So, I went to go see "Prince Caspian" tonight.

It was, um, well...

It was good. It really was. On the whole it pwned. It was a really good movie. And on the whole I really liked it.

But...

Well, suffice to say, usually it's half the book that isn't in it's movie version; in this case, half the movie wasn't in the book. I'm not sure how I feel about that, really.

Most of the changes I didn't have a problem with because they facilitated the development of certain characters, like Miraz and Caspian (though in his case it did mean that he was characterized a bit strangely. Not badly, just a bit differently than the impression that you get of him in the book, in which he seems a lot younger and less complex). A lot of the changes also helped to make the story line more linear, since the book is so non-linear, which would have made for a strange movie.

And as much as I'm a Narnian purist/canonist and anti-shipper, I didn't even really have a problem with the weird little mutual crush thing they had going on between Susan and Caspian. I didn't particularly care for it and if it were up to me I probably wouldn't have included it, but it didn't really bother me all that much. I didn't even mind the exclusion of the Bacchus story line, since that part's weird anyway.

If there is anything that actually bothers me, it's what they did to Peter, especially in regards to that whole thing with Miraz's castle (which wasn't in the book. At all. In any way shape or form). In the book, once they've been back in Narnia a little while and have remembered and reacclimated and stepped back into their roles as kings and queens, then he really is, once again, King Peter the Magnificent, High King over all High Kings in Narnia, Emperor of the Lone Islands, Lord of Cair Paravel, and Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Lion. And he is everything that a King should be. But in this movie he just...wasn't. It's like he'd somehow taken a step backwards, somehow. I mean, he's not perfect in the book by any means, and I wouldn't want him to be, but...I don't know. I can't put my finger on it. Because it's not that he didn't screw up in the book, he did. But not in a way that cost anybody their lives. And he didn't pick fights (except with Trumpkin, early on). He just didn't seem like himself. I think part of it may have had to do with how they had him and Susan both not see Aslan until near the end (which isn't how it happened in the book).

And I didn't care for the accusation of the Pevensie's having abandoned Narnia. I can understand why the Dwarves would feel that way (and part of me had actually always wondered why Nikabrik never said it), but I didn't care for it. It kind of played into the whole mood of the movie, which I think was rather darker and sadder than it quite needed to be. Maybe I just didn't care for it because it was Trumpkin who said it first, instead of Nikabrik, and it's such a Nikabrik thing to say.

Also, their math was totally out of whack. The book doesn't actually tell you how long it's been in Narnian time since they were last there, but something in the time math of the movie is way off, because the movie said that the Telmarines conquered Narnia not too long after the Pevensies disappeared, which can't have been the case if 1300 years have passed, because Narnia was conquered by Caspian the First, and the Caspian of "Prince Caspian" is Caspian X, in a direct line from Caspian I, so something's way off there. And seriously, the Old Narnians living in hiding under Telmarine rule in Narnia for nearly 1300 years? That just doesn't quite make sense any way. *sigh*

And now that I come to think of it, I don't think that they actually named many of the characters in the movie. Their names were in the credits, but they didn't actually give the names of Pattertwig and Trufflehunter and Glenstorm, et al. You were just kind of expected to know them, which is fine, I suppose, because I do know them, but still, it's a bit odd. I'm not even 100% sure they named Reepicheep. I think they did, but I'm not totally sure.... They did a good job with Reepicheep and Trufflehunter though, all the same.


And I don't mind how they did Susan. I think they did a really good job with her, even with that thing with Caspian and that guy at the train station, because that, coupled with a lot of the little things she'd do or say throughout the movie (generally being a wet blanket) went a long way to foreshadow what becomes of her in "The Last Battle." So I think that all actually worked well.

And considering how well they've done with all the characters and such on the whole, I can't wait to see how they do Eustace. And Edmund and Caspian (and Reepicheep!) in relation to Eustace. HA! That'll be awesome.

But oh, my poor Peter. What have they done to you? And why? (*hugs book*)

And the worst bit of it is that he won't really get to redeem himself by being uber-magnificent again (super pwnsome to the enth degree though he was in his duel with Miraz) any time soon because he can't come back to Narnia again (technically) with Lucy and Edmund, so we won't see him again until "The Horse and His Boy" (assuming that they show him at all, which they may or may not in the movie, considering that in the book he is mentioned repeatedly, but as he is off fighting a war with some Giants he isn't actually seen. They may change that though. you never know. his victory over the Northern Giants is a really significant part of Narnian history) and then after that we won't see him until "The Last Battle." Granted, he's cool in those books, but we've still got "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" and "The Silver Chair" to go before we get to "The Horse and his Boy," and then we have to get through "The Magician's Nephew" before we get to "The Last Battle." So it'll be a while. At least they're doing them in the order they were written though, instead of in chronological order. I don't believe in reading Narnia in chronological order. (Plus, by doing them in the order they were written, they won't have to get different actors for the Pevensies when they do get up to "Horse and his Boy" and "Last Battle," because they're older in those ones [I think he's in his early twenties in "Last Battle"], so that's a bonus). I really hope they go all the way through with these to "The Last Battle;" that one's my favorite, and has super epic movie potential.

...Ok, that's weird, I've just gone to IMDB to check and see if they've got anything on "Dawn Treader," and they have Peter on the Character list. They must be doing that part mentioned at the beginning where he goes off to study with Professor Kirk and Susan goes with their parents to America in order to explain better to the audience why Lucy and Edmund are with Eustace....idk. Oh well. At least he's in it.

I don't know, maybe I'm over reacting a bit. But can you really blame me? I mean, C.S. Lewis is my favorite author EVER, and literally can't remember a time when he wasn't. I've known these stories and these characters my entire life. And it can't be that I just need to read the book again, because I just read it yesterday. But maybe once I'm through with "Dawn Treader" (I'm about half way through), I'll go back and skim over and see if I can't figure out where they got off doing that to Peter-- see where it came from.

hmmm...*changes mind about waiting. Goes and skims through book for a while. Comes back.* Nope, I still don't get it. All I can figure is that it was convenient for keeping the more linear story line and making the movie more exciting, as not much actually happens in the book. *Sigh. Again* All the same, poor Peter. I kept feeling so bad for him.

Maybe I just need to see the movie again. Maybe then it won't be as shocking and I won't mind so much, and then I'll like it better. Because, on the whole, I did like the movie. I really did. I just didn't care for what they did to Peter.

Well, at least they didn't mess with Edmund. That would have been unforgivable. Edmund is [usually] my favorite. (followed closely by Peter and Eustace, who are [usually] in a dual for second place).

And come to think of it, almost everything that they inserted that reflected badly on Peter was really Caspian's fault anyway. Hmm. And they kind of had to do some of those things to Caspian in order to make him a more dynamic character and not seem so young. So I guess in that light I can sort of understand it. And that makes it better. I'm still not totally happy, but it's somewhat better. Yeay!

But I still think I ought to see it again.

Anyway, back I go into my Narnia books. For some reason I can never read one without reading all of them. In order. But not chronological order.

I Narnia.





In other news, I am officially one third of the way through my May term in English 571 (Studies in Early American Literature), and I have yet to overload and die. Yeay!




My clubs: