Escape to the Movies: The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader

[superline51]

Seems to me like Bob likes a lot of movies. When recommending them I think he needs to realize that a lot of people only see a couple movies every year.....$ ya know.

True that. The only movie I recall him hating was the expendables.

Are we already forgetting all the Eclipse debacles?

 

[superline51]

Man, I hate Narnia. Ok, with that out of the way.

Bob mentioned that The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was the first one... it was publication wise, that's true, but it's not the first in the series. The Magician's Nephew was the first part of the story.

I guess he was just a weird guy.

Obviously, he meant it was the first movie made. I actually have two different sets of the Narnia books. One has Magician's Nephew as book one, and the other has it in its rightful place.

 

[Hungry Donner]

Put me in the Silver Chair camp, although whoever plays Puddleglum has big shoes to fill, Tom Baker did a fantastic job.

 

[shekron]

I don't get how Aslan is Jesus. "He rose from the dead!" people tell me. Yeah, and then I watched him run into battle and bite a witches' face off! It seems like a pick and chose thing where with heavy confirmation bias in play.

Well I take it as Jesus is so awesome he bit sin and death in the face

As mentioned in previous posts, the Jewish messiah was thought to be a militant leader to free believers from physical oppression. Hey, even in Christian theology, Jesus is coming back to kick-ass! Remember, he's not just the loving caring, peace guy; he's also the mighty and powerful leader. You don't want to be fighting as his enemy in the end times

 

[MovieBob]

Spoiler

Basically, Susan can't get in because she stopped believing, right? I guess Lewis wanted that to happen to one of the characters just to play that scenario out to the reader. I don't know. I do that sort of thing sometimes, so that makes sense to me. Still a little random though. I might have picked Peter instead, since he is the eldest of the four. They are all "growing up" though, physically and mentally. All of them except for Jill and Eustace are probably at least at young adulthood. I always sort of figured that Lewis just picked Susan for no deep reason. I'm sure she will make it to heaven, though. Aslan let a heathen in, so Susan is a definite. She will probably make it after she dies, though. That's the oddest part for me. The fact that her siblings just disappear into heaven forever. How does that affect her, if at all? Do they explain cuz I don't remember.

A quote from wiki:

Spoiler

Peter says that she is "no longer a friend of Narnia", and (in Jill Pole's words) "she's interested in nothing now-a-days except nylons and lipstick and invitations."

And what happens to her isn't explained. The wording of the above quote is what gets to me. Those few words suggest that Lewis somehow thinks puberty, and the things you feel and think during that period, are bad. I cannot see how such a well-educated man could possibly think something like that.

EDIT: I also can't recommend Neil Gaiman's 'The Problem of Susan' enough. It explains a lot of the problems I have with the series.

PS: It also doesn't help that I watched the first movie before reading any of the books, and found Susan to be one of the two likeable protagonists (Edmund was also all right).

I think it's worth taking into account that the story doesn't make much of an explicit "connection" between Susan's change of perspective and her non-presence at The End. More specifically:

Spoiler

She's not going to heaven because she didn't get killed along with the others, and she's not "into" Narnia anymore, but one isn't necessarily following the other - though the timing is oddly convenient...

The wording IS very unfortunate, there's no way around that. One of the recurring themes in Lewis' fiction is a strong dislike for the trappings of "traditional" Western femininity. In "Horse & His Boy" there's a one-off scene between the main female character, a classic tomboy, and another girl who used to be her similarly-inclined friend but "left" her and became a prissy-princess type; and the contempt for the second girl jumps right off the page. And the White Witch, of course, is an archetypal upper-class matron.

A lot of it was probably cultural - in English society at the time, the female "function" was to "civilize" the male, i.e. to give boys an impetus to grow up into "proper" men; something Lewis had great disdain for. One can only wonder if it would've been written differently had he re-approached Narnia after he married Joy Davidman (and adopted her two children) - which seemed to "settle" a lot of his issues with family, adulthood, etc.

 

[ThePants]

Now I want to go read those books.

I was disappointed too when your predicted internet sensation "Ninjas. Damn." wasn't in that movie (my friend and I still say it sometimes though), but I thought it was fun. The backgrounds were noticeably fake albeit because they were gorgeous to look at most of the time, and I felt they did what they did pretty well for what they set out to do. Case in point: It could've been a hell of a lot worse. Definitely better than "The Expendables".

 

[Brotherofwill]

I fail to see where it having Chrisian elements to it should be an issue at all. I find it kind of ironic that when something similar to this comes along with a focus on non-Christian religion or philsophy, or that is critical of christianity and/or organized religion in general it's presented as a good thing, but here it's not. I don't think you have to be a believer to appreciate the messages or the analogies, and really I find something rather disturbing with the implication that there is something wrong with being a believer.

Someone whips out "The Matrix", or movies based on "Journey To The West" which is heavily religious (involving gods and the like), and I notice people don't feel the need to make quite the same issue of it. To be honest I actually thought "The Matrix" had just as many analogies as Narnia did in it's own way.

I'm not going to shoot off a list of movies here, or anything, I just don't see why this even needs to come up as a major talking point in regards to the movie.

I agree. People make Christian undertones an issue while they often let other religious undertones, or undertones that tend to critize religion as a whole, slide.

I think the focus on that part of Narnia was only present in this video because Bob tries to find something interesting to talk about and show off his useless knowledge once in a while. He does go after the 'smartass' route too often for my taste, but credit too him, it's still entertaining to watch no matter what he talks about.

 

[standokan]

I HAVE to watch this because of a school trip, I'm pissed since you know Inception, Harry Potter and the movie I want to see whatever the costs, Scott Pilgrim are also still playing.

 

[Lordbishop]

although the new Narnias are ok, i'm still a strong fan of the old movies seeing as I grew up watching them. I guess you always like the one around your time than ones that comes along later.

 

[dystopiaINC]

lol yeah that was a pretty funny ending, i found it fit the characters perfectly.

 

[AvsJoe]

The Protector bit and the Buddy Christ bit got me laughing.

I won't be seeing this movie. I disliked the first one and I skipped the second one. I may catch up later but right now that seems unlikely.

 

[Burck]

I fail to see where it having Chrisian elements to it should be an issue at all. I find it kind of ironic that when something similar to this comes along with a focus on non-Christian religion or philsophy, or that is critical of christianity and/or organized religion in general it's presented as a good thing, but here it's not. I don't think you have to be a believer to appreciate the messages or the analogies, and really I find something rather disturbing with the implication that there is something wrong with being a believer.

Someone whips out "The Matrix", or movies based on "Journey To The West" which is heavily religious (involving gods and the like), and I notice people don't feel the need to make quite the same issue of it. To be honest I actually thought "The Matrix" had just as many analogies as Narnia did in it's own way.

I'm not going to shoot off a list of movies here, or anything, I just don't see why this even needs to come up as a major talking point in regards to the movie.

because everyone wants to be included and be PC. If it doesn't apply to them they automatically want to stop it and ruin it for everyone. it's the same reason people are attacking chrismas saying "i don't celebrate it, why should you?! HUH?! HUH?!". Its the same buzzkill that should just learn to avoid what he doesn't like and let people get on with their lives. So what if they believe in jesus? its not like they walk up to you and kick you in the funbags if you don't believe. I don't believe i should pay taxes does that mean i should try to stop taxes being collected? People just want to look cool and deep for no foreseeable reason. "i hate religion and hate its even referenced" is the same pseudo and contrived philosophy crap as "i lost all faith in humanity" that "nonconformists" use to "stick it to the man". Then again, "ye who talks the loudest listens the least" so maybe its only a few radical people instead of this movement of buzzkills.

Good job explaining the phenomenon there, although I haven't concluded the same about the Christmas part.

I remember having that kind of mindset shortly after I stopped attending church (I was raised Catholic). I didn't want to have anything to do with the Christian mythos or media reflecting or otherwise referencing it.

Over the last year however, I have come to terms with Chrisitanity (the religion, NOT any of its organizations) by recognizing its more universal message and making my own interpretation of it. I'm still atheist, and plan on keeping it that way, but I no longer spite the religion.

Its followers, of course, are on a case-by-case basis, just like everyone else in the world.

I also enjoyed Bob's explanation of C.S. Lewis's life, and most of all the, "GOTCHA! *Winking Jesus Statue*"

 

[twaddle]

Warrior's Way was bollocks and Ninja's Damn is never going to take off because it was cut from the movie!?!?
http://s3.amazonaws.com/files.posterous.com/flyguy/uuEtcnfCCghyagxBwzhCaqiqmyaznpzuCstrIHhkgcApBHuwxyArnGuGybkA/media_httpwwwnooooooo_ovFiJ.jpg.scaled500.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=1C9REJR1EMRZ83Q7QRG2&Expires=1292105621&Signature=Q350rhiz87fnR9sXASLXqSOdGD0%3D

 

[Woodsey]

I don't think a fundamental argument of atheists and agnostics is that believing in Jesus is stupid.

I'm perfectly open to the idea that a man called Jesus may have existed and said that his Daddy was God. The line gets drawn when you believe he really was the son of God and that he actually did do anything the Bible says he did.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader

This week, Bob gets on board for Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

Watch Video

It's not as obvious as the religious undertones in, say, His Dark Materials.

Aren't those books rather blatantly anti-religious?

I never cared for the Narnia movies, nor have I read the books but... What's this one line that makes Aslan less allergory and more second version?

Well, in the trailer the rat says: "We have nothing, if not belief".

Not sure what Aslan says.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

No Izzard?, DAM
It sucks that the Ninja movie wasn't good.
Turn's out there's the right way and then there's...
*puts on glasses*
The Warrior's Way
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

You win a button, press it wisely.

http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound=csi

 

[RedheadedKate]

Actually, Bob (not sure if you know this) the whole Narnia story started when he found a bunch of stories he'd written when he was about nine years old about Sir Peter Mouse in a country of talking animals and thought "Hey, I could make this a whole book and my goddaughter Lucy would get love it!"

And no, Mr. Deckard, you're not an idiot. The reason Lewis wrote it the way he did was so people would see the religious allegory if they wanted to, and the people who weren't looking for it would just go along for a fun ride.

I was worried about this, as Dawn Treader is my favorite book, but seemed like it would be really hard to adapt.

I also believe that they don't intend to do "The Last Battle". I think they're stopping after "Magician's Nephew".

 

[RedheadedKate]

Uh, I meant to say "goddaughter Lucy would love it.". Not sure where the errant "get" came from. Maybe from this second beer I am drinking.

 

[Oskamunda]

In order to understand where this review falls down [and really the only place I find that it does], one must remember two things:

1] Tolkien wasn't just Lewis' friend, he was his converter, and a large part of the fairy tale mythos that penetrates The Chronicles of Narnia is an homage and a thank you to Tolkien.

2] The Chronicles of Narnia were never meant to be vaguely Christian. They were blatantly Christian, an attempt to provide young minds with high fantasy adventure with Christian morals and parallels in a child-friendly medium that was conspicuously devoid of said morals and parallels before.

Narnia is really an invitation to go on to read The Screwtape Letters, Mere Christianity, and The Great Divorce.

 

[AdmiralMemo]

I really hope they do Magician's Nephew and The Last Battle. I don't know how well A Horse and His Boy will come off, though, due to the fact that some consider the Calmormen to be Islamic and/or Arab.

Lion, Witch & Wardrobe was the SECOND BOOK
The Magician's Apprentice was the FIRST BOOK

to do The Magician's Nephew they'd have to go back in time because that was book #1. The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe was book #2....

I've read them all, how did you guess?

You two must be from the new group. The Magician's Nephew was the sixth book written. They only put it in first in the new omnibuses because they like it chronologically. Lewis never liked it chronologically, because chronological order =/= narrative order. They could only publish The Magician's Nephew first after Lewis died, because he never allowed that done when he was alive.

For those confused about the book order, here's how it is. The comparison with the Star Wars prequels is pretty apt, but it bounces around a bit. Some collections order them in the order in which they were published, which is:
1)The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
2)Prince Caspian
3)Voyage of the Dawn Treader
4)The Silver Chair
5)The Horse and His Boy
6)The Magician's Nephew
7)The Last Battle

Others arrange them chronologically, which would be:
1)The Magician's Nephew
2)The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
3)The Horse and His Boy
4)Prince Caspian
5)Voyage of the Dawn Treader
6)The Silver Chair
7)The Last Battle.

For me, I'm definitely going to see this one. A big part of it is nostalgia; I read and loved the Narnia books when I was a kid.

To actually read them in precise chronological order, you'd need to read The Magician's Nephew, The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe all the way up except about the last page, then read A Horse and His Boy, and then read the end of The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, and then the rest. (This is because the entirety of A Horse and His Boy occurs within the reign of the Pevensies as kings and queens.)

What gets me most about the Narnia series is indeed the ending, specifically, the part where Susan isn't allowed to enter the stables/paradise because of reasons that can be summarized as 'she's growing up'.

Basically, Susan can't get in because she stopped believing, right? I guess Lewis wanted that to happen to one of the characters just to play that scenario out to the reader. I don't know. I do that sort of thing sometimes, so that makes sense to me. Still a little random though. I might have picked Peter instead, since he is the eldest of the four. They are all "growing up" though, physically and mentally. All of them except for Jill and Eustace are probably at least at young adulthood. I always sort of figured that Lewis just picked Susan for no deep reason. I'm sure she will make it to heaven, though. Aslan let a heathen in, so Susan is a definite. She will probably make it after she dies, though. That's the oddest part for me. The fact that her siblings just disappear into heaven forever. How does that affect her, if at all? Do they explain cuz I don't remember.

Alright... Here's the thing that most people don't get from The Last Battle: Susan's "growing up" and caring about "lipstick and boys" is only an ancillary reason why she's not in Heaven with the rest, not the root reason. Here's the timeline. First, Susan stops having faith in Narnia, and so, leaves the "reminiscing about our Narnian adventures" group. Second, the group is having a discussion, when King Tirian appears to them with a plea for help. Third, Eustace and Jill enter Narnia, and then eventually go through the stable to Heaven. Fourth, they meet the rest of them, who say they simply "appeared here" (or something like that). Fifth, Aslan explains to them that they all died when the train they were riding on crashed into the station. Sixth, they see their parents some ways off in some sort of Heavenly version of England, and will eventually meet with them, as everyone goes "inward and upward." Their parents were waiting at the station when the train crashed into it. They didn't end up in the Narnian part of Heaven because they'd never been there.
From this, it's easy to see what's happened. Susan will just have to deal with her family being killed in a train crash, like lots of other people. There's nothing "mysterious" on her end. Also, her "growing up" only caused her to be away in the US when this happened, rather than with the rest. If she had been there, and died in the crash, too, I truly believe she would have gone to the Narnian Heaven with the rest. (Or, at the very least, to the English Heaven with her parents.)

Atheist or christian, Aslan's line near the end was a total facepalm.

"I live in your world, too. But in your world, I have another name."

SYMBOLISM!

Well, it's right from the book. If you blame anything, blame the source, not the adaptation.