But Prince Caspian grips you from start to finish, with barely a breather! At almost 2 1/2 hours, that's a remarkable feat indeed, especially for a family flick.Of course the story, pacing, acting, cinematography and special effects were superb. Director Andrew Adamson helms the series once more, and if you enjoyed Shrek, you'll see parallelisms in Caspian (i.e. Puss in Boots is now a mouse).But the acting of everyone involved carried this movie through. Ben Barnes (Stardust) was perfectly cast as Prince Caspian. His positively swoon-worthy delivery of the titular doltish but brave young royalty was the perfect dark accompaniment to the mostly sunshiney demeanor lent by the Pevensie children who have slightly grown up. William Moseley continues to be brilliant as King Peter and so is the youngest of the siblings, Georgie Henley, who reprises her role as Lucy and continues to be the scene stealer with her adorable performance despite entering her tweens. Worth noting, too, is Skandar Keynes as the family's black sheep from the first installment of the Narnia series, Edmund. Despite lesser exposure here than in the last movie, he shows maturity as he grows into a more dependable character in Part Two. Anna Popplewell plays the ever sensible but fearless Susan and has a beauty that isn't obvious; she grows on you. She is consistently expressive, wonderful to watch (and is so darn lucky having kissed Ben Barnes!).Even the supporting cast, animated and otherwise, contributed their own brand of funnies, scaries and heartwarming fuzzies. Overall, a wonderfully made, entertaining flick! P.S. No after-credits scene here, but stay put to listen to the funky closing track "The Call" by Regina Spektor.

• Wizard World 2 posted on 17 Aug 2009

  Lets be frank: most of the fans of Narnia want the movie to be successful. And that bias may be contributing to the high rankings here. Take the name "Narnia" away from this movie and it's really a scattered story with special effects that drive the plot (and not the other way around) with very little going for it. If this were Wizard World 2 we would all be rating this a 2 or 3 at most.
  
  There just isn't a reason for this movie; there is no moral. The first movie is a clear allegory of the cross, Christ, and salvation. Aslan makes sense to us and his sacrifice means something. In this movie, there isn't a clear explanation for most of the story.
  
  
  This one question ruined the movie for me: why is Aslan missing and allowing his people to suffer? I've heard that this is an allegory of our world where God allows pain, suffering etc. In this movie Aslan shows up at the end (like he did last time) and saves the children and (few) surviving Narnians. Is this an allegory for the Return of Christ? It doesn't make sense. I don't think this can be an allegory for the End. It just doesn't fit.
  
  Other questions: why are their Spaniards in Narnia? How is that a part of the plan? Why did the children have to come back?
  
  
  It just wasn't impressive and the direction of these films is suddenly very much in question.
  
  
  I can't recommend this to anyone other than Narnia fans or people who want to be fans of Narnia (ie, Christians.)
  

• Wasted my money posted on 15 Aug 2009

  The disc was a region 1 and i cudnt watch it!!!!!!!!!!!!! And i could not change my Samsung player to multi region.

• Reading is Overrated! posted on 14 Aug 2009

  Well, with SO many good movies coming out this summer, Caspian was one that was up on my list. I knew that they were making it, so I read the book to my daughter last year, and I was really excited. And you have to understand that having 2 small children and trying to get to a movie is no small feat. However, we made our escape tonight to a later showing. So, after seeing "The Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe", I thought Caspian would be the same. By same I mean, like thinking the writers of the screenplay had actually READ THE BOOK! I was SO disappointed (thinking in my head during the movie...should have seen Ironman...should have seen Ironman...should have seen Ironman)!Sorry, but these C.S. Lewis books are near and dear to their fans hearts and I felt like the Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe stuck SO closely to the book and did such a fabulous job at adding only inconsequential fillers. I really feel that was just BAIT to get us to see the rest of them. I can NOT recommend this movie, Caspian, because it felt like the screen writer used his teenage daughter to help cast it and help write it. For those of us in our party who had NOT read the book, the reviews were mixed. One fell asleep; one thought it was disconnected and didn't make sense; two liked it because they are TEENAGERS! So, if you are a teenager, and can't READ...then go for it baby!!! AND if you're a girl teenager, Caspian is HOT (I kept expecting him to fling his hair like Prince Charming in Shrek2) and Peter is looking fine and Edmund is adorable and will be mega-handsome as he ages. But, if you are over 25 and HAVE read the book...stay home (or go see Ironman).I really, really believe that it would have been even MORE exciting had they stuck closer to the story and events of the book. What a great story!!! I just don't get why they didn't. There's NO love interest between Susan and Caspian (actually, I do think that Caspian should have been MUCH younger too). They don't ever go back to the castle do they? One of the best parts of the story (book) was Trumpkin's disbelief and wonderful revelation at seeing Aslan for the first time. Of course these Narnians didn't believe about Aslan either, he'd been gone for like 1,300 years! So, they all were TOO quick to believe. And I have to say there was NO character development for Doctor Cornelius either. That's so sad since he really is one of the VERY main characters! Why change also that Caspian didn't just get knocked out when he hit a tree and then woke up (and WHY in the HECK was Trumpkin gone already???) So, so many errors and unnecessary changes...ARG! Peter and Caspian do NOT fight. Peter doesn't have any "problems" as portrayed in the film. What the heck was going on in that screenwriter's head (or his teenage daughter's)???? WAY, WAY too many things were different! There was NO White Witch (and by the way, HOW do you kill someone who is already dead?). She was merely talked about. I did NOT expect the story to be completely changed in SO many parts. Hey, you know you shouldn't screw with a Mom who can only get out a few times a year. Crap, the last movie we saw in the theaters was Transformers...can't you give a girl a break??? I was SO distracted by the lack of following the story, that I don't even think I could tell you if I would have liked it having not read the book. Very disappointed Disney, Walden, whomever! Shame on you! If you liked the book, you won't like the movie. Just see the Lion, Witch and Wardrobe again and it will make it alright. (Why didn't I go see Ironman?)

• I think I might skip the sequel posted on 14 Aug 2009

  I went to see Prince Caspian with high hopes, after the excellent adaptation of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe in the Chronicles of Narnia. My expectations were high for this film, and I'm sad to say that my hopes were dashed completely. Sadly, unlike it's predecessor, which is one of the most faithful book adaptations I've seen, this film plays fast and loose with the story of Prince Caspian.I will not list all the many places where C.S. Lewis' original story has been trodden all over, but it so infuriated me that from midway through the film I had already made up my mind about it. I wouldn't have cared about walking out. Everything that made Prince Caspian a wonderful and rich story, seemed to be absent on the big screen.If the same names are involved in making the Voyage of the Dawn Treader, I doubt I will waste my money on what shall undoubtedly be another horrific mutilation of C.S. Lewis' fine work.