Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

Much more refined than LWW

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> Much more refined than LWW Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Much more refined than LWW - 1/7/2008 9:17:13 PM   
Pipkin3

 

Posts: 218
Joined: 12/10/2005
LWW was good fun, and a little magical, but didn't quite light the screen on fire, with some fake looking sets, an odd final battle that made me think "They're battling for Narnia, so why don't I feel like this is more than just a big fight in a large field?". We never got to see enough of Narnia for my liking. It was just a bit bland. (3/5)
P.C. does somethings better, much better in fact, but there is still a niggling lack of soul as EMPIRE suggests - no magic whatsoever. They've concentrated on being darker, but where is the magic??
Thankfully, they;ve gone for more location filming this time round, so fewer woodland sets with weird blue sky in the background. The visual effects have been improved enormously, particularly liking Trufflehunter the badger and those gryphons.
Of the four kids, Lucy and Edmund remain the most convincing, Lucy particularly so. William Moseley just irritates me as Peter. Anna Popplewell has improved, and its nice to see her get some action, bt the romance with Caspian doesn't have enough weight to work. Caspian himself is well played, but rather a bland character. I'll have to watch it again to make sure.
The best performances come from Peter Dinklage, Sergio Castelitto, Francesco Favino, Georgie Henley and Skandar Keynes. I loved the scene with Tilda Swinton. Shame Reepicheep didn't get so much to do, but his voiced perfectly all the same.
I don't know if its the acting ,but sometimes the dialogue feels dodgy too. Some of the kids aren't good enough to make the script sound right.
The battles are much more exciting all round, despite the castle raid not being in the book.
A bigger scale, better shots, improved pacing and visual effects make it a more refined attempt than the first film. A pity it still lacks enough magic, plus with the occasionally wonky dialogue and William Moseley, it has let itself down in other areas.
Still more fun than the first, even if the latter was a more magical story experience.
Will

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 31
RE: Much more refined than LWW - 1/7/2008 9:47:37 PM   
**pirate_queen**


Posts: 617
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: a galaxy far far away
compared to the first film this is so much better. I agree it could have been darker but hey this time some of the chracters actually bled during the battles!  I also feel that ben barnes was an excellent addition, but that may be because of his godlike good-looks and his amazing hair! I was glad that caspian was there to take some of the attention away from the pevensies because all excpet edmund are now really annoying me!
I'm now actually looking forward to dawn treader and more of ben barnes, mmmmm!
so i give it 4 stars! (the film is really worth 3 but barnes gets it a 4th)

(in reply to Pipkin3)
Post #: 32
- 2/7/2008 12:02:19 PM   
quizkid

 

Posts: 102
Joined: 22/3/2006
From: wymondham
it has to be said that i liked the first one better not having read any of the books i was dragged along to the orginal and loved it even bought the dvdim not so sure id buy the shiny disc this time this film lacks the sense of wonder inevitablythough there are some cool fxs at theend. edmund and lucy the two best characters in the first one are sidelined this timeDOH!ben barnes has been to the orlando bloom school of cardboard acting along with william m osely and anna popplewell its all a bit slow to start dinlage and davis are good as is castlelito three though is about right

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 33
Better Than The First. - 2/7/2008 4:56:41 PM   
joanna likes films

 

Posts: 987
Joined: 27/10/2007
From: Bexhill
Narina is back and it's got darker. New enemies have arrived with threat and horrors await for the four Kings and Queens. But as it has been 1,300 years, back in the real world it has only been one and boy, have they grown up. Peter is now wondering what to do with himself after being King for so long, Susan is more interested in boys and more teenage things than Narina, Lucy still pins for returning to see Aslan again but Edmond is the odd one out not doing a lot. After returning to Narnia, they find new friends and foes for the ulitmate battle to the death. The battles scenes were gripping, holding you to the end. The special effects were amazing and the scenery is just beauitful. Now, with the perfomances. The four kids have returned older and wiser, they are a lot better and stronger than the first. Ben Barnes is very handsome, he suits Caspian with a iron fist and the romance between him and Susan is very strong. A darker, more action-filled tale, Prince Caspian is quite a excellent movie for kids and adults alike. PS My sister wants to say that Ben Barnes is damn fit and thought he was sexy as Caspian.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 34
RE: Prince Caspian - 2/7/2008 6:28:53 PM   
Timon


Posts: 14545
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
For reasons too long and convulted to go into here, I loved the first film. That's right, you read that right. I thought it was a nicely done family film that fit the festive period and Lord of the Rings shaped seasonal gap well. Sure, it was aimed a bit younger than LOTR but then so are the books and I thought it was an impressive start to a potentially great franchise.

The second part however, I feel, stumbles after a decent start. There were problems with the first film and most of it revolved around the acting of the older three child stars. Little Georgie (Lucy) I thought was wonderful in the first and she does well here.

Skandar (awesome name) aka Edmund was a little wooden last time round but here he shines as the cocky, young Edmund who you can believe was a King of Narnia. Unfortunately Mosley (Peter) and Popplewell (Susan) pout and moan in their roles giving performances more wooden than the trees of Narnia. It's a shame the younger siblings are pushed into the background and we have to deal with a lot of Mosley scowling. Still, he is impressive in the fight scenes.

Barnes does well in a role that for some reason demanded a Spanish accent. I know the Tellamines/ites (?!) are descended from pirates/brigands but  why the Spanish/conquistador look? Barne's Caspian holds the film together in a film that is very badly paced. You have decent fights and chases followed by lots and lots of walking, moaning and sneering. It jars badly.

Luckily Izzard, Warwick Davis and the wonderful Peter Dinkage root the film and give it some much needed fun. Dinklage's dour Trumpkin is a delight as is Izzard's lightning fast Reepicheep who I can't wait to see front and centre in Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

Whilst it is darker than the first - although the first had its dark moments - some of it is rather disturbing. The Narnian massacre during the castle battle is harrowing stuff for young ones and I was surprised to see it but it did make the world of Narnia indeed seem a 'more savage place' than we remember it.

A decent follow up but nothing new and not as fun as the first. Hopefully Michael Apted's direction of Dawn Treader will shake things up.

A solid ***

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to joanna likes films)
Post #: 35
RE: Prince Caspian - 2/7/2008 8:01:04 PM   
simonmckergan1


Posts: 1263
Joined: 8/11/2005
From: Belfast
Oh dear, this was pretty poor.  The kids apart from Edmund and Lucy were shockingly bad.  Example: Susan hanging from a ledge and from her reaction, about to fall to her death.....or so you might have thought but there was a flaming ledge about 2 feet below her.  The cinema I was in groaned at that awful scene.  The whole Aslan is Christ thing bothered me too, it just felt a bit too heavy handed.  Good points?  Reepicheep and some decent action.  6 out of 10 (generous might I add.)

_____________________________

As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station!

(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 36
Better than the first one, in a different way. - 4/7/2008 1:16:20 AM   
Anglachel


Posts: 232
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: Locked in the Ivory Tower
I had high expectations with this movie because I like the book more than LWW, and I wasn´t wrong, I loved it. Probably more than the first one, becoz it´s definitely darker Gosh! Whata  jump from the first movie  to this one,  it´s quite obvious this one is a bit more epic and real, since the very first scene XD.

More human characters, more conflicts.
King Miraz and Glózel were good enough, right actors to play them, so Lord Sopespian. We have great villains with no need of monsters or fiction. Miraz, and the other Telmarines, is just a man and he´s as baddie as any non-human villain and the Telmarines are just a s evil as an invasion of aliens.
So, real villains.

The four Pevensives were definitely more grown up, Susan and Peter had interesting issues to face in this new adventure to mark they are entering the world of adulthood and that they are not kids anymore:

Susan meets Caspain, so she enter now the complex world of love (I did like this addition, ironically. Is not in the book, and so Peter arguing with Caspian, but for me it doesn´t affect the book, it´s something that we can imagine, and does improve the movie)
Peter has to battle Miraz face to face, no magic, facing death (again) but this time he has Miraz´s life in his hands, and he realize is not easy to kill.
Caspian facing Miraz at the end of the duel is not in the book...but anywayz, the message is the same.

The book is the book this time, and the movie is basically the same than the book, but with a few harmless changes and a few additions.
An older Caspain, I like it,  it does help to make the movie darker and epic, and sexier of course: And it definitely help the third movie, having Ben Barnes as Caspian is great for the third movie, I like the book too!

I have LWW, which I say it´s as good as this one but in a different way,  and now I am waiting for PC DVD 

_____________________________

I have made a promise: to get back on you someday...
Justice come, it will be done.
You will face the darkest future!! You will go to hell !!!
Time will tell, I wish you well.

Dionysus

(in reply to simonmckergan1)
Post #: 37
RE: Prince Caspian - 4/7/2008 1:31:26 AM   
Anglachel


Posts: 232
Joined: 19/7/2006
From: Locked in the Ivory Tower
quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon
Barnes does well in a role that for some reason demanded a Spanish accent. I know the Tellamines/ites (?!) are descended from pirates/brigands but  why the Spanish/conquistador look? Barne's Caspian holds the film together in a film that is very badly paced. You have decent fights and chases followed by lots and lots of walking, moaning and sneering. It jars badly.

Luckily Izzard, Warwick Davis and the wonderful Peter Dinkage root the film and give it some much needed fun. Dinklage's dour Trumpkin is a delight as is Izzard's lightning fast Reepicheep who I can't wait to see front and centre in Voyage of the Dawn Treader.


Well enough discussed indeed, why the evil , the Telmarines, are Spanish  (obviously they are Spanish-alike, they used Latin actors: Italians, Spaniards, Mexicans, and the armours looks like old Spanish armours) Lok like Spanish conquerors... humm.
The book only say Telmarines were pirates, from the south as far as I remember. Nothing else, just pirates.
But, indeed, there were quite a lot of Spanish pirates around the seas here in the past. The actors are OK to look like pirates.

But in the other hand let´s see what can be: Maybe... maybe it was inspired in the Spanish conquest of America. The conquering of the land to indians.
The Spanish conquest were one of biggest in history, at least of American history. It has the fame of being the most brutal conquest.
However
The history of South America has quite of lot of guys like  Miraz, it remind me some which stories I have heard. LOL. Gosh... XD

Reepicheep:  he was... CUTE...LOL
Really, love to have Reepicheep too in the third movie. It seems it will be a great movie, I like the book!


< Message edited by Anglachel -- 4/7/2008 1:38:53 AM >


_____________________________

I have made a promise: to get back on you someday...
Justice come, it will be done.
You will face the darkest future!! You will go to hell !!!
Time will tell, I wish you well.

Dionysus

(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 38
RE: Better than the first one, in a different way. - 4/7/2008 4:10:11 AM   
Gimli The Dwarf


Posts: 73462
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Central Park Zoo
I quite liked it. More than the first one I think which I also liked a great deal.

I know quite a bit has been changed from the book but I shan’t complain because a) It’s been so long since I read it they could have changed half the character names and I probably wouldn’t have noticed, b) pretty much all of the changes seemed to work within the context of the film itself, c) what works on the page isn’t always going to work on the bog screen so some jiggery-pokery is to be expected anyway and d) my favourite films of all time play merry hell with the source material at times and it’d be hypocritical of me to praise them and bash this film for the same reasons.


As such, (And all the changes that I am aware of come from my sister, who reread the books last week) I liked that the Telmarines were Spanish, some kind of exotic invaders (even if it was bloody hard to understand them at times). I also liked the attack on the castle. It was a bit gloomy and made it hard to follow but I thought it worked well. True, seeing all the Narnians trapped should have been something of a tear jerking moment that didn’t quite work (No LOTR-style boo-hoos here), but neither did their seems fall into the “well what was the point” category (Pirates 3 and Spidey 3, I’m looking at you-oou). It was quite sad though, but I’m a sucker for any kind of self-sacrifice on film.

I also liked seeing The White Witch back. As I understand, it’s mentioned in the books that this could happen, but never explained how, nor indeed attempted. It seemed to fit though.

But what was going on with Caspian and Susan? A few glances to one another and that that spectacularly naff scene at the end (and an even more spectacularly naff song!) Romance involving kids is vomit-inducing stuff. And Peter’s still bloody annoying, instead this time he has Caspian to argue with all the time instead of Susan.

I suppose the silliest part was the trees. And the collapsing caverns to trap the Telmarines. May have looked good but it was taking things a bit too far.

Also, much like in the first film when the kids changing from whiny brats who want to go home to warriors willing to die for a land that isn’t there’s and a lion they met yesterday seemed highly unbelievable, Caspian’s willingness to die for a group of creatures he thought were legends didn’t seem right. Whether it was the writing or Ben Barnes’ portrayal, it just didn’t seem to fit.

The four kids are all right I suppose. Nothing as truly awful as the Potter lot. Peter was the worst of the bunch. Lucy had les to do than last time but she was still quite good.

I saw The Lion, the Witch and The Wardrobe again at the weekend and I noticed some really bad effects, both CGI and practical. This one didn’t seem to suffer so much (though Badger and Squirrel looked pretty awful) The Minotaurs looked great again (I felt sorry the that big fella holding the gate) and both battle scenes held the attention well. Harry Gregson-Williams score also went up a notch, at times reminiscent of his Kingdom Of Heaven score, but better than the first film.

Erm. What else? I liked both the dwarves, even if a few of Peter Dinklage’s one-liners fell flat. I didn’t like Izzard as Reepicheep. I liked the swordfight between Peter and Miraz, and once again the design of some aspects of the film is remarkable. LOTR-style moment seemed to crop up all over the place, shots, scenery, effects, situations etc. Didn’t bother me for the most part (apart from the trees. They just seemed to be shoehorned in)

That’s about it really. It’s not a masterpiece, there is plenty I’d change and I suppose diehard fans of the books will rightly have things to say about some of the changes. But it was highly watchable, very entertaining and it certainly seemed shorter than 143 minutes. I liked it – 4/5


_____________________________

So, sir, we let him have it right up! And I have to report, sir, he did not like it, sir.

Fellow scientists, poindexters, geeks.

Yeah, Mr. White! Yeah, science!

Much more better!

(in reply to Anglachel)
Post #: 39
RE: Better than the first one, in a different way. - 4/7/2008 4:26:05 AM   
Manchurian candidate


Posts: 11123
Joined: 13/6/2006
From: A Clear-Thinking Oasis
Can I ask what you lovely, endearing, beautiful people thought of the song over the closing credits? (The Call by Regina Spektor)

_____________________________

"Ford's economics are the worst thing that's happened to this country since pantyhose ruined finger-fucking."
Lyndon B. Johnson
"British Beatitudes! … Beer, beef, business, bibles, bulldogs, battleships, buggery and bishops"
-Ulysses, By James Joyce
"Rose McGowan is a fucking clown"
-Harry Lime
"Who's Keith"
- Rhubarb

(in reply to Gimli The Dwarf)
Post #: 40
RE: Better than the first one, in a different way. - 4/7/2008 5:52:29 PM   
Timon


Posts: 14545
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
quote:

ORIGINAL: Manchurian candidate

Can I ask what you lovely, endearing, beautiful people thought of the song over the closing credits? (The Call by Regina Spektor)


I like it. I've like Regina Spektor ever since I first heard 'Us' and I thought 'The Call' fitted the ending of the film well, just as Alanis Morrisette's 'Wunderkind' suited 'Wardrobe'.

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to Manchurian candidate)
Post #: 41
PC so not LOTR - spoilers - 5/7/2008 6:42:25 PM   
Speedwagon Roll!

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 25/5/2008
From: London
Worst film I've seen this year. The kids were awful, especially given that only Georgie Henley is under sixteen, but perhaps that due to the gruesome, exposition over-loaded script. I couldn't but for one minute that these were once kings and queens, nor was at all convinced that either boy was a leader of men.

Why did the Telmarines have Spanish accents?

What did the Narnians hope to achieve by attacking the castle?

Why is Aslan such a patronising cunt, dear one?

And the fucking Ents; always the weakest link in LOTR, and now they're back. Who thought that was a good idea???

The only good performance came from Anna Popplewell's lips; that's a pout that Angelina can only dream of.

Besides that, rank bollocks.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 42
RE: PC so not LOTR - spoilers - 5/7/2008 9:17:26 PM   
Paul2j

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedwagon Roll!

Why is Aslan such a patronising cunt, dear one?


Just sprayed coke all over myself thanks to this.

(in reply to Speedwagon Roll!)
Post #: 43
RE: PC so not LOTR - spoilers - 7/7/2008 1:33:53 PM   
blackduck


Posts: 1559
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul2j

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedwagon Roll!

Why is Aslan such a patronising cunt, dear one?


Just sprayed coke all over myself thanks to this.


Enjoyed the film , but this point really annoyed me, basically the Narnians endured 1300 years of oppression and were almost exterminated because Aslan couldn't be arsed helping them. Also why would any of the Telemarines choose to leave a now peaceful Narnia for a war torn England? Were these explained better in the books?

_____________________________

I am but an egg.

(in reply to Paul2j)
Post #: 44
RE: Almost as good as Potter - 8/7/2008 6:39:07 PM   
R W

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 23/6/2006
Director: Andrew Adamson
Screenwriters: Andrew Adamson, Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely
Starring: Ben Barnes, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell, Skandar Keynes, Georgie Henley, Peter Dinklage, Sergio Castellitto

Synopsis
A year has passed since their first adventure and the Pevensies (Morseley, Popplewell, Keynes, McFeely) return to Narnia, realising that over a millennium has passed since the siblings left. When an evil king is determined to rule the land, the Pevensies and new alley Prince Caspian (Barnes) wages war in order to save Narnia.  

Review
After the bizarre success of Shrek II, New Zealand director Andrew Adamson took started an adapted franchise of C.S. Lewis's fantasy saga. The first instalment, known as The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was the first and best of a series of fantasy epics that try to be as powerful as Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings.  

Based on the second Narnia book that was published, even though it is the fourth chronologically, Prince Caspian is considered to be the first of a trilogy to explore the adventures of Caspian X, so we might be expected adaptations of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (Michael Apted as director) and The Silver Chair.

The first half of the film is somewhat familiar to The Twin Towers, in which there are multiple journeys about various characters. On the one hand, we have the Pevensies who are trying to discover why Narnia is a different place. And on the other hand, we have a prince charming roaming around the woods, where he discovers talking animals, dwarves and a mouse voiced by Eddie Izzard.

The film never stops for character development or any emotional moments, as it expands the action sequences to create the spectacular. In the second half, things do get dark and yet there is still enough light for the family to enjoy. Whatever harsh stuff that Adamson provides, he still conceives this franchise as the light equivalent to LOTR.

However, as director, Adamson still wows us with some impressive action, such as the invasion sequence at King Miraz's castle. The visual effects have improved as they don't look like animation from a DreamWorks computer-animated film. With such incredibly long epic moments, including small dialogue scenes in between, you wished that the film was a little shorter.

Since the actors who played the Pevensies are three years older, their maturity makes them more convincing than they were going through wardrobes. This is perhaps the final entry at Narnia for actors William Moseley and Anna Popplewell. Ben Barnes as our new hero is perfectly fine as a young warrior who struggles with the consequences he has to face.

Many of the voice actors, who play the Narnians, are no longer a nuisance as they don't sound like identifiable British actors as that was a flaw in the previous film. The villains, who are the Telmarines has a strange Spanish influence, in the same way that the Magisterium from The Golden Compass that were inspired by the Russians. Dwarves are typical characters in the genre, but Peter Dinklage portrays his performance like a father figure, rather than a comedic role.

It is hard to say whether all of the Narnia novels will be adapted for the big screen, as they don't seem to be as successful as the Harry Potter films. But since the next film will be in the hands of a more interesting director, Narnia may still have a future.

Verdict
A sequel that is both light and dark, it manages to have the entertainment for families to enjoy.
Post #: 45
RE: Almost as good as Potter - 8/7/2008 7:41:26 PM   
Speedwagon Roll!

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 25/5/2008
From: London
Please, please, I'm in pain here; why did they atack the fecking castle?  I just need to know...

_____________________________

Dodge this!

(in reply to R W)
Post #: 46
Like the Two Towers but not as good - 8/7/2008 8:49:43 PM   
ilander66

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 1/5/2006
I know that Tolkien and Lewis were friends and I have not read the book of Prince Caspian but is it really that similar to the Two Towers? Caspian doing and Aragorn (you should lead the people 'oh no I cant really' 'oh alright then') a weird fortress cave thing where all the good guys whole up for the final stand *cough* helms deep *cough* and then SPOLIER the trees come alive at the end and squish all the bad guys (just like the ents no?) anything missing? well what about nicking the Flight at the Forge bit from the fellowship of the ring where the waves come alive and wash away the bad guys (big watery bloke not horses though). who said originality is dead?

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 47
RE: An improvement but work needed on Aslan - 9/7/2008 4:03:24 PM   
Cruisecontroller


Posts: 4381
Joined: 28/4/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jayofeen

Pretty poor and some bad effects (sepcifically the lion, Aslan, which still needs work) spoiled it for me. It's unfair to mark it down for similarities between it and LOTR, however, since Lewis finished writing the books the same year as the LOTR was first published. It's hardly plagiarism.


I think Jayofeen that the previous posters comments you are reffering too are regarding the cinematic style of PC mimicing the LOTR movies not PC`s books story plagurising the LOTR`s books. A point I agree on. On one hand the epic battles made the film edger and more grown up than TLTW&TW but were unorgional in style. No doubt the night raid on the castle was put in to beef up the action as its not in the orgional book to bring in Ring film fans. Its a good sequel  and much better than the already decent first film with some very impressive effects and battles. Moseley is too wet in the movie though whereas Prince Caspian helloo! 4/5.

_____________________________

MyDVDCollection.http://www.empireonline.com/myempire/mydvdcollection.asp?UID=49319

Last five movies seen & rated by me.

1. Star Trek: Into Darkness. 5/5
2. I`m So Excited. 3/5
3. Iron Man 3. 4/5
4. Olympus Has Fallen. 4/5
5. Oblivon. 3/5

(in reply to Jayofeen)
Post #: 48
RE: An improvement but work needed on Aslan - 9/7/2008 8:27:20 PM   
Emyr Thy King


Posts: 2153
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: The Grid
This film was certainly better than the first, I found the first to be flat. The performances were a little dull and uninspiring and the battle scenes choked. This time around there are some good new changes. However before I continue, could Empire, specifically Dan Jolin explain the hardcore fawnography lovefest displayed in the July issue, page 110 :-

"Now a considerably filled-out 20, Moseley sits before us, out of costume in a tight, John McClane-style khaki vest, a garment we perhaps ungenerously suspect has been chosen with the express prupose of showcasing his recently sculpted biceps"

Perhaps someone should've given him a moment?

I though William Moseley who played Peter was disappointing and a bit too..'piffy'.He and to a certain extent Anna Popplewell were very wooden (yes more wooden as the trees as others have made numerous gags on), perhaps someone should've shouted "timber!" to give some immediacy in their performances. The scene where someone tells Peter to smile back at the Narnians in order to rouse them was hilarious, I take it, it was meant to be intentionally comedic but the smile was unintentionally funny. I also thought he was unconvincing as a warrior. Anna Popplewell just pouted and smiled her way through, and the sub-plot (if you can call it that) involving the 'romance' between Susan and Prince Caspian wasn't needed and by all accounts isn't even hinted at in the books! Now it seems to me that many of the reviewers who liked Ben Barnes as Prince Caspian were admirers or 'swooners'. I actually thought he was good and did provide some gravitas as a leader, although I certainly didn't swoon. Lucy was well played, especially as the youngest sibling who gets ignored by others and is still faithful to the memory of Aslan. The actor who played Edmund, Skandar Keynes (I second the motion that he has a cool name) really did shine. He actually seemed threatening and very capable with a blade. His first 'duel' with the dwarf was class and had a hint of LOTR about it (more than just the swordplay). Peter Dinklage the one who played the red haired dwarf was very good, I actually didn't realise he was in this as he had an english accent and everything else I've seen Peter in he had his native U.S accent. Very good I thought. Reepicheep was well voiced by Eddie Izzard, although the joke "how original" did wear thin after a few times. Still he kicked arse when he first appears.

The castle assault sequence was well made, it's interesting that this and other things caused a small rift and conflict between Peter and Caspian. Some didn't like this, but I thought it made the drama more interesting, and actually one of the few scenes where Moseley acted and didn't just sulk.

3/5 from me. Could've been better, if I was more knowledgeable on the source material I may given it a lower score. However since I wasn't nitpicking I overlooked things I may not have done, knowing the book.




_____________________________

"This whole imbroglio is epiphenomenal"...."demigogic faux egalitarianism" - Will Self

(in reply to Cruisecontroller)
Post #: 49
RE: The Chronicles Of Narnia: Prince Caspian - 11/7/2008 7:59:23 PM   
yaso123d


Posts: 4
Joined: 8/6/2007
From: london
I found it about as good as the last one although in a different way. I thought this one had better action but it was more annoying. The little girl is the most annoying character in my opinion, and Edmond was the best and I wish they could have had more of him on screen.

I didn't really think it was very suitable for young kids, a few creatures in that film looked surprisingly ugly/scary....to back up that point, me and my boyfriend definitely noted the smell of urine in the air about half way through the film...no lies.

_____________________________

nature is coming to get us all

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 50
RE: The Chronicles Of Narnia: Prince Caspian - 13/7/2008 12:22:50 AM   
Paul2j

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 30/9/2005
On the whole, the film is very watchable and eventful enough.  Really enjoyed the first three-quarters of it.

The ending almost ruined it.  Why couldn't Aslan just do that in the first place?  And the response to Lucy's 'could I have saved them?' was laughable - you didn't have enough faith in me so people die - nice.  I tried to ignore that, and ended up enjoying it in the main.

7/10

(in reply to yaso123d)
Post #: 51
RE: The Chronicles Of Narnia: Prince Caspian - 20/7/2008 11:48:39 PM   
Crowqueen

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 19/7/2008
Pretty good film given that the source material is a bit less iconic than Lion/Witch/Wardrobe but it's the most action-filled of the books - not sure how they are going to cope with Dawn Treader, which is basically a kind of school-trip version of Narnia with no real plot or climax or ending, just a series of adventures that really defy logic or reason. Prince Caspian is really the high point of the series, aside from Horse and His Boy which would call down a fatwa on the studio's head if they ever dared attempt to make and distribute it.

Personally I enjoyed it but then I enjoy anything with swords and men charging about on horseback. Barnes makes Caspian come alive a bit (in the books he is rather a milksop) and I'm only sorry he didn't flirt a bit more with Susan at the important bits that they couldn't chop, because it would not only have explained the bits at the beginning but also been more deliberately realistic (even Wall-E finds a bra and ...puts it on, so why not Su and Cas?!). Overall I think it's pretty much better than the first film which I enjoyed on the big screen but lost a lot on the transition to DVD, and I think I needed the story at the time because I lost myself in the plot of it and didn't really notice the CGI flaws at all. But Cas was, I agree, more of a political rather religious experience so it succeeded in bringing Lewis' characters to life. The Pevensie children were as usual annoying brats but I think keeping Aslan out of it until the end was intentional: first of all, although Aslan is much more prominent in the book, they needed to show that people need to take care of themselves and God only helps turn the tide of battle for you when you need the decisive blow (much like Churchill got everyone to pray for peace at 9pm during the war but he still sent the boys in on D-Day). I sympathise with Peter and Caspian's dilemma with the White Witch and was only really disappointed when more wasn't made of the intrigue among the generals. Also they could have made much more of an in-joke with the Telmarines coming into this world at the end - what would have been really interesting at the end would be the children bumping into them in the tube station at the end.

The acting was as people have suggested - too iconic and not realistic enough, and Caspian barely held on to his accent. Like the last film, they took enough liberty with the original text to make what is basically a children's novella into a coherent and believeable story (the BBC adaptation was direly in need of some imagination, but I suppose you don't mess with something like Narnia if you aren't doing it on a large enough scale for it to really matter). Re-reading the book, I think I like the film's plot better as it appeals to more than just Narnia afficionados and stands alone as a proper fantasy flick, and Lewis was good enough at writing to avoid something like Eragon or The Golden Compass coming out of his pen - too many flicks or novels turn into standard "quests" - point A to point B to point C - rather than seriously coping with a complicated plot. I didn't have any particular problem with William Moseley, but then again, I tend to get immersed in the action enough during these kind of films not to notice that kind of thing; I must be one of the few people who enjoyed the first film enough to regret not seeing it at the cinema over and over again, but this one I can safely say that once it had finished I didn't really want to see it straight away over again like the first one. I think I can say that the appeal of LWW was more psychological than that it was a terribly good film, because on DVD it didn't have the same appeal, but I don't even think I'll even be renting Caspian again.

Overall better than some people think but you need to be able to lose yourself in the story and plot to get past the deficiencies in the plot and in the acting, and I think they seriously need to think hard about Dawn Treader because that could just be completely off the wall the way it reads as a novel. If they do make it (and don't get axed like The Golden Compass' sequels have) they will have to do as much of a rewrite to it as they did to Caspian to make sure they keep the story moving and give it a proper climax and denouement, otherwise it will probably play like a bad trip of the other kind.

And I sincerely hope they get to make The Horse and His Boy at some point - with Chinese/Mongols rather than Arabs/Turks? - because that remains my favourite "other" Narnia book and it has enough of a plot to keep going, unlike Dawn Treader.

@Paulrj - Lewis didn't pull any punches when it came to Aslan. In The Horse... he rips Aravis' back to shreds because she let her servant get beaten when she fell asleep on duty. The message really here is that Aslan doesn't just come in and put everything right - you have to believe in him and be faithful to him before he will help. That is proper theology, and I think personally people need harder lessons rather than "We can just do it by ourselves" or "God should help without being asked to" or whatever. CS Lewis isn't all feel-good-factor, because I think films are getting more and more direct - if we don't shape up ourselves, we're not going to get out of this fix. Just look at Wall-E and Boy With The Striped Pyjamas - two films which I'm surprised have been made at all, what with their stark messages/endings. Caspian isn't meant to be saved by deus ex machina, but by making sure he keeps faith in his honour and a just and honourable solution himself, rather than either messing up plans to fulfil a personal vendetta against Miraz (the point of the film's own material) or by just thinking that magic will save people without having to plan a fight.


< Message edited by Crowqueen -- 20/7/2008 11:55:32 PM >

(in reply to Paul2j)
Post #: 52
I didn't find it as magical as the first ... - 1/8/2008 1:54:00 PM   
sunnygirly2k4


Posts: 36
Joined: 17/12/2006
From: Essex, UK
I felt the acting was a bit wooden (especially from the older teens and the ttle character), the plot deja vu, the score is too LOTR and it's also trying too hard to be 'darker' and some parts could've been cut. what's with the unessary romantic subplot too? It's got more action than the first and seems slightly more mature, but it NEEDS to find it's own identity badly. Here's to hoping the new director for Dawn Treader does the books more justice,

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 53
Fantasy Perfection - 2/8/2008 1:57:10 PM   
fountaingirl

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 2/8/2008
A wonderful film that makes you smile as youre not sure what to marvel at first. I agree with many of the above comments like more was needed on Aslan and the performances of the older children are slightly 'wooden' however this reminds me of the harry potter films that include stunning visuals with some equally bad acting going on. But to be honest, you can quite easily ignore that and simply gawk at the enjoyable action sequences and amusing creatures. I disagree with the comment that says the music is too lotr, i think its exactly what the film needed to round it of nicely. The beautiful regina spektor number at the end was perfect for the farewell scene :) Overall, I think it was a beautiful film. Like the title says...fantasy perfection.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 54
OK - 17/8/2008 12:26:28 PM   
Pipkin3

 

Posts: 218
Joined: 12/10/2005
Not sure if I reviewed this before, but in case you'd like ot know Empire, susan avoids nerds because shes used to being sought after by handsome princes :)

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 55
Great Sequel! - 3/2/2009 7:10:46 PM   
Caster


Posts: 5608
Joined: 30/9/2005
As good as if not better than the first Narnia film. The FX are seemless (badger!), the story different enough to not be just a cash-in of the first film and even most of the cast act better - except for Peter who looks as if he couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag. On the strength of this I can't wait for the next one.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 56
RE: Great Sequel! - 9/3/2011 7:22:48 PM   
JagLover

 

Posts: 447
Joined: 11/5/2007
I found the battle scenes in both movies of this franchise to be rather dull and uninspired, which since they form a greater part of the plot here becomes an issue.

I actually preferred the first film, it was more fun and magical and had a far more prominent role for the less wooden of the children.

3 stars, maybe 3.5 stars for the scenary which should look stunning in Hi-def when I get the Blu Ray.

I have more hopes for the next one, which will shed the wood, and have a more varied setting.

(in reply to Caster)
Post #: 57
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> Much more refined than LWW Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109