Re: Voyage of the Dawn Treader Movie?
- There's been some discussion among Mythies on Facebook. Personally, I've been on a roller coaster about this movie: 1) Dawntreader is on of my favorite Narnia books, in part because it's inherently so spiritual; 2) Walden Media has alternated between ham-fisted and oblivious when it comes to spiritual content in CSL's Narnia; 3) Michael Apted is a good film director and made the passage of anti-slavery laws in England compelling in AMAZING GRACE; 4) Michael Apted isn't a Christian so he may be insensitive *but* he handled AMAZING GRACE well; 5) the trailer was alarming.
So I went with great trepidation and VERY low expectations. And I enjoyed it quite a bit *but* the secret was probably the low expectations...!
I am willing to entertain an argument that the structure of a movie (vs short novel) means some kind of unifying theme & goal is desirable but the fact that the movie *starts* with the search for the seven Narnian Lords and morphs into the search for their *magical swords* and a battle against evil green fog just felt Harry-Potter-esque. Elevating the sea-serpent into a major battle (and incorporating Eustace Dragon) was predictable and tedious (I turned to Diana Glyer at the end and said, "they killed Cthulu!") although I did like the chittering sound they gave it, inappropriate as it was for an ocean-dwelling creature.
I think the adaptation leaves MUCH to be desired and it's still the best of the 3 Narnian films made thus far. Don't expect a lot and DON'T re-read the book before seeing the movie (!! save that treat for after) and you too may find it better than anticipated.
-- Lynn --
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, davise@... wrote:
> Has no one on this list seen the movie yet, or have an opinion? I haven't myself, but I'm very curious to know whether it is any good. The review in the Times was solidly negative, the review in the Guardian was mixed, some of the online reviews are favorable. General agreement that Eustace is satisfyingly horrible.
> -- Ernie
- Steve <sschaper@...> wrote:
>They worked very hard to remove any chance that someone might be directed to JesusI'm not the best person to judge this, so I'd appreciate it if you'd tell us what exactly the movie did to fail to convey this. Aside from the fact that, as far as I can recall, the Emperor was not mentioned. But that in itself wouldn't be enough to change the tone so drastically. Aslan isn't on stage very much in this movie, but then, he isn't onstage much in the book either, and as far as I could tell, he was treated much the same. He even gets to say the book-Aslan's line about "I have another name. You must learn to know me by that name." How is he "tame" and not the Son in the movie that differs from the book?
>Christ, as well as changing the basic morality from that of Christianity to that of
>Carl Rogers. Imagine if you went to a movie about the Nativity, and found out that
>it was about the wonderful birth of -you-.
>Aslan is portrayed as a powerful big buddy, a tame lion, not the Son of the Emperor
>over Sea from Before Time, Who is the Lamb Who is the Lion.
- -----Original Message-----
>From: lynnmaudlin <lynnmaudlin@...>Was it actually, "Oh, no! They killed Chthulu! The bastards!" --?
>...I turned to Diana Glyer at the end and said, "they killed Cthulu!")
A better way to Internet
- Not from me; I'm always happy to see Cthulu completely destroyed-- :D
-- Lynn --
--- In email@example.com, David Emerson <emerdavid@...> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: lynnmaudlin <lynnmaudlin@...>
> >...I turned to Diana Glyer at the end and said, "they killed Cthulu!")
> Was it actually, "Oh, no! They killed Chthulu! The bastards!" --?
> PeoplePC Online
> A better way to Internet