You have been WARNED.
Have I overused the "bolds" and "CAPITALS"? Never mind.
To make things easier for you readers, I shall break down this review into several sections.
Plot
This, unfortunately, is where the movie falls short.
If only they had just used the same formula that they used in The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe, that is, to faithfully follow C.S.Lewis's storyline, this section would have got high marks, as everyone knows that his work was brilliant. But no, the script writers had to put their heads together and say: "Let's toss it a little here...and turn it there..."
Result? A little underwhelming.
I entered the cinema late-no thanks to certain people-and missed a little of the beginning. At first, the movie seemed to be following the original plot. Then, I noticed a few changes that I won't mention here, just in case you are one of those who didn't see/follow my warning.
The real disappointments came later. When the crew reached Lone Islands, they defeat the slave bosses(which follows the plot), and after they saved one of the Lords(who is a poor prisoner here instead of the wealthy guy in the book), he hands them a "magical sword" which, as we find out later, together with the other swords from the other six Lords, must a great evil on Dark Island(which does exist) which will threaten Narnia with...something.
WHY??? Lewis doesn't even mention the swords in the book!(Ok, he did, but they were just the Lords' weapons) The plot was supposed to be about all of them on a quest to the other side of the world which was where they believed Aslan's country was and the obstacles, fears and temptations they faced on the way.
If you haven't read the book, you have to. Now. Go get the car, bike, whatever and find a book shop.
This is the problem with movie producers and directors. They think that every movie has got to have a super villain that has to be killed in the name of humanity(or, in this care, 'animality'). Why can't it just be about each individual's fears?
However, I do think that the producers were clever in choosing the Dark Island part to be expanded, especially as it is about manipulating one's fears and thoughts. (I still feel that they shouldn't have made it something to be destroyed) They also expanded the part on Edmund's rivalry with Caspian, which was great.
All this 'expanding', however, creates a new problem: many details and long parts in the book have been cut short.
First it was on Lone Island. There was a whole sub-plot on how they devised a cunning plan to oust the Governor, but in the movie it isn't even mentioned.
We also have the part on Ramandu's island (Ramandu was the one who told them about the 'spell' that needed to be broken with the 7 swords) and several other parts that I can't remember cut short. Being a fan of the books, this makes the movie feel... stingy, in an odd way.
To give the script writers credit, the parts which followed the original were excellently done(you'll have to read the book to understand). If only they had decided to just leave the rest of the plot alone.
Special Effects
This is one of the best parts.
The scenery, sound effects, costumes and lighting and general "believable-ness" are beautiful and immaculately executed. One has to watch the movie to appreciate this, of course, but here are some, er, examples...
The Pevensies, Caspian and the "Blue Star".
Repicheep(right) and Eustace-turned-Dragon
The Dawn Treader.
The 3-D effects, while not groundbreaking or outstanding, do a very good job at enhancing the viewing experience. Should you pay extra for it? In my opinion, probably.
Characters
I just wish that the script writers were half as good as the actors.
Seriously, they are good. Georgie Henley(Lucy Pevensie) is as delightful as ever; you just can't help liking her.Skandar Keynes (Edmund Pevensie) is slightly boring at normal times, but does a great job at acting out his dark side. High praise goes to Will Poulter(Eustace Scrubb) for (together with the script writers, of course) managing to turn the people-love-to-hate character in the book into...people-love-to-hate-and-laugh-at. He talks in such a complicated manner that it's usually funny. Simon Pegg is also excellent and witty as voice of Reepicheep, although whether it surpasses Eddie Izzard from the second film(Prince Capian) is for you to decide.
Overall, although I'm a little underwhelmed with The Voyage of The Dawn Treader's storyline, the producers have done a fine job on the characters, their lines, the scenery and the effects.
Rating: 7.5
The Good: Characters, witty lines, scenery, special effects.
The Bad: Altered plot, some parts cut short.
Terence Wang wonders when the next Narnia film will come out, and which book it will be based on.
Overall, although I'm a little underwhelmed with The Voyage of The Dawn Treader's storyline, the producers have done a fine job on the characters, their lines, the scenery and the effects.
Rating: 7.5
The Good: Characters, witty lines, scenery, special effects.
The Bad: Altered plot, some parts cut short.
Terence Wang wonders when the next Narnia film will come out, and which book it will be based on.
1 comment :
Well to be honest, I feel that this is the first ever book-based-movie that I think is more interesting than the book. I've compared Harry Potter film to the originals, so yeah, I know how you feel. However, this is the first movie that I've seen before the book, so the feeling's quite different than when I watched the Harry Potter films - I thought that nothing was wrong, and it was quite amazing (until I've read the book, of course). Anyway, I think that movies are meant for those who don't read, 'cause those who do will certainly be not happy 'bout the plot. Still, C.S. Lewis's writing style doesn't suit me well (although I've still endured the entire chronicle) and I'll go for the movie. Love the special effects. Even though I'm annoyed that they made Edmund the 'greedy' guy instead of Caspian at Deathwater Island.
Post a Comment