Very true. Why does everyone suppose it is realistic that Peter would turn to a complete baby by being sent home and back from Narnia, while Lucy should handle it all with complete maturity and joy? It wasn't a bit realistic that someone over whom Aslan prophesied "Once a king in Narnia, always a king in Narnia" would become a bratty little boy as soon as he returned to Narnia ...AW said:
Actually - perhaps I am showing my ignorance or lack of general observation skills - until this thread, I had thought Ben was about 18/19 - still older than book-Caspian, but then the Pevensies are older than book-Pevensies as well.Animus Wyrmis said:
Book-Caspian is dependent on his counsellors for decisions, especially Dr Cornelius, Glenstorm and Trufflehunter, and then Peter when he arrives. He has no great plan, and doesn't seem a particularly effective leader. Film-Caspian shows some political skill in winning over a hostile audience, and seems fairly handy with a sword - he beats Peter. He also knows enough about the traditions of Telmarine kingship to suggest the single combat. (I was never quite clear why he didn't fight it himself in the film, though. Was it because Prunaprismia had shot him in the arm?)
Since I have agreed with you that the change in Peter's character was a bad change, I'm not going to argue on this point. However, recall that Edmund is not slow to get into the fight at the railway station either, though. Also the others would have been less the decision-makers than Peter, so might have felt the change back to childhood a bit less than he did. But I agree that there are a number of points in the film that strain plausibility somewhat, as there are in the book.
When I watched I was sort of under the impression that he suggested it as a win-win: either Peter or Miraz would die, and Caspian could go on to win the battle. In the book it's clearly because Caspian can't do it (although Peter dresses it up as being incorrect, since they're fighting for Caspian, and it is true that it's the place of the High King), but Peter and Caspian seem sort of evenly matched here, so...who knows. It served to make him look something of a coward unfortunately.
I am not sure I agree with this. I don't think there's enough evidence to suggest in the movies that Peter pulled all the strings, and in the books it's clear from HHB that the other three had plenty of authority to deal with foreign policy, marriage contracts, and dealing with the army. It seems like the moviemakers simply forgot that their other characters ought to feel it just as keenly (even if we admit that Peter had more decision-making then, he has more now, so it should even out).
Yes, I agree. I even own the PC DVD; I like the film.
He didn't say "tales about Aslan," he said tales of Aslan, which is slightly different.
Now back to the film bashing ...
I think the movie was good, as good as the book actually!
Changes to characters, I agree (except Susan - she needed to be made more exciting); but the plot I do think needed to change.MrBob said:
It is referred to in the film; we just don't see it explicitly because of when the film begins. Sopespian does say, "Ever since the death of Caspian IX, you have behaved as if you were king," and the lords say to each other, "Are we going to wait until every seat in this chamber is empty?"
