Die Chroniken von Narnia - Prinz Kaspian von Narnia

In some ways I think film makers who create films based off of beloved books have a hard and thankless job. They must balance the creation of a film that anyone can like while still remaining faithful to the subject matter for the fans of the books. Adamson did this brilliantly in the first Narnia movie creating a rich and deep world faithful to the book while still bringing in those who never did read it. Unfortunately he missed the mark sorely with Prince Caspian.

I tried very hard to separate this film from the book but came up with the conclusion that one can not do that in cases like this. True, movies are never better then the book so you have to go in expecting changes, however this film is so far from the book that if the characters names were changed one would never know it was a Narnia based story. The film felt more like a story someone else wrote and simply pasted names and small scenes from Lewis's book to make it fit the mythos.

First things I like... Miraz was great! He was evil and developed in ways he wasn't in the book and I thought it was fantastic. I also liked how we got to know Miraz general Glozelle. That character showed a man who was on the wrong side but still had honor. He was worthy of what he receives at the end of the movie and was a great addition not included in the book.

Now on with the problems. One of the biggest was the dialog. Long gone is the intelligent flow of language and in its place is a modern interpretation of how people should talk to fit in with todays youth. The children and animals say "Shut up" while the dwarfs pipe up with "Ya gotta be kidding." It is clear that this script was not from the book and was from someone else's work not Lewis's.

Peter and Caspian are not the noble characters impacted by their experience and worthy of leading the Narnians. Peter starts off the film as a whining young man, a mere imitation of the young man we saw in the first film. Peter has little growth from that point never showing any consideration of growth. In fact by the end of the film there is no love for Peter or belief that he is a high King. Caspian is not much better. Caspian lacks humility and any true endearing quality until the end of the film when he admits he feels unworthy to lead (one of the few lines from the book). This moment comes far to late for us to believe there is anything genuine behind it.

The romance between Caspian and Susan is so forced it becomes painful at times. The entire love aspect adds nothing to the characters and merely adds grown factor to poor character development.

Attempts are made at creating drama over the four kids sudden disappearance from Narnia but there is no follow through. Several things have this half thought out feel to them making you wonder if the writers felt Lewis didn't know how to write about characters.

One of the biggest issues is that the lynch-pin for the entire Narnia series is missing for most of the film, Aslan. Aslan is never really referenced through out the first two thirds of the film. The Narnias never mention him or even recognize that he is the major influence for their entire nation. There is a hint at the situation from the book in which the children deal with the fact that only Lucy can see him but what Lewis used to show growth and a major issue of the children's growth in this story is blown over and turned into a three minute trek and dream sequence.

One of my biggest problems is when Lucy tells Peter that a possible reason that Aslan has not appeared is that he is seeing if they are worthy of him showing up. I was very angry at this statement because if there is one thing the first movie showed us and the books make clear it was that Aslan worked for those he cared for, not because of their deeds but because of who he is. Aslan was treated poorly and we lost all sight of the great lion who was loved as a great leader and king from the first film.

All in all I think this film suffers from some one else writing the story they think should have been done, not interpreting the story that was written.

Prince Caspian expands on the battles in the book; turning them from a few pages long into 30 - 45 minute epic fights that borrowed more than a little from The Return of the King. While competently choreographed -- this is far from the cinematic epic the overreaching soundtrack wants you to believe that it is.

The movie is entertaining, but rough around the edges. The editing is poor and one scene in particular should have been removed entirely as it does nothing for the film, outside of extend its already substantial length.

Is it better than The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe? That all depends on your stylistic preferences. If you're the wonderment, fairy-tale, unlimited Turkish Delight type you'll prefer the first Narnia. If you're a darker, sword and sorcery fan you'll consider Prince Caspian the better movie.

Both were worth the price of admission, but both left me feeling like they were one script doctor, soundtrack and/or director away from being the perfect fantasy movies they could have been. That said, Prince Caspian certainly warrants a bucket of popcorn and a fun Sunday afternoon at the theater with the family.

When Queen Prunaprismia (Alicia Borrachero) delivers a baby boy, King Miraz (Sergio Castellitto) orders his soldiers to kill Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes); however his tutor gives Susan's magic horn to him telling that he should blow is his life is in danger and asks him to ride to the forest. However he is chased by the Telmarian soldiers and he summons the Pevensie siblings. They discover that hundred of years have passed in Narnia and they join Prince Caspian to lead the people of Narnia against the evil King Miraz. When the battle begins, the siblings send Lucy to seek out Aslan, otherwise they will not win the powerful Telmarian army.

I expected to like "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" more than I did. The special effects are top-notch, but the story has a poor development of characters and the unoriginal final battle gives a sensation of déjà vu to the viewer with the excessive use of CGI. But the greatest problem is the weak lead cast: the four siblings and Prince Caspian are performed by the wooden and unknown young actors and actresses that are too weak for the lead roles. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "As Crônicas de Nárnia – Príncipe Caspian" ("The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian")

Very excited about seeing the 2nd Narnia film, having read all the books as a child Prince Caspian was one of my favourites as I loved how he was told the stories of old Narnia as a child and desperately wanted to see the old days return. Unfortunately the Caspian in the film seems to have little knowledge of Old Narina! The images from the books which I though would have been a useful tool for the film makers were not used once, a deep disappointment to me, especially as other films such as LOTR worked so hard to recreate the images fans of the book were familiar with. Of course there are the comparisons to LOTR, and at times it does feel like they are simply recreated smaller more child like version of events and characters from LOTR, of course when a film as great as LOTR is made every fantasy flick after will always be compared and fail to match it. If you haven't read the book I'm sure it will be an enjoyable family film, it is darker then the first and some parts will frighten small children. But for fans of the book the likeness to the book can be painfully little at times, and will leave you confused as to where the story is going. The back story for Caspian was not very well developed but as Caspian features in the next two books/films hopefully we will see and learn more about him. I will go and see the film again in the coming weeks and watch it as a fantasy fan and not as a fan of the books, hopefully I will enjoy it more!

Having just come back from a screening of Prince Caspian, I can honestly say that I got the movie fresh in my mind...and it was amazing! Not only was it better than the first in every way - the story, the acting, the screenplay - but it managed to have more of an edge without sinking into the pitfall that movies such as Pirates of the Caribbean have slipped into.

Meaning that unlike the Pirates sequels (don't get me wrong, I love Pirates, but this is something that bothered me a little), the makers of Prince Caspian did not believe that to make it better and more exciting, they had to gore and bloody it up. Instead, while it is darker, the blood and gore is kept to a bare minimum considering this is an action flick.

Anyway, that now aside, I highly recommend this! It's a great movie - great action scenes, a tad bit of romance but not overly so, and a good plot. Plus the young cast are even better in this film than they were in the first, and Ben Barnes - well, it's right that he is the title character,because he very nearly would have stolen the floor from underneath the original kids if they were even the slightest bit less perfect (William Moseley was the weakest of the five, as he was in the last movie, but he still stepped it up quite a bit).

Granted, I've not read the books, so I don't know if this is as dedicated to the book as many fans would like it to be. Then again, most movies adapted from the books never are. However, if they can find it in them to accept changes for theatrical purposes, I'm sure even the most die-hard fans will admit it "wasn't bad."