The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2 Disc Special Edition) [2008] (DVD)

Very, very good What makes CS Lewis's Narnia "septet" so timeless is that the books work on 2 levels - straightforward 'fantasy' for children and a 'deeper' symbolic allegory of Christian faith. This turned out fortunately for film-makers like Disney wanting to jump on the Tolkien/Rowling fantasy bandwagon. Children in the 1940s and 1950s didn't need more explicit biblical references putting in the books because British Christians then grew up like Muslims today - their faith was not an optional add on but an integral, 'living' aspect of their existence. They were familiar with what Lewis's allegories were without needing them spelled out. Today, in Britain's almost totally secular society, the fact that Lewis didn't lay the Christian theme on with a trowel means that modern kids can take the series at 'face value' but still learn the lessons the series tried to impart to readers. The lesson of Prince Caspian was about the importance of faith, hope and the dangers of pride and arrogance. With both Caspian and Lion, I went to see each film with eagerness but trepidation because it would be too easy to lose those - and the whole point of the books. But Prince Caspian doesn't disappoint. Other reviews have summarised the plot and what has been included/excluded, but though Ben Barnes as Caspian is a bit passive at first in the film, it does stick mostly to the book and the themes therein, which is vital - there has never been a decent film version of Conan-Doyle's Lost World because everyone who's ever been near it has used inverted snobbery to turn Lord John Roxton into a villain and insist on shoehorning in a love interest. In Caspian, Peter in particular falls into the trap of pride, angrily rebuking Lucy when she reminds him who really defeated the White Witch, and arrogance in assuming that beacuse he was Peter the Magnificent he can pick up 1300 years later where he left off. Caspian indirectly causes the death of the Narnian attackers because he lets anger get the better of him instead of remembering others rely on him. The film, like the book, also makes the point of how foolish and arrogant it is to disregard people because they are different or too young/old - everyone believes Lucy is delusional because she is the youngest, but the point is that the young have no artifice, and are 'naturally' honest. The film also fleshes out Queen Prunaprismia, Caspian's aunt, who in the book was nothing more than a plot device, and both Lord Sopespian and Glozelle. The one weakness with the film and why I have given it 3 stars, is not it's fault. I cannot for the life of me understand why the first film was Lion, and not The Magician's Nephew, which was set in Sherlock Holmes' London of the 1890s. During Lion I had to explain to my companion how Jadis the White Witch got to Narnia, how Diggory Kirke got a magic wardrobe and how he knew it was so, and how the lamp-post got into the Waste. All these are explained in the first book, and tie in to the last book, when some of the original characters appear. Another issue that The Horse and His Boy weren't filmed before Caspian. This book was set during the Golden Age of Narnia when the 4 Pevensie's were adults, and sets up much of the Telmarine plotline and outlying kingdoms, etc for Caspian; it also sets up much of Susan's angst in Caspian, the book which informs much of the controversy of her outcome in later books. But Caspian the film makes a valiant stab at showcasing how difficult it was for them back in London. They still retained their memories of being adults with tremendous personal and national power (in Horse, Susan comes within a whisker of marrying a foreign king to avert war, showing they were grown-ups with grown-up lives and international concerns); Susan's disenchantment because she knows the joy of Narnia only lasts whle she's there is very poignant - once she gets back to London she'll be a powerless teenage girl dismissed by everyone and treated as 'disrespectful' if she says and does things 'beyond her age'. In short, the Pevensie children no longer fit in the 'real world' and Susan is the only one who seems willing to openly acknowledge that being part of Narnia has a downside Aslan can't fix, even before having to accept all their friends died of old age centuries before.

A Rare Film Better Than the Book In the centuries since we were last in Narnia, things have changed. The Telmarines have overrun the country, sending the real Narnias (you know, the talking animals and mythological creatures) into hiding. The country is currently under the rule of King Miraz (Sergio Castellitto) until his nephew, Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) is old enough. But on the night that Miraz's son is born, Caspian flees and goes into hiding. In great danger, he blows the ancient horn of help. Meanwhile, in our world, only a year has passed for Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy Pevensie (William Moseley, Anna Popplewell, Skandar Keynes, and Georgie Henley). They are waiting for a train when they are suddenly called somewhere else. At first, they don't realize where they are, but it doesn't take long for them to realize they are once again in Narnia. Only years have past since their first visit since the castle around them in is ruins. When they learn of the plight of the true Narnias and Caspian, they set out to join forces and free the country. But with Aslan (voiced again by Liam Neeson) long gone, what can four children and a prince do? Let's get the obvious out of the way first. They royally changed the story here. And as someone who has never been fond of this book in the series, I will say that many of the changes were for the better. They cut much of the first half of the book, which is the slowest part of the story. They made the battles (yes, they added one) more epic. But not all the changes were beneficial. The movie felt more like a retread of the first, something I've never felt before. Peter here is moody and touchy, not the leader he is. That sub-plot and the theme of faith vs. reason and power are never fully developed but glossed over for the battle sequences. And let's not forget the romantic sub-plot that felt forced but harmless to me. There is one major change I thought I wouldn't like. It expands on a scene from the book and sends the characters further down a path of darkness. Some will find it scary and upsetting, but I think it worked and was one of the better examples of the theme. For anyone disappointed by the battles in the first movie, you'll be happy to hear this one makes up for it. The battles are epic and gorgeously choreographed. Couple those with the wonderful special effects we have become spoiled with, and you've got a great feast for the eyes. But I digress. I was discussing the book versus the movie. I reread parts of the book after I saw the movie. Yes, they changed the story, but they also include some great lines from the book. Ultimately, they made a good movie. Even with the changes, the movie never overcomes the fact that the story is essentially straight forward and weak. But I like this version better than the book. (Is an avid reader allowed to admit that?) Having made that confession, I will list my biggest disappointment. Trumpkin the Dwarf (Peter Dinklage) and Reepicheep the Mouse (voiced by Eddie Izzard) are not given enough time to develop here. What is here is wonderful. But these two characters are one of the redeeming features of the book for me, so I wanted to see more. Ultimately, I really did enjoy this film. I was drawn into the world, the characters, and their struggle. I laughed multiple times and was moved to tears as well. It was a great escape film with some good themes to think about later.

Ripping Yarn Ripping yarn but lacks the charm and magical nature of the Lion the Witch and the wardrobe. Narnia has been ruled by a brawling warlike people when Susan, Edmond, Lucy and Peter find themselves in Narnia they find it a shadow of it's former self with many of the animals wild and unable to talk. A battle rages at the end and the four band together again and use each others strengths to conquer evil. Good family film if a little old fashioned.

Saved by the mice and Lucy The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way. It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series. Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality. Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy. She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish. I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market. So why have I given it a reasonable three stars? I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done. I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three. This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.