Mistakes in the movie - are we going too far?

The answer is, they would not, AND THEY DID NOT. The case of Eustace has already conclusively proven Mr. Lewis' view on "goodness retention." And Andrew Adamson has proven HIS own view that what is noble should be dragged through the mud. It should have been foreseeable, after the way he was so eager to make Robin Hood into someone despicable in "Shrek."
 
"Certainly they were children again -- but why would they lose their nobility of spirit?"

inky, if they lost their nobility of spirit, then Edmund would have returned to England as the exact same boy as when he left, and that wasn't the case. Eustace as well.

Why would anyone return and become worse then when they first went in? That was not the point of Narnia. It was a place where one learned lessons and kept the knowledge of those lessons.

"Edmund and Peter do that in the book as well, the difference being that the fight starts just as they intervene with the werewolf leaping on Caspian."

Asbel, the other difference is that in the movie, Peter and his siblings have to come to the rescue while in the book, Caspian and his allies are already fighting, turning Peter and Edmund (and Trumpkin) into more or less back-up.

MrBob
 
Actually I think thats more or less true but the main purpose of the Pevensies in the book, particularly Lucys is to act as a sort of conduit to allow for Aslans return or` to point the way back to Aslan` if you prefer.

As for `Loosing their nobility of spirit` in the film, did they in fact loose it?

I might agree to a point that Adamson should have handled it better but my own reading of Peter`s character was that he was someone who HAD seen something better but was having trouble reconcileing it with his life in the mundane world of 1940`s England, something that was also happening with Susan but she was dealing with it a bit differently.
 
Last edited:
I find it difficult to believe that Peter could have kept his "nobility of spirit" and still acted the way he did in the movie. That was my single biggest objection with the movie - the way they ruined Peter's character. They created what was essentially a power struggle between Peter and Caspian, going directly against the line in the book:

Peter said:
"We haven't come to take your place, you know, but to put you in it."
Click to expand...
 
Olórin the Wise said:
I find it difficult to believe that Peter could have kept his "nobility of spirit" and still acted the way he did in the movie. That was my single biggest objection with the movie - the way they ruined Peter's character. They created what was essentially a power struggle between Peter and Caspian, going directly against the line in the book:
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this. When the director/writer chooses to make a change that essentiay runs counter to the theme of the book, then that really ruins the film as far as its being a "Narnia" film. To me, Peter and Caspian's characters were so far out of sync with their characters in the book that this film was more like a fan-fic based in Narnia, but with different characters. In that sense, it was a good movie, and I enjoyed it. I loved what they did with the Telmarines, and I'm a huge fan of Miraz in the film -- they made him so much more wicked and powerful and less of a buffoon. (Caspian got to be the buffoon in the film! A big grown man like that not wondering why he wasn't king already or realizing that when Miraz had a child, he would want Caspian dead ...)

Anyway, good as the film was in the action/adventure/fantasy genre, it wasn't enough like the book to qualify as the actual film version of the book ...
 
Back
Top