Prince Caspian: A Review

Much of this material came out of an e-mail conversation I had with my good friend Sean a week or so back. As usual, I have been busy (expect a new post on my busyness on 2 June) and have not blogged.

And without further ado: a review of Prince Caspian:

I found the film entertaining and interesting. The filmmakers adroitly used rich visual effects and the actors were cast appropriately. Although the story is told well, it is not the same story C.S. Lewis told. (Or rather it differs significantly.)

The enjoyable parts of the movie include the vivid scenery. It illustrates the book’s descriptions rather adeptly. (Lewis was not as detailed as Tolkien in his description, so some of the more fanciful locations [e.g., Miraz's castle] go beyond what I imagined them but don’t contradict the text.)

Among the many changes in the film from the book, one stands out as a very useful change for telling the story in a different medium: the change from Miraz as Lord Protector to King of Narnia during the timeline of the film instead of sometime earlier as in the book. With this change, one gets to see how Miraz assumed the throne instead of it merely being told in a flashback. I also like the inclusion of the disappearance of the lords loyal to Caspian IX. However, I wish the film had anticipated Voyage of the Dawn Treader and mentioned the 7 lords which were sent on impossible missions overseas. Another minor change I liked was the exiting of Caspian X through a wardrobe in his bedroom; a nice touch tying this into the first film.

Many of the film’s changes were not only unnecessary, but detrimental to the story of Lewis. Many of these changes seem involve variations to characters in the film.

The director Andrew Adamson seems confused about Aslan’s character. While his presence is abbreviated in the films, Adamson puts lines into Lucy’s mouth, ‘Peter, don’t you remember who really defeated the White Witch?’ So it appears that he suspects that Aslan is central to the story. On the other hand, he abbreviates Aslan’s dialogue, omits his appearance with Bacchus, and changes his role in freeing the town of Beruna. Aslan’s lines are also strangely altered; the line I like best from the book records Aslan’s response to Lucy’s observation that he is bigger, ‘Every year you grow, you will find me bigger.’ However, this is rendered ‘Every year you grow, so shall I,’ in the film. As Sean writes, ‘The book’s line indicates how Lucy’s perception of Aslan changes as she grows in faith, while the movie’s line makes it sound like Aslan is somehow dependent on Lucy for growth.’ I concur. Aslan is partially stripped of his deity in the movie.

In another example, Peter is no longer the noble High King of the book. Nothing in the book alludes to his getting in fights at school or saying things reminiscent of Nikabrik like, ‘We’ve waited for Aslan long enough.’ It is almost as if the modern (post-modern?) movie cannot have a hero who isn’t ‘complex’ or doesn’t have a ‘dark side’. As has been pointed out on several websites this is akin to Faramir’s character being butchered in Jackson’s Lord of the Rings. Conversely, Susan loses her negative side, and has a romantic interest with Caspian thrown in. This will make it harder to understand why Susan does not appear in The Last Battle.

Overall, the movie was entertaining as a standalone product. Nevertheless the movies takes significant departures from the book and despiritualizes Lewis’s work. Plan to read the book alongside (or in lieu of) the movie.

And for the sake of completeness a mention of the symbolism in the book cannot be ignored. Keep in mind however, that Lewis was not a strict allegorist. Prince Caspian references both sanctification, q.v., Lucy and Aslan’s dialogue above, and a telling of the recovery of true religion (perhaps specifically the Protestant Reformation). After the disappearance of Aslan (Christ) and the Pevensies, Narnia (the Church) fell into decay until about 1500 years later, when Caspian (Luther, perhaps?) discovered Old Narnia and the Pevensies (true religion and the teaching of the Apostles) restored Narnia to its rightful place (the Church to proper worship). Of course, I paint with broad strokes and not every detail will fit this schema. Feel free to discuss in the comments section.

And lastly a few links:
Modern Reformation’s Review
Christianity Today’s Review
NPR stories

Walk Score

My friend Phil wrote an interesting article about this site Walk Score. Walk Score measures a locale’s ‘walkability’, I’m excited because for where I am buying a house in Tucson (oh I will have to blog about this but until then enjoy this sneak preview)

near Shannon and River has an alright walkability score for being in the suburbs; even more exciting is that the intersection at River and La Cholla is a developing commercial zone. We’ll have to get bicycles to make this even more accessible.

While I’m advertising other websites here is one about the housing bailouts: Angry Renter

Brambleman, Destroyer of Israel

Many thanks to Dale Ralph Davis for the title of this post which I borrowed from a chapter in his Judges: Such a Great Salvation. We are reading through the book for personal devotions, and it is amazing to see the patience God has for his people.

In this passage (chapter 9) we see that the oppression of Israel is not from solely without. Abimelech the son of Gideon, killed his father’s other children gained a kingship and oppressed Israel. Sin is from within, Israel had forgotten their God and he left them to be subjugated from within and without.

The title of this post comes from Jotham’s (Abimelech’s brother who escaped death) parable against electing a worthless man as king. He stated (in parable) that like a bramble is good for fire, their poor choice for a leader would come back to burn them.

Yet God is sovereign and cares for his people even in trying political times. Abimelech would eventually be killed and God would raise up other judges to rule over his people.