The Song Fight Bulletin Board

We just went to see this at a midnight showing. Real weird audience that freaked me out just a little. There were huge groups of church youth groups. The damn kids behind me kept bashing my chair.

I don't really remember much about the actual movie. (I kept nodding off, and when I woke up they'd be on the same set, just about 20 minutes later with a little bit of plot had advanced.) But freaking Qui-Gon Jinn is Aslan, which threw me quite a bit. It wasn't that bad a movie, just kinda pacey. I wouldn't go see it again, and I probably wouldn't get it on DVD.

C.

were there any atheists protesting?

C. S. Lewis said it isn't an allegory. Fuck, man.

Bethany, dude's name is Liam Neeson. Six years before he was Qui-Gon Jinn in one movie he was nominated for an Oscar for playing Oskar Schindler.

mkilly wrote: Bethany, dude's name is Liam Neeson. Six years before he was Qui-Gon Jinn in one movie he was nominated for an Oscar for playing Oskar Schindler.

Marcus, I'm not quite that dumb. It's the fact that both characters have a protective/prophetic-esque characterization that that's the first connection I made.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound quite so much like an asshole. I just um... really like Liam Neeson.

Now that you mention it he does tend to play that sort of role doesn't he? The bad guy in Batman is basically a Sith-like Qui-Gon Jin who, instead of teaching Obi-Wan, tries to turn Batman to the dark side.

What do we learn from "Dark Man"?

Then again, I guess we could say he *was* sort of a mentor to Jim Carrey in "The Dead Pool"...

But really, it was Swayze who was the mentor in "Next of Kin", so I'd say the whole mentor/prophet theory is bunkum.

-Spoilage if you've not read the books or seen the movie-

The best part about this movie is little Lucy's interactions with Tumnus. It had a purity and innocence that was very nice to watch.

I don't remember if it was this way in the books, but (regardless of whether or not one agrees with them) the philosophical underpinnings seemed shallowly drawn.

There are hints of power behind the movements of the plot, and key moments like the Ice Queen asking Tumnus something like, "do you know why you're here? It's because of him [Edmund]. He gave you over for some tasties." Although to be fair, he spilled the Tumnus info before he had the slightest hint she was evil, her point still hits true, Edmund had betrayed his family and the Narnians for treats and his shame was evident and powerful.

I felt a slight stirring when Aslan was led up to the stone table and shaved, but even that was diminished by the relative lack of cruelty he faced on the part of his executors, and the obvious distance between the cheering horde of mongrel animals and me as observer. (keep in mind I'm agnostic here so ye of faith correct my projections upon your religion, if there be errors) The reason the crucifixion story has so much power is because it is not some evil band of disfigured animals torturing Jesus, it is us doing it. It is his blood on our hands. So the reference here comes off weaker than the original story.

This distinction allows us to be comfortable with Edmund's salvation while not caring that thousands of minotaurs and cyclops and creatures so ugly as to defy description are slain. It's easy to believe that Edmund can come around, but what about a pox-faced rat-weasel? Do we consign them to flames of woe?

Much of the shallowness could be fixed I think if this movie were done in two parts, but I'm not sure how to get past the inherent distance we feel from the actions of the animals in Narnia.

I was listening to NPR and they were saying that JRR Tolkein and Lewis were really good friends for 15 years and that the Lord of the Rings would probably have never been finished without Lewis' cajoling. Their friendship started to slip away when Tolkein apparently disliked The Narnia series.

It was an enjoyable movie. People complained that it was plodding, but I would rather it have been much more pointedly and deeply plodding.

abecedarian wrote:It was an enjoyable movie. People complained that it was plodding, but I would rather it have been much more pointedly and deeply plodding.

I think you hit the nail on the head, that's the issue with the movie. I wasn't moved enough by the acting and portrayal of scenes that moved me intensely when I read this book aged 11. That was definitely not true of LOTR where despite having re-read the book several times I was engrossed and drawn into the movies in spite of their length.

I loved little things like the mothballs. Don't ask me why but when they rolled out when Lucy opens the door, I had a huge flashback therapy moment going on. Doubt that many of the other people in the audience had any idea what they were despite having obviously read the books. The mice nibbling through Aslan's bounds was a cool little thing that could easily have been left on the cutting room floor a victim to time...glad they didnt. The beavers were great as was fox and all the freezing scenes were painful and cruel just as they should be...which brings me to Tilda....She is terrific...love her in Constantine and here in a much more cold controlled performance that fits the character so well she was great. Also laughed afterwards when my son described Father Christmas as the mythical Narnian arms dealer . Little stuff like that was awesome.

As Bjam said we had a very large number of church youth group audience in the house. They played a trailer for Gospel and about 30 people around us started singing along.....not a bad thing just.....weird....definitely NOT the usual midnight first screening crowd we are used to.

just re-read the first book over thanksgiving... in like one day... it's a quick read. we're looking forward to seeing this on sunday.
-bill

Congratulations, HInc, you have just wasted 15' of my time

Interesting site I found long the way: http://www.simonsingh.net/The_Black_Cha ... puzzle.htm

Lord of the Rings Lite. High technical marks, but something about it (probably the characters) didn't quite grab me the same way Fellowship did. Some absolutely fantastic looking creatures (Aslan, the minotaur, the beavers); some not-as-good (the fox, the wolves in places). Also (and this is a weird complaint), there were very few realistic looking sets: they were either small obvious studio sets, or they were sprawling blue-screened panoramas, and no in-between. It gave the movie a strange hyper-realistic feel that sharply contrasted the preview for Pirates of the Caribbean 2 (shown immediately before the feature). I guess what I really wanted to see was a Hobbiton. Also, a tad slow. B+, probably an A- if I hadn't read the book.

Is it just me or does grown-up Peter look like the Burger King mascot? Like, identical?

Puce wrote: Is it just me or does grown-up Peter look like the Burger King mascot? Like, identical?

Yes! So creepy. My brother and I did the frantic whisper of "Holy crap, it's the Burger King King!"

abecedarian wrote:Congratulations, HInc, you have just wasted 15' of my time

Fifteen feet? Or is that minutes? Was it fun?
That site does look useful, but a little cheaty
doesn't seem to work in mozilla, but i.e. works.
-bill

HeuristicsInc wrote:Fifteen feet? Or is that minutes? Was it fun?
That site does look useful, but a little cheaty
doesn't seem to work in mozilla, but i.e. works.
-bill

Minutes. I like a challenge (implied or otherwise). Besides, it was much more educational than the 30 minutes I spent in the time wasters thread.

HeuristicsInc wrote:Cipher

I'm dumb: It took my a full half an hour (mind you, I just used pencil and paper). It was worth it just for the moment when I realized what the first word was.

yay, then my work is done here. i have three solvers!
-bill

Four, you bastard.

I had just read all of the Narnia movies to my kids over the summer so they were fresh in my mind. I was very worried about how the adaptation would be. I was pleasantly surprised at just how on point it was. I even took out the book after seeing the movie and all that was really missing was a little of the Turkish Delight seduction and meeting Giant Rumblebuffin. This stayed very true to the book. Tilda Swanton's Queen Jadis was incredible. They even achieved the sense that the kids seem older as their adventure goes along. I'm not talking about when they're hunting the white stag, I'm talking about how they feel older when you look at them at the thrones of Cair Paravel. All in all, excellent work. I give it an A.

I thought it was awesome. I give it an A!
We were pretty impressed that they kept the religious overtones to the same level that they were in the original book. Didn't underuse them, didn't dumb them down. The soundtrack was excellent. Adding in the bit in the beginning with the German bombers was a nice touch, to give you a better idea of where they were coming from.
I did not think it was plodding. The movie went at the right pace for the material, I thought. But I did just read the book, so read into that what you like.
Battle scenes were nicely done!
I thought the kids and the White Witch were all well acted. My wife M says that Aslan wasn't as impressive as he should have been but that it's largely impossible to portray that in a movie... Witch costumes and such were really perfect.
M was pretty nervous about this, because this series are her favorite books from her childhood and she's reread them a bunch of times... she had a couple of small nitpicks but nothing too serious (I thought). So we were pretty impressed...
-bill

I would give it a B-.

I'm too lazy to see who said Lucy and Tumnus's interaction was "innocent," but I didn't feel that way at all. I think the guy they got to play him was too intense and weird for the role. I wanted Lucy to get the hell out of there.

And speaking of Lucy, they relied waaaay too heavily on her looking cute/perplexed/scared/wonder-filled. The 2.5 hour-long movie must be about one full hour of Lucy-expressing-emotions-in-closeup.

There's something missing to it, though I can't quite put my finger on it. Even Tilda Swinton, who would seem to be born to play her role, doesn't leave any impression. Maybe it's more for kids. I probably would have loved it when I was 10. It's a little meh now, though.

raisedbywolves wrote:I'm too lazy to see who said Lucy and Tumnus's interaction was "innocent," but I didn't feel that way at all. I think the guy they got to play him was too intense and weird for the role. I wanted Lucy to get the hell out of there.

Seconded. He creeped me out.