Lady of the Lion's Mane
New member
You didn't like the movie did you?
Oh, well..I actually thought it worked out better this way..Caspian wasn't as wimpy as in the book (no offence), and Peter wasn't perfect.
I agree.
Peter vs. Caspian
- Thread starter TreeDancer
- Start date
I agree.
marshwigglewigwams
New member
i totally agree with this. the movie had nothing of Lewis in it. if he saw it himself i'm sure he would not recognize his own story.
hmm.. i guess i really did hate the movie..
I wish I could write as eloquently as Copperfox. I wholeheartedly agree with your posts and with marshwigglewigwams. I wish the moviemakers could read these posts because they will realize that the old saying is true: You can fool all the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all people all the time (or something like that). The point is, there are some of us who realize what they did and that we are not compromising our beliefs and values for the sake of entertainment.
Fifth Pevensie
New member
Warning: It's late at night and I'm tired so this ends up being a long incoherent post. I apologize to all and salute those who persevere through it!
Short version: I agree with your companions.
Long version: Even when Peter made mistakes (and yes, in the movie he makes a ton more mistakes than in the book --although that is a consistent theme), IMO at all times he exuded more leadership than Caspian.
This leadership was hampered somewhat by his anger, guilt, confusion, frustration and pain -basically by being an emotional mess- but I think the leadership remained not just because he has the title so everyone is forced to obey the guy but because, in my honest opinion, Peter Pevensie loved the Narnians. Fiercely loved Narnia and desperately loved Aslan.
(Was it a more conventionally modern twist having Peter's love for Aslan come out as sharp feelings of abandonment etc.? Yes, yes, of course. But, after 6 viewings, I get stronger every time in my certainty that Peter's struggle of faith was because he wanted so much of Aslan's love and nearness. It is a classic case of the loss of faith; classic enough that I think it shouldn't always be dismissed as a modern twist -but that's another topic.)
Anyway, when you compare the two I think it is evident that Peter loves Narnia more. Caspian is a Telmarine prince embroiled in court politics who seeks out the help of the dangerous mythic people in hopes of regaining his life, kingship, and yeah peace for all. Peter is a Narnian king who came from another land as a reluctant-hero boy and decided to stay (despite the obvious risks) in order to fight for the oppressed people of Narnia who had befriended him and in order to carry out his duty to Aslan. He then grew to mythic status by ruling over Narnia for an unprecedented period of prosperity. His anger and frustrations to start off the movie are not because he has an evil uncle out to kill him but because he has been unexpectedly and possibly permanently cut off from his beloved kingdom.
Another reason that I think Peter is a great leader in this film, is that he continues to have magnificent courage. His instinct is always to protect. When he leads, he is at the front. He will walk into an impossible fortress (there was some ego involved there but also his natural courage) and he will take fully the responsibility of his leadership by fighting to the death one-on-one with the heavier Miraz "in order to prevent the abominable effusion of blood". Peter will readily make sacrifices for his family, for his people, and for Aslan.
This leads us to a third trait: his strong sense of responsibility. Much of Peter's courage and selflessness is manifested because he feels the responsibility of being the eldest. This was very apparent in the first film and is also IMO apparant in this one. Part of his mess in PC is due to a driving feeling of guilt thanks to his sense of responsibility for the fate of the Narnians, his people, during his unintended absence. He also displays this in the same small gestures of comfort and protection of his siblings as in LWW. (esp. hugging Lucy and comforting her at different times.) Of course, his ultimate sense of responsibility was after he humbled himself before Aslan's image and went as one man to hopefully decide the fate of two nations with his life (the Duel).
And a fourth reason is his initiative. There are many times, whether among siblings only or in a full war council, that Peter will step up to the plate and give directions while others are still paralyzed by doubt or merely passive participants. Examples include after Susan causes Trumpkin to be dropped into the lake and the others stand around for a few seconds while Pete immediately takes off to bodily rescue him. Also after uncovering the treasure room door. Seeing the darkness that was equally manifest to those around him, Peter immediately starts to construct a torch for everyone's benefit. Ed, although having a flashlight the whole time and seeing the same darkness beyond, does not offer to light the way until as a joke. (I love both Susan and Ed so I'm sorry if I sound harsh. I just believe that if we're going to get hyper critical of Peter then we should be equally critical of the others.)
Sadly, it is easy to dismiss Peter's initiative as "arrogance" but when I consider how many times those around him have instinctively waited for his response (and when I remember how indecisive he was as a lad) I appreciate that it is an important leadership skill to act when others are hesitating.
Finally, on a purely subjective level, I thought Peter exuded more charisma. I love the film but slightly cringe during Caspian's rally at the Dancing Lawn. IMO he showed his inexperience in leading men or even in delivering speeches. Peter, meanwhile, spoke clearly and confidently to his men and instinctively took center stage. Whereas Caspian was trying to grow into kingliness, Peter hadn't yet grown out of it.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up my feelings as well. I very much love the book (esp. bookPeter) and very much love the movie (esp. moviePeter) but would very ecstatically have received a movie more exact to the book. However, I have really never seen a movie faithfully and successfully adapt a book to the extent that I would love
In fact, I really didn't care much for LWW the film precisely because I thought it was just another fantasy flick with a modern twist on it so different from the beloved story of my childhood. Peter was my biggest disappointment. It's probably precisely because I began to appreciate the film LWW that I was able to love the film PC so much.
I enjoy watching these films. They remind me of my childhood memories though they are far from exact. They are entertaining and polished and still, in a different way, inspiring. But they are of course the films rather than the book. And really I guess that's what interpretation and imagination are for.
Short version: I agree with your companions.
Long version: Even when Peter made mistakes (and yes, in the movie he makes a ton more mistakes than in the book --although that is a consistent theme), IMO at all times he exuded more leadership than Caspian.
This leadership was hampered somewhat by his anger, guilt, confusion, frustration and pain -basically by being an emotional mess- but I think the leadership remained not just because he has the title so everyone is forced to obey the guy but because, in my honest opinion, Peter Pevensie loved the Narnians. Fiercely loved Narnia and desperately loved Aslan.
(Was it a more conventionally modern twist having Peter's love for Aslan come out as sharp feelings of abandonment etc.? Yes, yes, of course. But, after 6 viewings, I get stronger every time in my certainty that Peter's struggle of faith was because he wanted so much of Aslan's love and nearness. It is a classic case of the loss of faith; classic enough that I think it shouldn't always be dismissed as a modern twist -but that's another topic.)
Anyway, when you compare the two I think it is evident that Peter loves Narnia more. Caspian is a Telmarine prince embroiled in court politics who seeks out the help of the dangerous mythic people in hopes of regaining his life, kingship, and yeah peace for all. Peter is a Narnian king who came from another land as a reluctant-hero boy and decided to stay (despite the obvious risks) in order to fight for the oppressed people of Narnia who had befriended him and in order to carry out his duty to Aslan. He then grew to mythic status by ruling over Narnia for an unprecedented period of prosperity. His anger and frustrations to start off the movie are not because he has an evil uncle out to kill him but because he has been unexpectedly and possibly permanently cut off from his beloved kingdom.
Another reason that I think Peter is a great leader in this film, is that he continues to have magnificent courage. His instinct is always to protect. When he leads, he is at the front. He will walk into an impossible fortress (there was some ego involved there but also his natural courage) and he will take fully the responsibility of his leadership by fighting to the death one-on-one with the heavier Miraz "in order to prevent the abominable effusion of blood". Peter will readily make sacrifices for his family, for his people, and for Aslan.
This leads us to a third trait: his strong sense of responsibility. Much of Peter's courage and selflessness is manifested because he feels the responsibility of being the eldest. This was very apparent in the first film and is also IMO apparant in this one. Part of his mess in PC is due to a driving feeling of guilt thanks to his sense of responsibility for the fate of the Narnians, his people, during his unintended absence. He also displays this in the same small gestures of comfort and protection of his siblings as in LWW. (esp. hugging Lucy and comforting her at different times.) Of course, his ultimate sense of responsibility was after he humbled himself before Aslan's image and went as one man to hopefully decide the fate of two nations with his life (the Duel).
And a fourth reason is his initiative. There are many times, whether among siblings only or in a full war council, that Peter will step up to the plate and give directions while others are still paralyzed by doubt or merely passive participants. Examples include after Susan causes Trumpkin to be dropped into the lake and the others stand around for a few seconds while Pete immediately takes off to bodily rescue him. Also after uncovering the treasure room door. Seeing the darkness that was equally manifest to those around him, Peter immediately starts to construct a torch for everyone's benefit. Ed, although having a flashlight the whole time and seeing the same darkness beyond, does not offer to light the way until as a joke. (I love both Susan and Ed so I'm sorry if I sound harsh. I just believe that if we're going to get hyper critical of Peter then we should be equally critical of the others.)
Sadly, it is easy to dismiss Peter's initiative as "arrogance" but when I consider how many times those around him have instinctively waited for his response (and when I remember how indecisive he was as a lad) I appreciate that it is an important leadership skill to act when others are hesitating.
Finally, on a purely subjective level, I thought Peter exuded more charisma. I love the film but slightly cringe during Caspian's rally at the Dancing Lawn. IMO he showed his inexperience in leading men or even in delivering speeches. Peter, meanwhile, spoke clearly and confidently to his men and instinctively took center stage. Whereas Caspian was trying to grow into kingliness, Peter hadn't yet grown out of it.
Hm.
To each his own, I guess.
Indeed, on another thread, I put that I LOVE the book (and I really do love PC) and that I also LOVE the movie PC.
To each his own.
Also, I guess that one reason I didn't mind the changes so terribly much is that I am so used to it by now. I have witnessed all the alterations and omissions and such in the Harry Potter movies (for years now) and Lord of the Rings. So I'm very used to it. (and let me tell you, in early 'years', I didn't take it so nicely. They really messed up the story and visuals, etc in HP-Prisoner of Azkaban (the 3rd one, came out Summer 2004) and I was so mad I went home and cried. Butttttttttttttttttttttttttt....with GoF and OotP, I was okay by then, I understood, maybe lamented some things, and accepted and moved on. And maybe grew to like the changes.)
Yeah, that pretty much sums up my feelings as well. I very much love the book (esp. bookPeter) and very much love the movie (esp. moviePeter) but would very ecstatically have received a movie more exact to the book. However, I have really never seen a movie faithfully and successfully adapt a book to the extent that I would love
In fact, I really didn't care much for LWW the film precisely because I thought it was just another fantasy flick with a modern twist on it so different from the beloved story of my childhood. Peter was my biggest disappointment. It's probably precisely because I began to appreciate the film LWW that I was able to love the film PC so much.
I enjoy watching these films. They remind me of my childhood memories though they are far from exact. They are entertaining and polished and still, in a different way, inspiring. But they are of course the films rather than the book. And really I guess that's what interpretation and imagination are for.
Last edited:
daughter_of_ramandu
New member
Fifth Pevensie, I totally agree. Love is the most important thing, and Peter still loves Narnian. He is better as Caspian in this, and he is better to be king.
NarnianofGryffindor
Active member
Fifth Pevensie, I LOVE what you said. I agree 100% with that. That's an excellent explanation.
Lady of the Lion's Mane
New member
^Indeed! I agree very much so. I loved both Peter and Caspian in the film, as I have said.
On Caspian (as Saira has gone in-depth on Peter, I'll discuss Caspian a wee bit), his storyline was most certainly, as Ben put it in an interview, a boy-to-man, prince-to-king journey. He starts out almost naive, unrealistic in some assumptions, etc.
We love and care about him anyway.
As he learns to accept Peter as his High King (for real, not just as legend), and watches and learns from Peter and Edmund and learns from all who are around him, he matures and grows into himself.
We watch him become more kingly.
He becomes more aware of the sheer treachery and cruelty with which his race has ruled, and more broken-hearted and deeply saddened by it, hence by the time he is rapidly becoming kinglier (unbeknownst to him), he relinquishes the chance to kill Miraz, when not long before he would have killed him in a heartbeat. He says something like "You can keep your life, but I'm giving the Narnians back their kingdom." (This act, btw, earns him enormous respect, regard, and allegiance from the Old Narnians -they feel they can call him their king, now- and is key in gaining the respect and 'acceptance' of Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy. They all thought he'd be just like Miraz in that sense, bloodthirsty and hungry for vengeance. It showed that he had become more Narnian, less "cruel Telmarine.")
He valiantly rallies the troops (with the torch, in the How, before a very cool entrance from underground) to battle, rescues Susan and Lucy, and when called a King of Narnia by Aslan, he still is unaware of his growth and transformation. He still does not feel ready. This, of course, means he is.
He has learned humility and honor, courage and true nobility. He has begun to shed his awkwardness and uncertainty.
So, when it comes time to address the Narnians in the end, he is more their King. And he is deeply saddened at the Pevensies' leaving, and gracefully, kindly, nobly tells Peter, upon accepting Rhindon, that he will 'keep it safe till you return.' In passing Rhindon on to Caspian (which was by no means an easy act for Peter), Peter imparts his strength and wisdom to Caspian. Etc...
So, this is one of many, MANY reasons I look forward to seeing VDT -- seeing Caspian now as true King of Narnia, considering himself no longer Telmarine, but Narnian, and well, being a King. In every sense of the word. He will have grown into the role (after 3 years, of course!)... become more fully himself.
Both Peter's journey (as Saira so lovely and eloquently described) and Caspian's are a joy to watch, for I, at least, feel as if I journey with them, as if I, too, grow and change with them. As if I am transformed as they are transformed.
On Caspian (as Saira has gone in-depth on Peter, I'll discuss Caspian a wee bit), his storyline was most certainly, as Ben put it in an interview, a boy-to-man, prince-to-king journey. He starts out almost naive, unrealistic in some assumptions, etc.
We love and care about him anyway.
As he learns to accept Peter as his High King (for real, not just as legend), and watches and learns from Peter and Edmund and learns from all who are around him, he matures and grows into himself.
We watch him become more kingly.
He becomes more aware of the sheer treachery and cruelty with which his race has ruled, and more broken-hearted and deeply saddened by it, hence by the time he is rapidly becoming kinglier (unbeknownst to him), he relinquishes the chance to kill Miraz, when not long before he would have killed him in a heartbeat. He says something like "You can keep your life, but I'm giving the Narnians back their kingdom." (This act, btw, earns him enormous respect, regard, and allegiance from the Old Narnians -they feel they can call him their king, now- and is key in gaining the respect and 'acceptance' of Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy. They all thought he'd be just like Miraz in that sense, bloodthirsty and hungry for vengeance. It showed that he had become more Narnian, less "cruel Telmarine.")
He valiantly rallies the troops (with the torch, in the How, before a very cool entrance from underground
) to battle, rescues Susan and Lucy, and when called a King of Narnia by Aslan, he still is unaware of his growth and transformation. He still does not feel ready. This, of course, means he is. He has learned humility and honor, courage and true nobility. He has begun to shed his awkwardness and uncertainty.
So, when it comes time to address the Narnians in the end, he is more their King. And he is deeply saddened at the Pevensies' leaving, and gracefully, kindly, nobly tells Peter, upon accepting Rhindon, that he will 'keep it safe till you return.' In passing Rhindon on to Caspian (which was by no means an easy act for Peter), Peter imparts his strength and wisdom to Caspian. Etc...
So, this is one of many, MANY reasons I look forward to seeing VDT -- seeing Caspian now as true King of Narnia, considering himself no longer Telmarine, but Narnian, and well, being a King. In every sense of the word. He will have grown into the role (after 3 years, of course!)... become more fully himself.
Both Peter's journey (as Saira so lovely and eloquently described) and Caspian's are a joy to watch, for I, at least, feel as if I journey with them, as if I, too, grow and change with them. As if I am transformed as they are transformed.
Last edited:
Fifth Pevensie
New member
Thank you, daughter of Ramandu and NarnianofGryffindor, for appreciating my point despite its length! I feel better now about not having deleted last night's ramble.
Rachel, that was a lovely post about Caspian. I agree with everything you said and what a beautiful way to describe Caspian's kingliest moment (sparing Miraz's life)!
I found it interesting that you brought up the Pevensies' unspoken suspicion of Caspian's Telmarine ancestry. Well, of course not "unspoken" on Peter's part.
But I think that essential disparity between the known commodity of great Narnian rulers and the unproven addition of a wayward Telmarine heir is one of the few things that gives credence to the onscreen conflict btwn the two. Caspian, over the course of the movie, has not only to learn how to be a king of Narnians but also prove it.
Another interesting aspect in comparing these two kings is the end scene, as you've mentioned. I've always wondered why the Pevensies couldn't just stay and be the rulers Narnia needed -again- since they still have their youth and played a critical part in securing the peace. The movie -or maybe just my increased age - really emphasized the sense that the Pevensies' time was done and it was now the moment for a new solution.
I disagree with the notion that the Pevensies (i.e. Peter) were diminished for the sake of Caspian's greatness. Rather, I think there's a theme of the constant renewal in Narnia. New kings and queens, new friends, new servants of Aslan's will, while the old heroes have already made their contributions and retreat to wait their return (via corporal or spiritual).
For PC, Caspian -by the end of the film- is the right man to be King not IMO by being kinglier/greater/whatnot but for being of his time and of his people. The Pevensies do not belong in this more savage Narnia, centuries after their rule; the new land peopled with Telmarines and Narnians is best served by the mixing of both cultures, a Narnian-taught Telmarine. The Pevensies are friends to the Narnians still and will come whenever Aslan calls but Narnia has changed, as the world must ever change, and as time must always pass. JMHO.
I am also very excited for VotDT! In both the PC book and movie, my feelings for Caspian are lukewarm but end on a high note. In VotDT, I enjoy his character much more as he is a wonderful, well-established king. I am sure that Ben can pull it off.
Once that movie is made, the discussion will be interesting in trying to rank Caspian and Peter. Peter is High King but a thing of the past (not to return to Narnia). Caspian is a King that spawns a true-bred dynasty of kings. Also interesting to note, Peter spent his period of rule sharing reign with his three siblings. Caspian rules with singular power. So, although I believe Peter is the better king now, I'm not sure how it goes overall.
The best answer I suppose is that they both serve to glorify Aslan and protect their people. No personal glory or rankings are required. It all goes back to Aslan and his wisdom in choosing his servants.
Rachel, that was a lovely post about Caspian. I agree with everything you said and what a beautiful way to describe Caspian's kingliest moment (sparing Miraz's life)!
I found it interesting that you brought up the Pevensies' unspoken suspicion of Caspian's Telmarine ancestry. Well, of course not "unspoken" on Peter's part.
But I think that essential disparity between the known commodity of great Narnian rulers and the unproven addition of a wayward Telmarine heir is one of the few things that gives credence to the onscreen conflict btwn the two. Caspian, over the course of the movie, has not only to learn how to be a king of Narnians but also prove it.Another interesting aspect in comparing these two kings is the end scene, as you've mentioned. I've always wondered why the Pevensies couldn't just stay and be the rulers Narnia needed -again- since they still have their youth and played a critical part in securing the peace. The movie -or maybe just my increased age
- really emphasized the sense that the Pevensies' time was done and it was now the moment for a new solution.I disagree with the notion that the Pevensies (i.e. Peter) were diminished for the sake of Caspian's greatness. Rather, I think there's a theme of the constant renewal in Narnia. New kings and queens, new friends, new servants of Aslan's will, while the old heroes have already made their contributions and retreat to wait their return (via corporal or spiritual).
For PC, Caspian -by the end of the film- is the right man to be King not IMO by being kinglier/greater/whatnot but for being of his time and of his people. The Pevensies do not belong in this more savage Narnia, centuries after their rule; the new land peopled with Telmarines and Narnians is best served by the mixing of both cultures, a Narnian-taught Telmarine. The Pevensies are friends to the Narnians still and will come whenever Aslan calls but Narnia has changed, as the world must ever change, and as time must always pass. JMHO.
I am also very excited for VotDT! In both the PC book and movie, my feelings for Caspian are lukewarm but end on a high note. In VotDT, I enjoy his character much more as he is a wonderful, well-established king.
I am sure that Ben can pull it off.Once that movie is made, the discussion will be interesting in trying to rank Caspian and Peter. Peter is High King but a thing of the past (not to return to Narnia). Caspian is a King that spawns a true-bred dynasty of kings. Also interesting to note, Peter spent his period of rule sharing reign with his three siblings. Caspian rules with singular power.
So, although I believe Peter is the better king now, I'm not sure how it goes overall.The best answer I suppose is that they both serve to glorify Aslan and protect their people. No personal glory or rankings are required. It all goes back to Aslan and his wisdom in choosing his servants.
Lady of the Lion's Mane
New member
^well said!
Yes, although Peter is High King over all other Kings of Narnia. (excluding Aslan, High King over all High Kings.) I wonder, does that stretch back into the past? Including Frank and Helen and their kids? Hm... Or just those that came after Peter? (and during, including his siblings)
Hm...
but I agree with what you said!
(and on Caspian's kingliest moment...the tears in his eyes and deep passion, his anger and pain. But also the hope that he can rise above the bloodthirst of his race, his determination to not sink as low as Miraz...always make me want to cry and kiss him. kiss as in..."thank you"... not anything else. 
)
(btw...how old are you? you seem young to me. as you said "my increased age," I was just wondering. )
Yes, although Peter is High King over all other Kings of Narnia. (excluding Aslan, High King over all High Kings.) I wonder, does that stretch back into the past? Including Frank and Helen and their kids? Hm... Or just those that came after Peter? (and during, including his siblings)
Hm...
but I agree with what you said!
(and on Caspian's kingliest moment...the tears in his eyes and deep passion, his anger and pain. But also the hope that he can rise above the bloodthirst of his race, his determination to not sink as low as Miraz...always make me want to cry and kiss him.
kiss as in..."thank you"... not anything else. )(btw...how old are you? you seem young to me. as you said "my increased age," I was just wondering.
)
Last edited:
Lady of the Lion's Mane and Fifth Pevensie: Those are well thought-out and highly convincing posts. However, I disagree with you. None of that was intended for either Peter, Caspian, Lucy, Aslan, etc. in the book.
marshwigglewigwams
New member
true, BarbarianKing. we can all voice out how we feel about each character in the movie, but in the end, what prevails will be the characteristics of each as presented by C.S. Lewis in his books.
Fifth Pevensie
New member
Yes, although Peter is High King over all other Kings of Narnia. (excluding Aslan, High King over all High Kings.) I wonder, does that stretch back into the past? Including Frank and Helen and their kids? Hm... Or just those that came after Peter? (and during, including his siblings)
Hm...
but I agree with what you said!
(and on Caspian's kingliest moment...the tears in his eyes and deep passion, his anger and pain. But also the hope that he can rise above the bloodthirst of his race, his determination to not sink as low as Miraz...always make me want to cry and kiss him. kiss as in..."thank you"... not anything else.
(btw...how old are you? you seem young to me. as you said "my increased age," I was just wondering. )
Yes, I wonder too about Peter a bit. I can't think he's a comprehensive High King since he had nothing to do with past times. He didn't serve Aslan and Narnia until his kingship; and it makes sense that he is still High King after Caspian since he's the one who helped him onto the throne. And because by having a (however token) true-blue Narnian King over him, I think Caspian's Telmarine birthright to the throne is strengthened in Narnian ways.
But realistically Peter isn't exactly monitoring Caspian's doings and stepping in in any way. So, I shall try not to be such a loud pro-Peter activist once VotDT comes around.
Especially as all the qualities I so much admired in Peter are nicely maintained in the book by Caspian and Ed; I feel the lack less keenly than as a kid --which may mean I'm moving beyond "brand names"!And I really do love how you've described Caspian's great moment. William most vexingly continues to steal the scenes for me while I'm watching in theatres! So that while I'm registering what's happening with Caspian (the close-up shots et al) emotionally I'm stuck on Peter's journey or Lucy's and Susan's -- the other Pevensies faring dramatically better than non-Pevensies.
I'm just a little fixated on that amazing family!p.s. ahem! re: age, I am very close to a quarter of a century!
And I last read the books and watched BBC (since before this year) when I was about eight, so... big jump in age and a rather slower change in perspective. I can't help but cling to a lot of my first impressions --thus Lucy is still the closest in perspective to me than being a little kiddiwums and Peter is still the wonderful Big Brother etc., rather than being an annoying or cool teenage kid. lol
Fifth Pevensie
New member
Sorry for the double-post but I had too much images etc.!
Thank you, BarbarianKing! As a much-respected frequent adversary of these Peter skirmishes
, it does mean a great deal to me to have you give credit to our arguments rather than dismissing it as so much silly talk. I'm glad we can continue to agree to disagree and post accordingly! lol
Yes, it is nice how we can have an open dialogue without offending anyone! And we can either see the characters in a literal sense for the film or an interpretative sense. It'd be nicer IMO to have the literal characters (which is why I own the books) but I'm content to have interpretative versions running about in the films --of which I can't wait to own PC on DVD! My poor LWW DVD is being endlessly played these days.
Thank you, BarbarianKing! As a much-respected frequent adversary of these Peter skirmishes
, it does mean a great deal to me to have you give credit to our arguments rather than dismissing it as so much silly talk. I'm glad we can continue to agree to disagree and post accordingly! loltrue, BarbarianKing. we can all voice out how we feel about each character in the movie, but in the end, what prevails will be the characteristics of each as presented by C.S. Lewis in his books.
Yes, it is nice how we can have an open dialogue without offending anyone!
And we can either see the characters in a literal sense for the film or an interpretative sense. It'd be nicer IMO to have the literal characters (which is why I own the books) but I'm content to have interpretative versions running about in the films --of which I can't wait to own PC on DVD! My poor LWW DVD is being endlessly played these days.
marshwigglewigwams
New member
Yes, it is nice how we can have an open dialogue without offending anyone!
yes, of course, fifth pevensie, things must be done without offending one another..
we have the right to our own opinions..
Lady of the Lion's Mane
New member
Saira: Agreeing with you on it being nice to discuss without offending anyone, per se...
on your age: so you're almost 25? That's not old, by any stretch of the imagination. You are young, then, indeed. You sound like you think you're some old geezer, and you're not!
on your age: so you're almost 25?
That's not old, by any stretch of the imagination. You are young, then, indeed. You sound like you think you're some old geezer, and you're not!
Thank you, BarbarianKing! As a much-respected frequent adversary of these Peter skirmishes
You're welcome. I am glad we can discuss anything here with honor and respect. The values we all leaned from God and strenghtened in the writings of CS Lewis.
Fifth Pevensie
New member
^Lovely.
I hope no one minds then if I continue on in a vein of friendly argument. There's more I want to say about the importance of Peter's leadership in this film --however, now is not the time, I see, as it's quite late.
I hope no one minds then if I continue on in a vein of friendly argument. There's more I want to say about the importance of Peter's leadership in this film --however, now is not the time, I see, as it's quite late.
^Lovely.
I hope no one minds then if I continue on in a vein of friendly argument. There's more I want to say about the importance of Peter's leadership in this film --however, now is not the time, I see, as it's quite late.
Go ahead, but I don't think I will be posting anymore about what I think of the movie. I am feeling exhausted about this whole deal, and the more I discuss it, the worse the film seems to me and the angrier I get at the film makers. I really blame no one but myself for expecting to see something good come out of Disney for once (boy was I crazy!) and for actually fantasizing that they would do something for honorable reasons and were not solely out to make $$.
I will lower my expectations for VODT and remind myself that this movie thing is really business and nothing else. I am not even looking forward to the DVD and cancelled my order for the movie companion book. From now on, only CS Lewis, and nothing else in regards to Narnia.
Ah, sweetie, don't get discouraged. I have high hopes for VDT, especially with the new director! And don't be so hard on Disney. It is a business, of course, but they have made a lot of really good films for little kids ...
OK, back to Peter v. Caspian ... in the film, Caspia wins hands down. In the book, no such conflict can or would exist.
OK, back to Peter v. Caspian ... in the film, Caspia wins hands down. In the book, no such conflict can or would exist.