Why does everyone hate this movie merged with worst change

What was the worst change from the book in your opinion?

  • Interlacing the Caspian sequences between the Pevensie sequences

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • Aslan's first introduction

    Votes: 9 6.2%

  • The addition of the raid of Miraz's castle

    Votes: 9 6.2%

  • Peter's added cockiness and arrogance

    Votes: 50 34.5%

  • Susan's romantic affair with Caspian

    Votes: 49 33.8%

  • Caspian's age

    Votes: 3 2.1%

  • Something else

    Votes: 7 4.8%

  • They were all good

    Votes: 17 11.7%
  • Total voters
    145
I understand you guys feelings, I guess the only reason I was able to get past it was that I knew it was going to happened and in my mind had conjoured up images of stuff much worse than the Peter who was in the movie, thus, I was pleased that they had not dragged it through the mud to the extent that I thought. I am not surprised about it. I know that movie-makers seem to not be able to pull themselves out of the modern era.
 
Wow...I was certain that everyone wouldn't like the change I saw...SUSAN FALLING FOR CASPIAN!! I mean come on...I know she...oh wait, don't want to spoil the last movie :D. But seriously? Kissing Prince Caspian? That's really pushing it.
 
Lord of Light said:
Oh, and one other thing...basically the only thing that stuck to the book was Edmund leaving his "torch" in Narnia. :D
Click to expand...

Indeed there was much that was changed. But I was very pleased with Lucy in this one. I think she was my favorite character for the movie. She was the only one (out of the Pevensies, Caspian and company) that was portrayed correctly in this film. However I laughed when I caught the bugly bear sucking his paw in the background of a battle scene. :D
 
Yes, actually, Lucy was well done. Georgie deserves a lot of credit for that. I loved her smile on the bridge, which was saying, "Just TRY to hurt me when Aslan's beside me, suckers!"
 
haha...the part that i really wanted to see that they didn't put in was the whole thing with Caspian's Nanny and the school girls seeing Aslan....
 
:(

shocks! i haven't seen the movie myself but i heard of it from friends and i was really disappointed. but still, i thought it would still be ok to watch it myself. and yet from reading through this thread i think i'm already too disappointed to do so. especially about the stuff about Peter and the romance thing between susan and caspian! aagh! :mad: i wonder if it would still be wise to watch the movie.. what do you guys think? :confused:
 
Go to it once, just for the sake of preserving the series. But they will lose me for good if they do what I anticipate them doing at the end of a "Dawn Treader" movie: having Aslan say to Lucy and Edmund, "There I am known by MANY names."
 
I think it's probably a bad idea to get me started on all the things I was mad about in the movie that they changed. :p First of all let me say that I think it was a very good movie but only if you separate it from the book. I will only name the things I was most unhappy about so I don't get boring or annoying. ;) .

#1. Aslan's talk with Lucy: It wasn't really there. I was especially upset when he is telling her she did wrong by not following him even when the others didn't see him. In the book he made sure she knew she did wrong and when she realized she started crying because she felt so bad and realized her mistake. In the movie their conversation went like this (practically, at least that's the way it felt) "You should have followed me, Lucy" "Oh, I'm sorry, Aslan!" "Oh that's alright, no harm done!" Since Lucy had always been the good little girl she needed to know when she does wrong. She had to remember she wasn't perfect.

#2. Caspian and Susan's horn: Why the blazes did he blow the horn at the part he did in the movie?! He really did it for no good reason. #3 has to do with this one, so I will just mention it now. I was really upset that Caspian didn't believe in Old Narnia! In the book that was part of what made him a special character; he believed in something he couldn't see (which is what we all have to do with our faith) and believed in it so strongly! He only said "I'd heard the stories but never really believed they were true". What's with that? He would have known that the horn was very special and I thought it made him a wimp to have him blow it so early when he wasn't in huge dire need. Now I understand they wanted to have the Pevensie's in it, but I still think it was really silly. Caspian in the book would have known and believed in what he was doing.

Okay, so enough of my rambling. The above are the things that made me most angry. But like I said if I separate it from the book it was a pretty good movie. Did anyone else have these problems?
 
I agree with you on all counts. The reason they had him blow the horn at that moment, though, was to get the action started and get the Pevensies into the film as early as possible.
 
LadyAnneOfNarnia said:
I think it's probably a bad idea to get me started on all the things I was mad about in the movie that they changed. :p First of all let me say that I think it was a very good movie but only if you separate it from the book. I will only name the things I was most unhappy about so I don't get boring or annoying. ;) .

#1. Aslan's talk with Lucy: It wasn't really there. I was especially upset when he is telling her she did wrong by not following him even when the others didn't see him. In the book he made sure she knew she did wrong and when she realized she started crying because she felt so bad and realized her mistake. In the movie their conversation went like this (practically, at least that's the way it felt) "You should have followed me, Lucy" "Oh, I'm sorry, Aslan!" "Oh that's alright, no harm done!" Since Lucy had always been the good little girl she needed to know when she does wrong. She had to remember she wasn't perfect.

#2. Caspian and Susan's horn: Why the blazes did he blow the horn at the part he did in the movie?! He really did it for no good reason. #3 has to do with this one, so I will just mention it now. I was really upset that Caspian didn't believe in Old Narnia! In the book that was part of what made him a special character; he believed in something he couldn't see (which is what we all have to do with our faith) and believed in it so strongly! He only said "I'd heard the stories but never really believed they were true". What's with that? He would have known that the horn was very special and I thought it made him a wimp to have him blow it so early when he wasn't in huge dire need. Now I understand they wanted to have the Pevensie's in it, but I still think it was really silly. Caspian in the book would have known and believed in what he was doing.

Okay, so enough of my rambling. The above are the things that made me most angry. But like I said if I separate it from the book it was a pretty good movie. Did anyone else have these problems?
Click to expand...

I agree with you. This Caspian was nothing like the Caspian in the book. Just like their (movie) Peter.

marshwigglewigwams said:
what do you anticipate, copperfox? :)
Click to expand...

He just said it.
 
I loved this movie - I have seen it three times already and plan to see it several more.

As to changes from the book, the things that stood out to me the most were Caspian's age/maturity level and the romantic angle between him and Susan...but I was most irked by the romantic angle. I can adore the scene if I set aside what I know happened in the book, but taking into account the books as a whole? They aren't about romance, and the movie would have still been wonderful without that little twist.

EDIT: I've been reading through a few of the movie threads here and there today, and had pointed out for me exactly how different Peter's character was from book to movie...I have to agree that he was wildly out-of-character from the books. *sulks*
 
Last edited:
I think that everything was pretty good. The Miraz castle raid added to the tension of Peter and Caspian, and I still am adamant that CS Lewis let go too much of young adulthood by excluding any romances in his novels, even though they are meant for kids. Also, I still think that Peter's "arrogance" and whatnot was good, because he's an angsty teen who's trying to keep his family alive both in London and in Narnia. Then he reigns Narnia for 15 years, returns to London for a year where he's a regular kid, and then goes back to Narnia only to discover nothing is as it was. He has every reason to be angsty and I liked how they played it.
 
QueenSusanofNarnia said:
I think that everything was pretty good. The Miraz castle raid added to the tension of Peter and Caspian, and I still am adamant that CS Lewis let go too much of young adulthood by excluding any romances in his novels, even though they are meant for kids. Also, I still think that Peter's "arrogance" and whatnot was good, because he's an angsty teen who's trying to keep his family alive both in London and in Narnia. Then he reigns Narnia for 15 years, returns to London for a year where he's a regular kid, and then goes back to Narnia only to discover nothing is as it was. He has every reason to be angsty and I liked how they played it.
Click to expand...

yes, but it not the Prince Caspian story as told by the one who really knows (C.S. Lewis). It was the Narnia that the movie-makers wanted. :(
 
Back
Top