While at the Narnia Faith Summit last week, I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Paul McCusker, a writer at Focus on the Family. He’s a really great guy, and I hope to be able to post an interview with him on this site at some point in the future. He has written his impressions of the event, as well as the footage that was screened for us on his website. Glad to know that he came away as positive about the film as I am. Here’s an excerpt:
They talked about their desire to get this picture back to the sensibilities of “The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe,” to recapture the “magic” and get away from the action-adventure-teen-heart-throb approach of “Prince Caspian.” They also acknowledged the difficulties of bringing the story to the screen, since the book wasn’t easily conducive to a film’s structure. Yes, changes have been made, but those changes are expected to be in keeping with the spirit of the book.
Read the rest of his thoughts on his website at PaulMcCusker.com
And if you missed it, here are my thoughts on the First Dawn Treader Footage Screened
LOVE Paul McCusker!
Since Paul McCusker wrote the Narnia Radio dramas (I think), he should know how hard it is to adapt a book to script of any kind. All these opinions are driving me nuts. December is too far away!
I’m glad to hear that they are trying to recapture the magic of “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe”. It just wasn’t the same “mood” in PC, and the Susan Caspian thing wasn’t great. I hope they succeed in recapturing the magic!
~ReepicheepFan
Wait–is this Paul McCusker of Adventures in Odyssey?
Yes it is! 🙂
I have to disagree somewhat. I have never fully understood what people mean when they say the first movie captured the magic more than the second. Can someone give me a good explanation of what that means? Some examples?
It could be argued that almost as much “action-adventure” was added to the first movie as the second. (For example, the scene when the Pevensies are riding the ice, and the expanded battle scenes.)
PC was a better movie because of the changes they made to the structure of the story – structure that would not have worked on film. But, I am beginning to think, the changes to LWW did not make it a better story. They added adventure and took out the sense of joy. (The sense of joy was lost somewhat in PC, too.)
I will have more to say about this in a article about the Focus on the Family Radio Theater version of LWW that I am planning to publish this weekend on Examiner.com. You can click on my name to go to my articles there.
~It is rather hard to describe “the magic”. Well, let’s compare it to cooking.~
Lighting: Bright and Happy
Music: Light and Joyful
Characters: Happy, though real enough not to seem kiddy
Sets: Not overboard on detail, draws the attention to the characters
Landscapes: Beautiful
~~~
All this coming together creates the “magic” which we keep talking about. Now to compare it to PC:
Lighting: Darker, in the shadows
Music: Serious, Darker, though still with Narnia mixed in
Characters: More mature, serious, not that happy
Sets: In the shadows again, dark, though with the regular things from film 1
Landscapes: Woods, and a dark castle. Aslans how, darkish lighting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That is all I can compare. I am not saying the PC was a “dark, gloomy, and serious” movie, I loved PC, but it didn’t have the same feeling as the first. I’m sure others can say the same as I, and argue with my points, but that’s how I see it.
~ReepicheepFan
I loved LWW’s “magic” because of the wonder of experiencing Narnia say, through Lucy’s eyes for the first time. I see the magic when seeing Aslan for the first time on the screen, and I see it when I hear the prophecy spoken from Mr. Beaver. For me, the “magic” is certain scenes and lines that they got right. There were certain “magical” qualities in Prince Caspian too, but just not as much for me. I think there are different “magical” qualities for each individual.
Thanks ReepicheepFan and Narniamiss. What you are saying sounds rather nebulous and subjective.
Let me give an example of why this doesn’t make much sense to me. Are the Harry Potter movies “magical”? But, aren’t they also at the same time very dark?
Now if you mean that the “magic” is having the same feeling you got from reading the books, as Narniamiss seems to indicate, I would have to say that PC “felt” more like the book than LWW did. The more I watch the movies and read the books, the more convinced I am of this.
I think that rather than speaking of fantastical in nature, or containing strange creatures and magic powers as plot devices, normally when people speak of “magic” in relation to LWW they mean the same as when one would say “that was a magical evening”–a specialness, a level of pleasure, a sense of sweetness and awe. Which I believe such things as the looks on the Pevensies’ faces coming into Narnia, the close-ups of the ice-clad flowers, and the emphasis on panoramas helped to achieve in the first movie, personally. But I do realize that even in this sense, the definition of “magic” can be subjective. It’s in how parts of the movie touch on individual emotions, and how the mind averages these emotions out in retrospect: and so to some people PC may actually have more of this form of “magic” in it.
Well, that’s good to hear about recapturing the magic. I agree that LWW was better with the magic than PC. PC still had a little in it, but not as strong. I didn’t like the Susan/Caspian thing either, but my cousin liked it. I am actually beginning to look forward to seeing Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I just hope the main theme song for Narnia will be kept and the music will flow in just as good as Gregson-Williams pieces have done.
I agree magic is more opinionated, but I “think” everyone likes the LWW magic more than the one in PC.
I agree that the “magic” is different for each person. However it seems like there is an objective magic as well or this many people wouldn’t be talking about it. Lily of Archenland really nails it.
~ReepicheepFan
I think that the “magic” referred to for the LWW isn’t exactly “magic” as in spells and potions and a strange land. Sure, there is an element of that kind of magic, but this is more of the child-like wonder that one experiences in LWW. You know, the innocently surprised look on Lucy’s face when she first steps into Narnia. Both Narnia films have a “magic” about them, but LWW’s makes adults feel like children again while PC’s make children feel like adults.
The question has been asked: What is the
This is GREAT to hear!!
So you remove my comment? I think that’s a guilty conscience acting.
Removed what comment?