SPONSORED BY:
MOVIES

Lewis and Dark

"Prince Caspian," the second installment in the Narnia franchise, sinks under a dull, bombastic sameness.

 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

The Narnia films, based on the C. S. Lewis Chronicles of Narnia series, share a highbrow imprimatur with box office juggernauts Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings that suggests they are higher-quality fare than most films for young audiences. For one thing, they are adapted from books (and not just kids' books, but literature and, even better, British literature); they are live-action, include gorgeous scenery, and depict their young, virtuous protagonists as serious, intelligent beings who speak in refined locutions. There's no swearing, no bathroom humor. But underneath these genteel trappings, the narratives of the films more closely resemble the sequential, repetitive structure of videogames than a traditional plot arc. "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian," the second installment in the series (following 2005's box office smash "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe"), efficiently reintroduces the four Pevensie children, sets in motion a struggle for control of Narnia, and lets the combatants get down to the business of beating each other senseless in a series of escalating battles that constitute the meat of the movie. There's a dull, bombastic sameness to the last two-thirds of "Prince Caspian," as the characters progress from battle to battle, like players ascending the levels of "Donkey Kong."

The movie opens in Narnia, which is now ruled by evil King Miraz, leader of the Telmarines, a race that banished the Narnians to the forest. When Miraz's wife gives birth to a son, Miraz's nephew Prince Caspian, who is the rightful heir to the throne, must flee the castle. Meanwhile, back in England our school-aged protagonists from the first film, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy Pevensie, are sucked through a Harry Potter-esque time portal in the underground and deposited back in Narnia, which has aged 1,300 years since their last visit. Aslan, the mythic lion who guided the Pevensie children during their first visit, is nowhere to be found.

This first part of the movie has a mournful, lugubrious air; Lucy, in particular, can't get over how much Narnia has changed, and she refuses to accept the loss of her beloved lion. Director Andrew Adamson conveys the children's grief with atmospherically somber shots, showing the scenery as both stunning and foreboding. In one scene Lucy wakes in a misty forest and wanders off in search of Aslan. Adamson's camera makes the trees seem to whisper the way—so much so that a special effect of swirling petals beckoning Lucy forward is clumsily excessive. When Lucy wakes to discover that her early morning walk was just a dream, the light sharpens to reveal that she's back in reality—as real as Narnia can be, that is. It's a nice, subtle visual touch for a film that will soon be overwhelmed by computer-generated fakery.

Soon enough the Pevensies meet up with Caspian and, along with the Narnians, pledge to help him claim the throne and free the Narnians from Telmarine rule. Newcomer Ben Barnes, as Caspian, seems cast to bring some Orlando Bloom-style heat to the story—and teenage girls to the theaters—but he plays Caspian as too hesitant to be an effective foil to Peter's headstrong leadership. Like the Pevensie children, Caspian is an orphan—he lost his father, the king, as a baby, while the Pevensies have been separated from their mother by World War II. One message of the film is that adults, whether "sons of Adam" like King Miraz or fantastical creatures like the White Witch (Tilda Swinton, who makes a welcome cameo) are not to be trusted, with the exception of Aslan, the ultimate absentee father figure. But Caspian and the Pevensies never gel as an alternative family unit. The characters are often separated from each other, left to fight their battles alone.

As for those battles, they are your standard CGI extravaganzas: long, loud, and violent, though with little actual blood. Adamson seems to prefer excess to invention, so there are lots of shots of multitudes of armor-clad warriors racing down hillsides, and Narnian minotaurs and centaurs galloping full speed into the breach. The more obvious special effects are downright hokey, such as a weird swirling water creature who looks like something out of a toilet cleaner commercial. As the outcome of all the sword-flinging and catapult-launching is never in question, it's hard to stay engaged with the movie once the fighting begins. Filming for the next installment in the Narnia franchise is set to begin this fall, and it's a good bet the third film will be even more action-heavy, and dramatically flat, than "Prince Caspian." It's a shame, because under all the gimmickry and effects, there's a nice story to tell—as anyone who has read the books knows.

© 2008

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Visions of a Decade
Visions of a Decade

From 2000-2009, one photo per month.

The Failure of Copenhagen
The Failure of Copenhagen

Why there could be a silver lining in a failed climate treaty.

Sex Scandals of the 2000s
Sex Scandals of the 2000s

From John Edwards to Mark Sanford, the decade's memorable affairs.

118 Days in Hell
118 Days in Hell

A NEWSWEEK journalist recounts his captivity in Iran.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: goldeniangel @ 05/16/2008 2:32:13 PM

    .I sometimes wonder if ANYONE reviewing this movie has bothered to read the books in YEARS. This critic implies that they have, but it must not have been recently... and I'm not sure how much she remembers from the first movie. The "clumsily excessive" swirling petals are actually a dryad, similar to the one seen in the first movie that waves to Lucy - if not the SAME one considering that the dryads and hamadryads have much longer life spans. Also, the "weird swirling water creature" is the River God breaking loose his chains (the bridges)... JUST LIKE HE DOES IN THE BOOK

    Ok, so the battle scenes are CGI and filled with mythological creatures... um, Narnia is made UP of mythological creatures. It's kind of hard to create battle scenes where half the fighters ARE mythological creatures without CGI, at least GOOD battle scenes. These movies are everything I wished for when I was a little kid, the way that I wanted the original movies to be... although I still love to watch those for the nostalgia.

    I also don't quite know where this critic got the inane idea that the movie is saying all adults are to be distrusted. There's a beautiful scene where Caspian's Aunt is unsure of what to do when she realizes what her husband has done, other than Miraz none of the adults in the movie seem to realize what's truly going on between Miraz and Caspian. Caspian is NOT killed by one of Miraz's generals, because the man recognizes his true Prince on the battlefield and freezes. At the very beginning of the movie, the Prince is sent off to safety by the sacrifice of his VERY adult tutor. And by the way... do the dwarves not count as adults? Maybe this particular critic missed it, but Trumpkin IS an adult and even STATES so at one point in the movie when Lucy asks everyone to stop "trying to talk like adults". But maybe since he's so short, he doesn't count.

    About the only negative observation that I agree on is that Caspian needed to stand up a little more to Peter, although if I remember from the book there was definitely some friction between them. And quite often in this book, the Pevensie's are NOT fighting as a family unit, they ARE separated.

    I just wish that more movie critics were re-reading the books before writing their reviews, because the movies are fantastic for true fans of the books... they can't follow everything and get all of the details in, but the amount that they do manage to include in the movie is really quite spectacular, and the spirt of the books is always evident. Did this installment outdo my expectations like the last one? Well, no. But, my expectations are also higher after the last movie. So it'd be a little harder to outdo them.

    My personal opinion: Go see the movie, it's a lot less "lugubrious" and "flat" than this review, and it's still one of the best book adaptations out there. I can't wait for The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

  • Posted By: alexaworth @ 05/16/2008 10:22:03 AM

    Where to start, Danny? With the "your" or the fact that there are only seven books in the Chronicles?

  • Posted By: matari @ 05/15/2008 7:06:44 PM

    "He's showing how things are going to be in the END TIMES."

    If you are referring to the 'END TIMES' found in the Bible, Mr. Lewis is not.

    If you are of the belief that there will be an end to this world as we know it as prescribed in the Bible then one can only speculate (based on the information found in the Bible) as to what exactly will happen when the End Times come.

    I submit that what Mr. Lewis is actually doing is presenting the reader with a proper demonstration (through the characters in his Narnia chronicles) of how a person however fallible and flawed can still in the end become a person of ideal moral character (read into this the character named Edmund who can be first found in the Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe.) And when said person reaches that stage of what is divinely right & wrong, how one conducts him/herself when presented with a situation which requires their action.

    You know. How a good person should act =)

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now