Where the film improved on the book (spoilers)

Oh, definitely. I missed those bits with Gumpas as well....and did you know, we never hear either Pug or Gumpas actually named in the movie? That bugged me.
 
I think that slinky Middle-eastern looking guy whom Eustace knocked into the water was supposed to be Pug, but you're right, he was never named.
 
He was actually Gumpas; the one that held EUstace hostage was Pug. I only know that because back when Gumpas was cast, there was a photo of him in character standing on those steps by the boats. But I felt it was an injustice not to name them...especially since there was nothing else done with them!
 
Really? Wow - that was an inversion of characters. I felt sure that guy who got knocked in the water was the chief slave trader, who would've been Pug. Oh, well - the Narrowhaven scene had almost no relation to the incident in the book, so it's not like there was much lost there. In a way, I'd rather have them do something so different that it's unrecognizable than do a half-baked job.
 
Reepicheep's relationship with Eustace, and it's development, is even better in the film than in the book, I think.

I love Reep on the head of Eustace/ the dragon, before fighting the sea serpent! That's a brilliant addition.
 
Liz said:
Reepicheep's relationship with Eustace, and it's development, is even better in the film than in the book, I think.

I love Reep on the head of Eustace/ the dragon, before fighting the sea serpent! That's a brilliant addition.
Click to expand...
Yes, indeed! :) Much of the movie made me emotional, although I only really cried at the end, and a little bit during the scene where Lucy calls on Aslan. This was another one of those scenes that almost made me teary, just because I was so happy that the filmmakers got it right! :D
 
Despite the changes they made to the scene, I thought they did the undragoning with Aslan and Eustace in extremely good taste. No offense to anyone here, but to some people in today's world, if they did it letter for letter from the book, it could have come across as awkward if they didn't understand what that scene was really about. I really like how they did it in the movie - it made Aslan appear more mystical and powerful than he first looks - he is the god of Narnia, after all.
 
PrinceOfTheWest said:
Really? Wow - that was an inversion of characters. I felt sure that guy who got knocked in the water was the chief slave trader, who would've been Pug. Oh, well - the Narrowhaven scene had almost no relation to the incident in the book, so it's not like there was much lost there. In a way, I'd rather have them do something so different that it's unrecognizable than do a half-baked job.
Click to expand...

Lol, it's okay because I wouldn't have known it without seeing that picture! :)

Liz, I think they really did improve on the Reepicheep/Eustace relationship. I teared up both times when Reepicheep went over to Eustace.
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
Liz, I think they really did improve on the Reepicheep/Eustace relationship. I teared up both times when Reepicheep went over to Eustace.
Click to expand...

I love what Reep says to Eustace at the end: What a magnificent puzzle you are and a true hero. ...etc.
It's so sweet. :)

The development of their relationship is one of the most interesting aspects in the film, in my view.
 
Back
Top