Peter & Caspian fighting scene

In many critical ways, the Lord of the Rings movies were bad in how they translated the story to the screen. As a typical postmodern, Jackson missed many fundamental elements of Tolkien's thought, at times getting them so wrong that they were presented completely opposite of how Tolkien presented them. The movies may have been cinematically well done and commercially successful, but as a the translation of the actual story to the screen, they were failures.

This is my concern with what I'm reading about Prince Caspian. I understand full well that print and screen are different media, and because story elements have to be portrayed differently, it sometimes requires rewriting. But that rewriting can be done without violating the spirit of the story. An example of this would be the waterfall scene in the film rendition of Lion. There was no hint of anything like that in the book. It was added to the movie to generate some excitement, which it did without violating any of the principles of the story.

But if you try to generate excitement in Prince Caspian by introducing power tension between Peter and Caspian, then you're violating the basic principle of the story. As Peter says to Caspian, "I haven't come to take your place, you know, but to put you into it." (Sorcery and Sudden Vengeance). This mission is the hinge of the whole story: the children were summoned back to Narnia by Aslan (via the mechanism of the Horn) in order to restore proper order - i.e. a human king under Aslan's authority. Peter knew this, just as he knew that he'd only ruled as High King in the first place because he was under Aslan, and now it was Caspian's time. Lewis' Peter would no more have contended with Caspian for the right to the Narnian throne than he would have contended with the Tisroc for the right to rule Calormen.

This is why these screenwriters make me nervous. To expect a typical secular postmodernist to understand principles like proper authority and chivalry is expecting the near impossible. A postmodern only understands personal power and self-exultation. If they aren't willing to "sit at Lewis' feet" and learn how properly submitted men can and do behave, then there's no limit to how badly they could maul this tale.
 
As I said, I do not believe that Disney and Walden will make either Peter or Caspian power-hungry. I will quote my guess for the quarrel:
"You remember from LWW movie that he (Peter) was sort of bossy. He was the one who corrected all, Ed, Lucy, even Susan. He seems to feel an enormous sense of responsibility not only to his family, but to Narnia as well.
I think that he will try to correct Caspian's actions, especially if the Prince really is portrayed as sort of arrogant young noble. Caspian will clearly be frustrated by these and may become irritated with Peter. Add to this the supposed romance between him and Susan and how would Peter this. Add to this the old hag, which was mentioned in the book - she could influence Caspian with dark magic."
 
Yah but on the previous page, there is a quote from someone connected with the movie, and ITW's interviews with the production people, and they are all talking as if there is a power struggle between Peter and Caspian as one of the central conflicts of the movie. PoTW is right, that would be fatal to the story. That wouldn't make Peter the Magnificent, it would make him Peter the Supplanter.
 
PrinceOfTheWest said:
In many critical ways, the Lord of the Rings movies were bad in how they translated the story to the screen. As a typical postmodern, Jackson missed many fundamental elements of Tolkien's thought, at times getting them so wrong that they were presented completely opposite of how Tolkien presented them. The movies may have been cinematically well done and commercially successful, but as a the translation of the actual story to the screen, they were failures.

This is my concern with what I'm reading about Prince Caspian. I understand full well that print and screen are different media, and because story elements have to be portrayed differently, it sometimes requires rewriting. But that rewriting can be done without violating the spirit of the story. An example of this would be the waterfall scene in the film rendition of Lion. There was no hint of anything like that in the book. It was added to the movie to generate some excitement, which it did without violating any of the principles of the story.

But if you try to generate excitement in Prince Caspian by introducing power tension between Peter and Caspian, then you're violating the basic principle of the story. As Peter says to Caspian, "I haven't come to take your place, you know, but to put you into it." (Sorcery and Sudden Vengeance). This mission is the hinge of the whole story: the children were summoned back to Narnia by Aslan (via the mechanism of the Horn) in order to restore proper order - i.e. a human king under Aslan's authority. Peter knew this, just as he knew that he'd only ruled as High King in the first place because he was under Aslan, and now it was Caspian's time. Lewis' Peter would no more have contended with Caspian for the right to the Narnian throne than he would have contended with the Tisroc for the right to rule Calormen.

This is why these screenwriters make me nervous. To expect a typical secular postmodernist to understand principles like proper authority and chivalry is expecting the near impossible. A postmodern only understands personal power and self-exultation. If they aren't willing to "sit at Lewis' feet" and learn how properly submitted men can and do behave, then there's no limit to how badly they could maul this tale.
Click to expand...
I agree 100% A few small changes are necessary to put PC on the movie screen, but if you're changing the character's additudes towards one another and their motives that will completely destroy the story. The Pevensies and Caspian were always on good terms with each other. In all the books I don't think there was ever any tension between them at all. (The only time Caspian was annoyed was with Eustace... but that was Eustace's fault, not Caspian's :p) I am getting so nervous about PC now. :( I need to stop reading these threads or I won't be able to sleep. lol. Once PC comes out I may need to leave this Narnia Fans site and join a Prince Capsian support group. :p:(
 
inkspot said:
Yah but on the previous page, there is a quote from someone connected with the movie, and ITW's interviews with the production people, and they are all talking as if there is a power struggle between Peter and Caspian as one of the central conflicts of the movie.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I am sure that it won't be political power struggle - just power struggle between young men, who think that they know what is better for the other one.
 
I got my info from the quote you had posted there inkspot and from reading all the other interviews posted on various sites. Maybe some Comic Con thrown in...I agree with POTW. That's been my fear all along. I saw Peter's character changed in LWW a bit and it spooked me some. I doubt that they'd maul the story on purpose at all, they're good people who love the story...but one can't expect them to understand all the facets of the tale without understanding the Lion Himself as well as the other stuff POTW mentioned. We'll have to wait and see how it is played out. If nothing else, as with LWW, and the LOTR movies, it tends to make more people want to read the books...that's a good thing. I just wish that they'd stick to the books and fire Marcus and McFeely! Nothing personal against them, they just don't seem to know what they're doing so much. I don't know how much of it is Andrew in the mix, but we'll have to wait and see what comes out. Even if PC turns out bad, VDT could be very different with Michael Apted. If PC bombs though they may not make VDT. Tis a sticky one...ugh.
 
I don't know why, but it did not bother me so much when PJ departed from the LOTR books -- I was able to look at it and say, "The book is one thing, the movie is a separate thing," and enjoy both. But with PC, I feel like this wild departure from the characters and nature of Caspian and Peter really worries me. It's harder for me to separate the book and movie in my mind the way I was able to with LOTR ... I don't want them to ruin it!!!!
 
None of us do, including the people making it. They're very passionate about doing well and wanting to get it right. The problem is figuring out what is right. There's the Postmodern view that POTW was talking about as well as a secular view that leaves out so much....so it will be tough if not impossible to get everything right. We love and care about the stories so it's only normal to care a lot.
 
I agree pretty much with what has been said before.
What worries me most about the possible changes that've been discussed along the forum is that they interfere in the characters' behavior and principles. Someone mentioned something about a siege in Miraz's castle. I would not like that, since it has no need for such a scene, but I would tolerate it. Making Peter and Caspian fight, as well as building up a romance/'thing' between Caspian and Susan (something that has been discussed in another thread), would both not just interfere in the plot development, but also portray a fake picture of our beloved characters. It would go against their nature, even being it just a fictional one.
Taking an example from The Lord of the Rings' movies, that is what happened to Faramir. He became a 'reincarnation' of his brother, as the main differences between them both during the War of the Ring were their decisions, that made one pass the test and the other fail it. The character, as portrayed in the movie, was almost unrecognisable from the book.
 
People can't expect the adaptation to be 100% correct, it's just not possible. There will always be changes from book to film-thats obvious. I think the fightr between will be interesting, perhaps Caspian is doubting Peter's strength or leadership as high king so Peter challenges him? Or the compete to see how skilled Caspian really is with a sword, or vice versa.
 
It's possible that you're right about the reasoning...but it's not so much what the filmmakers described in their interview. We'll have to wait and see.

We all know that the adaptation won't be %100 accurate. What's important to all the long time fans of the book is that the spirit of the characters and the story stay in tact. Yeah there will be changes, but one has to think about which changes are acceptable. There will be an overall vote and people will vote with their pocketbooks at the theaters and in the DVD sales. But they'll also voice their thoughts on the fan sites like this one. I hope that when they do the latter Walden will be listening so that they know where and how to improve the next film(s) if they see a trend in the thoughts voiced on here.

I don't want to get too down on the film. The Comic Con footage looked amazing to say the least. However, it's the story and characters I care about. The spirit of both are important to me. I want to see what CS Lewis wrote, not a fanfiction based on it. I know some of that will be thrown in...let's just hope it's not too much.
 
I wonder....

There is a duel between Edmund and Trumpkin, of course. I wonder if they "twitched" the story so that happens between Peter and Caspian instead. It still wouldn't be optimal, of course, but it wouldn't be as bad as animosity between the two, which would be a total distortion.
 
I'm not sure if Ed and Trumpkin duel or not. At Comic Con there was footage of Trumpkin in the little boat with the kids passing by a waterfall, so we know he meets up with them sort of close to what it's like in the book...or else they were just teasing us which I doubt because it would be really mean. I think that this is something seperate.

The film makers were trying to think of how the characters would feel in flushing out everything and I think may have missed the mark greatly. They were thinking from a modern point of view where people are much more self-centered and thus they missed one of the greatest points of Peter's character. Not to mention a good bit that the generations of today could learn from. They thought Peter would be mad that he couldn't resume his role as king and then that Caspian was supposed to feel some entitlement to the throne so they struggled through it all and are supposed to come to an understanding I think. It's sad really, but we'll have to wait and see. Maybe things will turn out alright in the end. We'll find out next May.
 
I don't expect a perfect retelling of the book exactly as it is described by the author. Like the others, I do expect the spirit of the book to come through, the characters to not be changed too drastically, and the action not to stray too far off.

Now there were two parts in LWW that is simi;ar to the feared changes in Peter. In the book, Peter and Susan are very responsible and great older siblings to Edmund and Lucy, meant to look after them. When they feel Lucy is going mad by not letting go of the country in the wardrobe, they go to the Professor themselves to talk to him. In the movie, to my disappointment, they try to sneak away rather than talk with the Prof.

The second thing in the movie was when they were playing cricket outside and broke the window. Instead of acting responsibly and owning up to it, they were running around the house trying to find a hiding place so they would not get into trouble. The book has them trying to stay away from Mrs. McReedy's tour group and fatefully finding their way to the wardrobe room.

I seriously hope the sword fight between Caspian and Peter is still how both characters would normally act.

Bob
 
HugsForReepicheep said:
I agree pretty much with what has been said before.
What worries me most about the possible changes that've been discussed along the forum is that they interfere in the characters' behavior and principles. Someone mentioned something about a siege in Miraz's castle. I would not like that, since it has no need for such a scene, but I would tolerate it. Making Peter and Caspian fight, as well as building up a romance/'thing' between Caspian and Susan (something that has been discussed in another thread), would both not just interfere in the plot development, but also portray a fake picture of our beloved characters. It would go against their nature, even being it just a fictional one.
Taking an example from The Lord of the Rings' movies, that is what happened to Faramir. He became a 'reincarnation' of his brother, as the main differences between them both during the War of the Ring were their decisions, that made one pass the test and the other fail it. The character, as portrayed in the movie, was almost unrecognisable from the book.
Click to expand...
I agree with that 100%. I believe the spirit will still be in the movie, but the spirit can be there as well as having the characters changed. I'm not expecting everything to be just like the book...then again, even in LWW there were a lot of changes and it turned out pretty great! Edmund never met Tumnus in jail, Edmund was never even in jail. It was never really stated that Aslan had an army, they completely changed the foxs' character, the river scene was completely added etc.
Mind you, I'm not saying that these scenes weren't amazing, they just weren't in the book.
 
she-elfwarrior19 said:
People can't expect the adaptation to be 100% correct, it's just not possible. There will always be changes from book to film-thats obvious.
Click to expand...

I'd never expect that. I'm OK with changes, new scenes, new dialogs, cutting some parts out. What annoys me is when those changes are made based on the 'that-would-be-nicER' basis, meaning producers thinking of improving the story on screen (and thus concluding it's not good enough) instead of adapting it to the screen.

I'm not saying that's what they're doing, only that's what I fear might be done.
 
where did u guys find this stuff? like how did u know that there was gonna be a scene where caspian and peter fight? i haven't seen any previews for the movie.
 
Rumors do fly, and sometimes they actually are true.

Hugs-F-R, if you mean what I think you mean about Faramir, I agree. In the book, the tempting power of the Ring bounced off of Faramir like bullets off of Superman; but in the Two Towers movie he was hardly any more resistant to it than Boromir had been. (In fairness to Boromir, it was NOT that he was a wicked man at all--but as Gandalf dreaded in his own case, the Ring cunningly played on Boromir's desire "for strength TO DO GOOD.") Removing Faramir's high integrity is lowering the bar for heroes generally.

If the Caspian movie turns Caspian into a rebellious high-school brat who defies Peter's rightful authority out of plain idiotic stubbornness--and still worse, if it makes Peter sink to the same level when he is supposed to possess the wisdom from having already lived an adult life--they will be doing even greater damage than was done by the downgrading of Faramir. I hope it is not so; but just the thought of them so ruining the spirit of Mr. Lewis' work was the very thing that caused me, months ago, to create the forum thread called "Losing the Concept of Virtue."
 
According to the movie storybook the fight is a result of mistaken identity. This isn't what William Moseley implied in his interview previously, but I hope that this is the case. I hope that it's mistaken identity rather than an ego trip. Will talked about ego issues, but maybe that's apart from the fight. Peter certainly seems to have them in the begining of the film from the movie storybook....we'll see.
 
Back
Top