The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005)

[rune]

I saw a clip of this movie when I went to see something else last night. It looks quite good, I was presently surprised

[Culhwch]

Originally Posted by rune

I saw a clip of this movie when I went to see something else last night. It looks quite good, I was presently surprised

Presently surprised? But not suprised in the past or the future? Sorry, couldn't resist...

Yeah, I think this is out on Boxing Day here, not sure about everywhere else. I've not seen any footage, but have seen quite a bit of the production design artwork, and it looks to be shaping up nicely. The first preview came out over the web just in the last week, though sadly it was too big for me to even consider downloading (still on neolithic dial-up, sadly). If you're interested:

http://www.movie-list.com/trailers.p...niclesofnarnia

[I, Brian]

Darn good trailer.

[Culhwch]

Yeah, when I went to see Hitchhiker's yesterday the trailer was on beforehand. Looks astounding. Hopfully it'll fill the post-LotR void this Christmas.

[Winters_Sorrow]

It opens on 9th December in UK.
I have to say I didn't hold up much hope when I heard they were making this film (more so when I heard Disney were involved!)
However, what production stuff I have seen so far looks top notch.
In many ways, I'd be more annoyed if they mess this up than I would have been with LotR as (and I'm sure with most people) the chronicles of narnia was one of the first pure fantasy books I read as a kid and I still love reading it every now and then

here's hoping for it to be a roaring success so we can go all the way to "The Last Battle!"

p.s. as an aside there seems to be a real 'growth' industry with kids series being filmed at the moment. Harry Potter, Lemony Snickett & Narnia.

Here's hoping for the Famous Five next!

[Traveller]

I saw the trailer yesterday when went to see ROTS it looks great I have always loved the books and cannot wait to see the films.

They do insist on doing them the wrong way round though The Lion With and the Wardrobe is the second book they never do seem to make the Magicians Nephew maybe its a popularity thing

[Culhwch]

But didn't Lewis write them out of order - I was always under the impression that The Magician's Nephew was written last (or at least after TLTWATW) to tie up some loose ends (or loose beginnings, as it were) in TLTWATW. Besides, TLTWATW had to be the first film, as the most popular and known of the books.

[Traveller]

Yes he did write them out of order but as they always place the Magicians Nephew first would it not have made the smallest bit of sense to do it first but yes The Lion Witch and Wardrobe is the most popular one so it makes even more sense to film it first.

Another set of films filmed in New Zealand

[Culhwch]

Yeah, all the good films are shot in New Zealand these days - LotR, Narnia, King Kong. And here in Australia we get to play host to dire efforts such as Ep II and III, the Matrix sequels, the Mask sequel.... I just don't understand. Is there a sign on our door that says 'Make Your Crap Films Here! We're Not Choosy!'?

It was a while ago I last read them, but I don't think Nephew was a patch on Lion anyways. And as the whole series probably wasn't greenlighted (not sure even if it is now - I don't think some of the books would hold up a stand-alone film), Lion would have been the sensible choice for a possible one-off.

[Gem]

I'm looking forward to seeing TLTWATW. I'm sure it will be excellent. However, part of me wants to reject the big-budget Hollywood film because i'm such a huge fan of the lovely cheap-and cheerful 1980s tv series that I grew up with.

[stencyl]

There was a trailer mixed in with the about 30 minutes of commercials and trailers before Star Wars III. The stuff before the movies is going to be longer than the movies soon.

It was an impressive trailer, though.

[Dave]

I saw this today and I think it's very good. Jonathan Ross on 'Film 2005' said that he was disappointed; that it wasn't as good as 'Harry Potter'. I'd agree with that, but not to such a degree.

Ross also criticised that beginning, the costumes and the Queen.

Except for the beginning, the film is quite faithful to the book. Someone who had just re-read the book agreed with this. There are only few extra scenes added to set the background with their father in the war. The book goes straight into the wardrobe after a few pages and in a film that would translate into seconds, so something more is required. I did notice that some children were getting restless during the talking. I also didn't think that the steam train pictures were necessary. I've also travelled on that line near Haworth. It's been in countless films including 'The Railway Children' so it's quite recognisable now.

On the costumes, I think they were just right. Everything about the film had a 1940's retro-look and the costumes were just a part of that.

The special effects were excellent, especially the Beavers (voiced by Ray Winstone and Dawn French), Aslan (voiced by Liam Neeson) and the other animals. Jim Broadbent is hidden under make-uo as Professor Kirke.

Ross said that he couldn't tell that the White Witch Queen was evil and the Aslan was good. He must have seen some other film. She wasn't evil in a pantomime villain way, but she was throughly nasty and manipulating, and throughly evil.

In the USA the film is having 'Passion of the Christ' like advance screenings by Christian groups due to it's strong Christian themes. These are, of course, deliberate:

Aslan the lion, the wise king who created Narnia, mirrors Jesus Christ because he sacrifices his life to save others, then later is resurrected in triumph to save the world from evil.

When the book opens, Narnia is gripped by a curse that dooms it to unending winter -- a parable to Adam and Eve being cast out of the garden of Eden.

Each of the seven novels in The Chronicles of Narnia addresses one of the seven deadly sins, and The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe specifically focuses on gluttony.

But I would guess that is all way above the heads of most young film goers. Go along because it is a good story.

[PTeppic]

Originally posted by Dave
Each of the seven novels in The Chronicles of Narnia addresses one of the seven deadly sins, and The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe specifically focuses on gluttony.

Went over my head too!

It's okay as a film, but definitely aimed at children. The animals are very well done, sfx-wise, especially the fawn and centaurs. though in one or two blue screen moments against the scenery the edges still felt visible, which these days is unacceptable.

For me, coming out of the cinema, the whole thing just felt thin. Kids find secret world, accept they're the missing key in an ancient prophecy (though debate whether to help), each get a gift which they then use at a key moment (very Bond-esque), amazingly (magically?) learn how to use weapons in a day, one of them is tricked briefly but soon sees the true path, all join together in battle, the "dead" coming to the rescue, etc. Straightforward plot, few twists, only a couple of parallel threads.

BUT, Tilda Swinton seemed out of her depth and thoroughly uncomfortable as White Queen, little background on any of the mythology, "deep magic", how they forgot their human families to quickly, Aslan's past etc.

And it all felt like we've seen it before, only bigger, uglier and better. Which of course we have: LOTR. Small people finding their importance in a strange new world, man with a sword gets to be king, dead helping win the final battle etc.

Good, but not great.

[Dave]

Originally posted by PTeppic
...each get a gift which they then use at a key moment (very Bond-esque) ... it all felt like we've seen it before, only bigger, uglier and better. Which of course we have: LOTR. Small people finding their importance in a strange new world, man with a sword gets to be king, dead helping win the final battle.

Except that 'The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe' was first published in 1950 and 'Casino Royale' in 1961. 'The Hobbit' was first published in 1937, but 'The Fellowship of the Ring' was not published until 1953.

So who copied who? Lewis and Tolkien were contemporaries.

Anyone know why, since they have plans to film the whole series, Disney have begun with this episode? I know there is debate over which book to read first, but in the books I have the publishers say you should read them in chronological order and have numbered them that way. Lewis himself said it didn't really matter, but sided slightly with chronological order.

[philoSCIFI]

I liked the film. (I was going to go in depth as to why, but I lost my post when Ascifi decided to do some funky refresh thing on me. )

Anyway, I like that they started with this one first. (Again, would go in depth but had to refresh and lost the post.)