Prince Caspian

My neighbours, enticed by the promise of a roaring fire and chocolate, came over the other night, with a film from their DVD rental place.  They've given up on Blockbuster because of the surfeit of scratched and damaged DVD's, and have started renting from Tesco.  The DVD's come by post, and they can rent as many during each month as they want, on condition that they have no more than 3 out at any one time.

Which is why, just a couple of weeks ago, we settled down in front of the afforementioned fire, to watch Prince Caspian.

And now I'll tell you just why Disney decided to drop the Narnia series like a hot brick.  Their official reasons contain the words "budgetary and logistical reasons", but that's complete horsefeathers!

When I was young, I loved the Narnia Chronicles.  I didn't actually get into them until I was into two figures, but once there I stayed, reading and re-reading the books for years.  I remember the sense of wonder I would get with each new book, which would remain with me for many of those re-reads.  I haven't forgotten the feeling of despair I experienced when I read the last page of The Last Battle, knowing there would never be any more, and all I could do to recapture the magic was to read the chronicles again.  I remember my intense conviction that if I could only find the right door/wardrobe, I, too, could visit Narnia.  The enchantment of the books has never left me, even though, when I try to read them to my children, I find that, in comparison to modern children's literature, they're are, in some places, quite stodgy and slow moving.  

Take, for example, the begining of Prince Caspian.  The story starts, quite well, with a chapter about the Prince and his upbringing.  The cousin is born, and Caspian's life is suddenly in danger, and there's a midnight escape.  So far, so good.  We cut to the children in England, returning, rather downheartedly, to school, about to take separate trains from a small station in the country, when they are suddenly "pulled" back into Narnia.  While it takes them little time to realise that they are, once again, in the land they ruled over for so many years, it's quite some time later that they begin to suspect that they've arrived back in Narnia a very long time after they left, and that things have changed a lot in that time.  This confirmed, they set out to find out why they were drawn into the land, while also trying to find some civilistation and proper food!  Again, excellent story telling.  And then it gets rather awkward.  Having rescued a dwarf from the Telmarines, he proceeds to tell them the story of Prince C, and how he was given, and blew, Susan's trumpet in order to summon help in his time of Greatest Need.  So the exciting story of how Caspian came to blow the trumpet is reduced to a second hand tale.  Despite that, it's still a very good story.

So will someone tell me how Disney managed to make it into an unnecessarily long pile of poop?  I'll let them get away with making Caspian a dark haired man, because the Telmarines were mostly dark haired in the book, and it wasn't illogical.  But why on earth did they have to insert a completely unwritten section about an attack on King Miraz's castle?  There's quite enough material in the book for it to have been an utterly charming, if somewhat shorter, film.

And there's the crux of the matter.  The film is 150 minutes long.  And to translate that, it's just 10 minutes shy of 3 hours.  I complain about my girls' inability to sit still for a whole film, but because the flow of the movie was so turgid, I felt myself becoming restless, as looks lengthened needlessly.  Certain scenes were drawn out far too long, telegraphing the plot just in case we blinked.  Remember the part where the river raises up and breaks the bridge?  Just how many "meaningful" looks can we exchange with Lucy?  All that build up would have given the Telmarines plenty of time to evacuate the bridge before it became match-stick soup.

I know, since The Lord of The Rings was made into 3 superb 3-hour films, that longer movies have become somehow de-rigeur.  But there's a reason the Harry Potter and LOTR films have reached such lengths - the source material is incredibly long to start with.  There's a lot to be said for a tight little 90 minute film.  Especially if you're going to aim it at children.

I'm quite prepared to have a numb bum if the material demands, but with the best will in the world, none of the Narnia Chronicles can scrape together enough raw source to feed such a lengthy film.  People thought it was boring (Caspian notwithstanding) at the cinema, so they're not going to bother buying the DVD - after all, many films go on to become so called "cult" classics after a poor showing at the box office (remember Serenity?), but word on the interwebz isn't going to help Prince Caspian.  Thus a really expensive film (apparently it cost in the region of $225 million!!) is just not going to make back the costs, causing the studio to back out on the deal to make further films.

So THAT'S why Disney aren't going to make the rest of the Narnia Chronicles.

Prince Caspian

I went to see Prince Caspian at the cinema on Sunday morning, and although there are a few niggles (and you know me and my niggles!), there was much to be enjoyed, too.

OK - yes, I've read the book, and there's usually a great sense of disappointment when a well loved book is turned into a film, because it's unusual for the director to have experienced the same sense of awe that I did when reading the book. If, indeed, he (or she) read the book at all.

I remember the feeling of pleasure I got when watching the very first Harry Potter film, because the whole of Diagon Alley had been described in such great detail in the book, and in a short pan down the alley, one could see much of what had been described. This was a truly exciting moment for me, because the words had been moved to the screen, and while it'd taken me minutes to read the description, there it all was, without being laboured - perhaps 5 glorious seconds of perfect description. I haven't phrased that well, so I may come back to it.

In contrast, the third film had none of the colourful page to screen translation I'd enjoyed in the previous two films, and while the critics proudly trumpeted the "darker" feel of the film, I was outraged by the addition (addition? what are they thinking, there's plenty of very funny material in the book they'd had to cut) of a ridiculous shrunken head in the Knight Bus. In addition to which, the only darkness I could find was that there was virtually no colour to be seen, and someone seemed to have forgotten to turn on any of the lights.

So, it's possible that you can see that the look of the film is quite important to me. I want to feel that I've been transported to that place in my imagination I created when reading the book. This is sometimes a bit of an unrealistic expectation, because New Zealand doesn't look a lot like Narnia, in my imagination, anyway! Actually, to be perfectly honest, Narnia always reminded me of an English woodland, with widely spaced beech trees, a scattering of silver birch, and some crusty old oaks. The pictures in the books could have been drawn from any one of the places I played in as a child, from the woods at the back of my friends house in Blackwater, to the streams chuckling through the New Forest.

However, there are other images which have been captured well. As you probably know, had you read any of the books as a child, there are a number of charming little illustrations dotted throughout each book. Perhaps it was really these which gave me the images I've so carefully cherished all these years. It was, therefore, a pleasure to see some of these images included in the film. I remember being charmed by the bulgy bears, especially the one who would always suck his paws - and there, for just a second, was the picture - a bulgy bear, sucking his paw. The picture of Reepicheep, surrounded by his mousy followers, all getting ready to cut off their own tails after his is lost during the battle. The little underground home in which Caspian recovered after falling off his horse.

I fully expected some plot changes, especially after the mad chase in "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe". I'm sure I didn't expect a full on assault of Miraz' castle in the middle of the film, but perhaps this was better than the drawn out mini-scuffles depicted in the book. The jury's still out on this one.

I didn't even mind that there was a little romance between Susan and Caspian - I realise that this was not what C.S. Lewis had in mind, over 50 years ago, but the age of the actors suggest that there would at least be some interested glances exchanged. This may have been a children's book, but the film is aiming for a wider audience.

I think what did bug me most was the silly plot device (again with Susan) where she tried to put off the boy from another school at the beginning, and then looked at him with more interest AFTER she'd met Prince C. Come on, you're straining my credibility with this one. She's just realised that she's met this gorgeous young man, a real warrior, but sadly they can't see how it would pan out, so she's making nice-eyes at the geek-boy? Not going to happen!

Still, all in all, it was a better film than the first adventure into Narnia. I'm looking forward to the next one!