You know its easy to criticize movie Peter when watching the film but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the way, was the :p meant to be sarcastic or happy?

Happy!! Im sorry if it came off as being sarcastic. :p

so why was Peter the only one affected? What about Lucy? She went from Queen, occasional leader in battles, front line nurse, and the person whom many princes admired to be their queen to a preteen girl who can't even stay up as late as she wants.

Edmund went through a similar transformation, from King and leader in battles to a preteen (or early teen) boy who didn't have much of a say in his own life. Susan went through the same things so why should Peter be the one who is affected? Because he was the High King? That isn't as impressive as what his siblings dealth with, which were vitrually the same things.

That is a really good point. Peter had no right to act the way he did, and honestly, with that in mind, it does not make sense...
 
"I think it would have been harder on him than the rest of you are expecting because he had been back in our world for a year before he was braught back to Narnia. When in our world, he obviously had trouble adjusting back to living as a kid, and he really didn't like the lack of respect he was getting from people. Honestly, wouldn't it feel like quite a shock after being a king for decades, and suddenly everybody acts like you're just another random person?"

Sir Tom, so why was Peter the only one affected? What about Lucy? She went from Queen, occasional leader in battles, front line nurse, and the person whom many princes admired to be their queen to a preteen girl who can't even stay up as late as she wants.

Edmund went through a similar transformation, from King and leader in battles to a preteen (or early teen) boy who didn't have much of a say in his own life. Susan went through the same things so why should Peter be the one who is affected? Because he was the High King? That isn't as impressive as what his siblings dealth with, which were vitrually the same things.
MrBob

For one thing, Peter had much more of a responsibility to take care of everyone else. For another, in the movie Peter seemed like he missed Narnia a bit more than everyone else. As for his temper, that kind of goes with being a war veteran. Great veterans who are that passionate about a war effort tend to have a short temper on many issues having anything to do with the war, regardless of how old they are. I know a bit about this because I know a lot of people who have been in the military and other such combative fields. It's really no where as easy as you might think.
 
Okay so I only got to page 7 in all this so if what I'm about to say has already been said I'm sorry.
I think that the reason that people didn't like the Peter/Caspian stuff is that their characters were not even close to the characters that Lewis wrote. Peter did see stuck up wanting to be in charge and at the beginning of the movie he complains about how he used to be a King and now he isn't and he isn't getting the respect he thinks he deserves. With that whining about not being King shows he wants to be a King again. This is NOT what the book describes. Peter tells Caspian that they are not there to take his palce but to put him in it. That is not what I got from the movie. Also Caspian was more "take charge" in the movie then what I got from the book and he had no respect for Peter when he first got there in the movie when in the book he did. There was no "fight" over control of the army in the book but there is that conflict in the movie.

In the end I think ther reason that the focus is on Peter and Caspian in the movie is beause their characters are so far from what Lewis wrote.

Again, sorry if this has already been said. :o
 
Lava said:
Inky, if a person my age can relate to you and agree 100% then you can rest assured that us younger people are not going to somewhere in a hand basket.
Oh, sorry, I did not mean my comment to come off that way! Of course anyone with judgment and maturity can put themselves in the place of an ancient person like me and understand what I mean ... :p Thank you.
Great veterans who are that passionate about a war effort tend to have a short temper on many issues having anything to do with the war, regardless of how old they are. I know a bit about this because I know a lot of people who have been in the military and other such combative fields. It's really no where as easy as you might think.
No one said it was easy, and I know old soldiers as crusty as day-old bread myself, but what I know about leaders of those old soldiers is: as angry as they might get and as exasperated as they might be, they don't fly off the handle in front of their inferiors and blame them for the problems. They man-up and take responsibility in front of the troops. Later they may dress down someone they think has failed them in private, but to publicly blame Caspian the way Peter did was immature and not the action of a seasoned veteran at all.
I think that the reason that people didn't like the Peter/Caspian stuff is that their characters were not even close to the characters that Lewis wrote. Peter did see stuck up wanting to be in charge and at the beginning of the movie he complains about how he used to be a King and now he isn't and he isn't getting the respect he thinks he deserves. With that whining about not being King shows he wants to be a King again. This is NOT what the book describes. Peter tells Caspian that they are not there to take his palce but to put him in it. That is not what I got from the movie. Also Caspian was more "take charge" in the movie then what I got from the book and he had no respect for Peter when he first got there in the movie when in the book he did. There was no "fight" over control of the army in the book but there is that conflict in the movie.
Yes, correct. This is why many book fans did not like PC movie, because it pitted Caspian and Peter against one another, and made Peter behave like a spoiled brat rather than the high king. Did you think this was a good change to the book or a poor one, Wylla?

In the end I think ther reason that the focus is on Peter and Caspian in the movie is beause their characters are so far from what Lewis wrote.

Again, sorry if this has already been said. :o[/QUOTE]
 
Oh, sorry, I did not mean my comment to come off that way! Of course anyone with judgment and maturity can put themselves in the place of an ancient person like me and understand what I mean ... :p Thank you.

It did not come off like that I am sorry if my reply made it sound like I thought it sounded like that. I was trying not to call you old and was really tired and could not think. Two straight nine hour work days kind of does that to me. You are not ancient and I am not quite as young as some of the other people on here.
I think like Lewis said (HHB where they are talking about how Rabadash was raised), it comes down to how someone is raised. I was raised in a house where that type of temper tantrum (where Peter blamed everyone but himself) was unacceptable after the age of three. My parents used many of the same techniques that their parents had so I was raised in a house that used techniques that would have been used in an American 1940's and 50's household. The Brittish households were ever so much more proper and less tolerant of ill behaved children. The Brittish upper middle class of the 1940's sent their children to finishing schools. On top of that, the Pevensies were war era children who had to grow up quickly even without the trip to Narnia. We 21st century children and even those of us who grew up in the 90's are so completely different and sheltered from real life that projecting our values and reactions onto a child from that era is a travesty. Like I have said before could you imagine your grandparents behaving like a modern teen if they were to suddenly find themselves back at the age of 15 nowadays.

No one said it was easy, and I know old soldiers as crusty as day-old bread myself, but what I know about leaders of those old soldiers is: as angry as they might get and as exasperated as they might be, they don't fly off the handle in front of their inferiors and blame them for the problems. They man-up and take responsibility in front of the troops. Later they may dress down someone they think has failed them in private, but to publicly blame Caspian the way Peter did was immature and not the action of a seasoned veteran at all.
Again I agree 100% and would go on to add that my grandparents were veterans of WWII and while yes my grandmother had a temper and it was not fun to behold she would have never ever ever done what Peter did. Nor would my grandfather. They both were involved in battles. They both saw horrible things and they both knew when they were wrong and while they would not necessarily always apologize they definitely never blamed someone else for their decisions either.

To elaborate of Wylla's comment, not only did Caspian and Peter not have a power struggle but also Peter did take full charge in the book. He automatically was recognized as the leader. Making them have a power struggle cheapened Caspian's character and his respect for Peter. The minute Peter was acknowledged as being Peter by the rest of the Narnians (Trumpkin excluded) he was automatically in charge. Caspian asked questions but he deferred to Peter because Peter was High King. Peter did not come to take Caspian's place, no, it was Peter's right and duty to command the efforts to put Caspian into his throne. Peter was High King over all Narnian Kings second only to Aslan. It was Peter's duty to see that all of his subjects, royalty or not got a fair shake. That makes it Peter's God-given duty to do everything in his power to put Caspian on his throne. He is not there to take Caspian's throne but Caspian is still his subject because Peter is THE High King.
 
Last edited:
Oh, sorry, I did not mean my comment to come off that way! Of course anyone with judgment and maturity can put themselves in the place of an ancient person like me and understand what I mean ... :p Thank you.

No one said it was easy, and I know old soldiers as crusty as day-old bread myself, but what I know about leaders of those old soldiers is: as angry as they might get and as exasperated as they might be, they don't fly off the handle in front of their inferiors and blame them for the problems. They man-up and take responsibility in front of the troops. Later they may dress down someone they think has failed them in private, but to publicly blame Caspian the way Peter did was immature and not the action of a seasoned veteran at all.

Yes, correct. This is why many book fans did not like PC movie, because it pitted Caspian and Peter against one another, and made Peter behave like a spoiled brat rather than the high king. Did you think this was a good change to the book or a poor one, Wylla?

In the end I think ther reason that the focus is on Peter and Caspian in the movie is beause their characters are so far from what Lewis wrote.

Again, sorry if this has already been said. :o
You know, you're actually very right. I'll admit that it was not a good change to have Peter behave the way he did, but still I won't let it ruin the movie for me. If you put these things aside, the story is still good, and Peter is still a hero.
 
To elaborate of Wylla's comment, not only did Caspian and Peter not have a power struggle but also Peter did take full charge in the book. He automatically was recognized as the leader. Making them have a power struggle cheapened Caspian's character and his respect for Peter. The minute Peter was acknowledged as being Peter by the rest of the Narnians (Trumpkin excluded) he was automatically in charge. Caspian asked questions but he deferred to Peter because Peter was High King. Peter did not come to take Caspian's place, no, it was Peter's right and duty to command the efforts to put Caspian into his throne. Peter was High King over all Narnian Kings second only to Aslan. It was Peter's duty to see that all of his subjects, royalty or not got a fair shake. That makes it Peter's God-given duty to do everything in his power to put Caspian on his throne. He is not there to take Caspian's throne but Caspian is still his subject because Peter is THE High King.

YES!!! That is really good, Lava!! I agree with you totally!! Especially the last few sentences. Peter was High King, and Caspian would always be his subject, like Edmund stated in the VDT book when he says "I'm no subject of yours. If anything, its the other way round. You are subject to my brother, the HIGh King." Now, Ed did say that at Deathwater, but he was SPOT ON. No matter who Caspian was, Peter was higher than him, so they should not have had the power struggle. I loved when, in the book, Peter said "I haven't come to take your place, you know, but to put you into it." It was how MoviePeter should have started out behaving when he first got into Narnia. It seems like that is how he was acting, but he still had the "I want to be in control" sort of attitude. It was not as prominent as I originally believed though.

I agree with you that the power struggle cheapened Caspian, it sort of changed him almost more than Peter was changed, because in my opinion, Peter was provoked. When he and Caspian got into the fight when they first met eachother, Caspian attacked Peter, and he did have good reason to do so, but Peter was just responding to a threat, especially because his sister was right behind him and he had to protect her. Second, Caspian messed up the Castle Raid, and while I think Peter was not smart to not listen to Caspian when Caspian said that no one had taken the Castle, it was still Caspian's fault that it went wrong. Third, when they started arguing after the Raid, Peter provoked Caspian, but Caspian pulled his sword first. Again, Peter was responding to a threat. Finally, the witch almost coming back was Caspian's fault, yet again. He could have easily stopped the werewolf and hag from doing the whole sorcery thing, and in the book was willing to do so! In the movie, however, he wanted anything that would kill Miraz. He wanted revenge, and had a very selfish attitude because of that. Peter was trying to stop the White Witch from coming back, but stepped into a circle that he probably did not see. Because of Caspian's mistake, Peter almost falls himself! In all, I feel that Caspian provoked Peter and sort of caused some of Peter's mistakes.

But I still feel that the whole thing between Peter and Caspian was totally unnecessary. The Susan and Caspian thing sort of pointed to her change and eventual disbelief, which is why I liked that, sort of. I thought that was a little cheesy, but I love the humor it added to the movie, especially when watching the commentary. :p
 
Yes, the Susaspian thing did have a purpose. But I don't like that kind of humor. It makes me gag.

It was some of the comments they made, like Lucy's " 'You might need to call me again'?!?!" I just love that line, and it was the Susaspian thing that created that comment. Also in the training the archers scene that was cut out, when they are talking and he is like "are you sure that is not an acorn?" and susan said "To far for you?" That was the stuff that made me laugh..
 
Suspian was so flat (story wise )the first time I saw it in theaters the kiss came out of no where. I was like "WHAT!?!?!"
SAME HERE! But watching it again, I can catch all of the nuances, and get sick. Don't get me wrong- I'm not opposed to romance, but teenage drama stuff is just lame. And if a movie HAS to have a romance, it can at least do it well. -.-
 
agreed. Suspian was sort of odd, especially with the kiss at the end. That was weird, and it always makes my brother and I awkward.. :p Those sort of things in movies that i love make me awkward. lol.
 
Yes, correct. This is why many book fans did not like PC movie, because it pitted Caspian and Peter against one another, and made Peter behave like a spoiled brat rather than the high king. Did you think this was a good change to the book or a poor one, Wylla?

I didn't like the change. I have always liked the character of Peter and the movie ruins what Lewis wrote. Also, I thought the Susan/Caspian stuff was pointless, besides pointing more to Susan's rejection of Narnia. Which they did do without having to put the romance into it.


To elaborate of Wylla's comment, not only did Caspian and Peter not have a power struggle but also Peter did take full charge in the book. He automatically was recognized as the leader. Making them have a power struggle cheapened Caspian's character and his respect for Peter. The minute Peter was acknowledged as being Peter by the rest of the Narnians (Trumpkin excluded) he was automatically in charge. Caspian asked questions but he deferred to Peter because Peter was High King. Peter did not come to take Caspian's place, no, it was Peter's right and duty to command the efforts to put Caspian into his throne. Peter was High King over all Narnian Kings second only to Aslan. It was Peter's duty to see that all of his subjects, royalty or not got a fair shake. That makes it Peter's God-given duty to do everything in his power to put Caspian on his throne. He is not there to take Caspian's throne but Caspian is still his subject because Peter is THE High King.

EXACTLY!!! Thank you for elaborating!


But I still feel that the whole thing between Peter and Caspian was totally unnecessary. The Susan and Caspian thing sort of pointed to her change and eventual disbelief, which is why I liked that, sort of. I thought that was a little cheesy, but I love the humor it added to the movie, especially when watching the commentary. :p

Yes to both of QLTV statments. Although really I think that they started setting up for Susan's rejetion of Narnia from LWW. With Susan blaming Peter for everything and always wanting to leave.
 
What was the point of Suspian anyway? Future Disney Channel airings?

oh.... off topic again.
yeah, Peter was in the stubborn older teen here, but he seemed to have recovered by the end of the film :)
 
Thank you! I totaly agree with that he changed in the end!! Because he did.
I really didn't see any change. Well, yes, there was a change. He wasn't screaming and demeaning others. But I didn't see a true change of heart, or real penitence.

Yes, QLTV, I will eventually watch the movie and make that list... but I don't want to right now, I'm having too much fun. =P But then, you probably don't care if I make the list or not. xD
 
What, the list of All peters flaws? You are right, I do not care. ;) but he did change!! Just watch it again and listen to how humble he is in the end and how calm, how different from the first half of the movie he was!!
 
What, the list of All peters flaws? You are right, I do not care. ;) but he did change!! Just watch it again and listen to how humble he is in the end and how calm, how different from the first half of the movie he was!!
Well, yeah, he's calm... But change requires more than not throwing a fit! :p It would have been nice if he could have apologized to people... to have humbly admitted that he had wronged them. Sure, he hands over his sword to Caspian, but that's not the same as truly asking forgiveness. Had the filmmakers properly resolved this issue, it might bother me a little bit less.
 
Thats why I wish they had kept the `Chosing Marshals` scene in the film.

In the beginning they have that dialogue between Peter and Caspian which shows that by that point in the story they have settled their differences, are able to work together and are a bit more friendly as a result.
Its actually as close as they ever get in the screenplay to the "I haven`t come to take your place but to put you in to it" line.
 
Last edited:
You know, you're actually very right. I'll admit that it was not a good change to have Peter behave the way he did, but still I won't let it ruin the movie for me. If you put these things aside, the story is still good, and Peter is still a hero.
Wow, I admire you for saying that Sir Tom! :)
Also: I like the movie and own the DVD. I just don't think of it as a version of the book but a separate thing all together
I didn't like the change. I have always liked the character of Peter and the movie ruins what Lewis wrote.
Right, exactly why I think of the film as something separate from the book.

W
yeah, Peter was in the stubborn older teen here, but he seemed to have recovered by the end of the film :)
He didn't realy. If you compare the final scene of the Pevensies in Narnia in the book with the final scene of them in the film, Peter has again been robbed of his nobility in the film and comes off as a whiny baby again: "I'm not needed here anymore, boo-hoo-hoo."

If they had actually mended his character, and let him leave Narnia with some dignity, I would have been much happier -- all it would have taken was a gracious speech. But they didn't even give him that. :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top