I visited Narnia often in my youth, and I had spent many years in Middle Earth before it became part of popular American culture. I love these books. In fact, they pretty much ruined me for fiction. Every time I’d read a book, I’d think, “That’s okay, but its not Narnia or Middle Earth.” I read those books so often I knew them cover to cover. Why would anyone allow their children to reach the age of ten without having had the Chronicles of Narnia read to them?
I suppose I am a Narnian fundamentalist. I want the movie to stick very closely to the book. I was the same way with the Lord of the Rings trilogy that came out a few years ago. They were great books, but as I watched the movies, I found myself saying over and over again, “That’s not in the book.” I wanted Peter Jackson to remain faithful to the (nearly) sacred text and every diversion from that text annoyed me. I would have loved the movies much more if I had never read the book.
I found the same things happening tonight as I watched “Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader” with my wife and daughter. This was one of my favorite books in the series (along with “The Silver Chair”) and I was probably a little more judgmental because of that. I wanted the makers of the movie to stick closer to the text of the book than they did. They produced an NIV translation and I wanted something a little more NASB.
But it was a fascinating movie (if I could have controlled my fundamentalist tendencies). The gist of the story was the same; Edmund and Lucy return to Narnia with their obnoxious cousin Eustace Scrubb (brilliantly casted and played). They are plucked from the sea by Prince Caspian and go on his quest to find and restore the seven lost lords of Narnia. They travel from island to island rescuing the lords or figuring out how they died.
I will have to trust that the constraints of making a movie require that the order of the quest be altered some. And they did take some liberties. They combined some of the story lines and glossed over other details (and I grieved for each one).
But all in all, the movie is well-made, interesting, funny and well worth the investment for a family night. I’m cheap, so we saw it in 2D, but at many theaters 3D is available. Here is the “Miller Analysis” which I know that you were waiting for breathlessly!
It’s a GREAT Movie
In spite of my complaints about how the story varies from the book, I wholeheartedly recommend this movie. It is great family entertainment. I loved it. My wife loved it. My 17-year-old daughter loved it. Three thumbs up! (Six?)
With all the thematic changes to the storyline, this is still the much-beloved story which C.S. Lewis gave to us. If you go in knowing that it varies slightly from the book and can suspend your textual criticism, you will enjoy a couple of hours of powerful, family-friendly, exciting cinema. You disappear into another world for a couple of hours and that is all you can really ask from a movie.
There is no objectionable content, to the best of my memory. I do not think there was a single obscenity in the movie and there was absolutely no sexual content. You can take a child of any age to the movie without embarrassment. There is a little bit of violence and intensity, but it is not nearly as dark as the Tolkien trilogy. It is truly family entertainment – quality family entertainment.
Clear Spiritual Content
I was pleased that the producers of the movie did not excise the spiritual content of the book. There is a poignant scene at the end of the book. Aslan tells Edmund and Lucy that they would not return to Narnia, but that he was known in their world by a different name, a clear reference to Christ. They were told that they were brought to Narnia so that they might know him better in their own world. One might have expected that exchange to be omitted from the movie, but it was not. I appreciated that they did not ignore the spiritual symbolism of the book.
Missing the Point of the Voyage
The part of the movie that I liked least was the introduction of a “bad guy” into the storyline – some sort of evil green mist that attacks the Dawn Treader and its inhabitants throughout the story. Harry Potter had his Voldemort. The Fellowship of the Ring had Sauron and Saruman. I guess the movie makers thought they needed an arch-villain to create intensity during the quest.
I think this misses the entire intent of the Voyage of the Dawn Treader.
I have a theory about the book – I don’t know if literary experts would validate this or not. C.S. Lewis used to claim that his stories were simple fantasy fiction, and that no allegory was intended. But I find myself wondering if the quest for the seven Narnian lords might also be a representation of the fight against the seven deadly sins – those human frailties that corrupt our existence. It is not too much of a stretch to believe that a medievalist would have woven that concept through his book. At each stop along the way, the Dawn Treader battles a new enemy – not Voldemort or Darth Vader, but their own frailties and failings.
The residents of the Lone Islands were slothful and lazy. The Dark Island represented discouragement and despair. The Dufflepuds were envious of others and needed to be taught to accept who they were. The pond in the cave that turned everything gold represents the seductive power of greed and the boat faced the wrath of the sea monster. Eustace’s sojourn as a dragon, in the book at least, was something of a humbling of his proud and self-centered experience. Lewis never beat us over the head with his deeper meanings, but it seems to me to be a clear theme in the book.
The Dawn Treader was not just seeking seven Narnian lords, but was seeking a path to defeating the sins that defeat us. In other words, the driving force of the story was the battle to overcome human weakness and sin.
The makers of the movie obviously felt that human struggle was not enough, so they had to introduce the magical villain to drive the story. I like the book! That doesn’t mean I don’t like the movie, I just like the book better.
Go see the movie. Its worth it in my humble but correct opinion.
But I have one more question: when did popcorn and a coke get to be nearly $14? I am really getting old! Send your (non) tax-deductible donations to Uncle Davey’s Movie Fund.
DAVID, I like your theory. You are definitely on to C.S. Lewis. 🙂
“C.S. Lewis used to claim that his stories were simple fantasy fiction, and that no allegory was intended.”
He did claim that. (smile)
But then he wrote this:
“I thought I saw how stories of this kind could steal past a certain inhibition which had paralyzed much of my own religion since childhood. Why did one find it so hard to feel as one was told one ought to feel about God or about the sufferings of Christ? I thought the chief reason was that one was told one ought to. An obligation to feel can freeze feeelings. And reverence itself did harm. The whole subject was associated with lowered voices; almost as if it were something medical. But suppose by casting all these things into an imaginary world, stripping them of their stained-glass and Sunday school associations, one could make them for the first time appear in their real potency? Could one not thus steal past those watchful dragons? I thought one could.”
Was his allegorical writing subconsciously done, in the beginning?
Not exactly. Take a look:
In a letter to some Maryland fifth graders in 1954, Lewis wrote:
“I did not say to myself ‘Let us represent Jesus as He really is in our world by a Lion in Narnia’;
I said, ‘Let us suppose that there were a land like Narnia and that the Son of God, as he became a Man in our world, became a Lion there, and then imagine what would happen.'”
So, yes, DAVID, your theory is absolutely supported.
I’m convinced that almost all fiction is, at its root, a morality play. Different moral stands, but a morality play nonetheless.
One of the things that makes me happy is that I have to make my children put down Chronicles of Narnia and read something else between re-reads. And they see more and more of Christ in Aslan.
There’s been at least once that one of my kids has re-explained my sermon in terms of an illustration from Narnia. They were right about it too.
Thanks for the Scofield Narnia, Uncle Davey.
Hey, Scofield’s notes are inspired, John! Don’t be making fun…
Dave, upon seeing and hearing complaints about this movie not being an accurate presentation of the book I had a thought. (Uh, oh.) It is interesting that people have been vocal about inaccuracies (misrepresentations?) over a fictional book while hardly ever do people complain about just how inaccurate those “true story” movies are.
And no, I don’t mean to take anything away from your post. 🙂
There’s an answer to that, I guess. I know the Chronicles of Narnia a lot better than I know the life of Al Capone or of Michael Oher and the Tuohys.
So, I know when you vary from the book, but when you take liberties with the other stories, I have no frame of reference to judge.
It’s great to hear they did such an overall good job with the movie. My wife and I are planning on heading to see the 3D version sometime within the week.
I guess I’d like to try the 3D sometime. But I’m not sure I could survive a full length movie with those funky glasses without a massive headache.
I only have one working eye so 3D wouldn’t even work for me. Curse you, technology!!!
Took my family of 5 to see it this morning, Me, Wife, Three kids, 12, 10, 8. We enjoyed it immensely. (Thumbs up on the casting of Eustace, well played)
Saw the 3D version, wasn’t blown away by the 3D but the movie itself was a visual feast. Also, I appreciated the sentiment of Eustace at one point, he describes trying to scratch his way out of the dragon hide, He comments something to the effect, “There was no way to scratch myself out of it,” implying only Aslan could release him.
We went at 10:00 Sat. Morning so tickets were 50% of regular price.
No Popcorn, but we did stop by the dollar store on the way so everyone could get a box of candy to take in with us. Did not see a sign forbidding this activity, but I did go out of my way not to look for it either. Spent 5$ on candy, that would have been $18 in the theater. Should I be scolded for skirting the rules?
I don’t know what the rules are Don, but I’m guessing a lot of people find that some candy has spilled into their pockets when they sit down in the theater.
Don, glad to hear that part of the story is in the film. It’s my wife’s favorite part of the book!
I remember going to movies as a kid. Mom would take her “movie” purse. The one that could hold 4 cans of coke and two bags of microwave popcorn. We had to time the “crack of the can” with something loud in the theater.
Now, to teach my kids to be honest, we just stream movies from various websites. Why, we’ll be watching Narnia as soon as it buffers….oh, wait, that really is stealing. (And, no, we don’t actually do that, though I’m tempted on this one.)
Joe #10, Your ears work so the glasses will fit fine. What’s the problem ?
3D movies make use of the fact that people have two eyes. I could watch the movie but it would look like a movie that was slightly out of focus since my brain was only getting images from one eye.
Something to consider, folks. Dawn Treader was the #1 movie this weekend, but box office in the US is considered disappointing – half of what the last movies did.
I am not trying to say that we have an obligation to go spend our money on the movies. But if we don’t watch well-made, family friendly movies, we will have a hard time complaining when Hollywood does not make them.
Yeah, but balance that against the overall choice of budgeting and stewardship. For me, as much as I wanted to go, and my wife wanted to go, the movie tickets cost as much as we spend on milk, juice, and eggs between grocery shopping trips, so we had to choose.
It’s hard, because I want family friendly movies made, and made well, so that I can rent them. I just cannot afford, at least right now, to support them in a theater at $8/head, plus the gas to get there (nearest theater with Dawn Treader was an hour away).
very good thoughts, especially the possible correlation with the 7 deadly sins. if you’re a serious fan of Narnia, you MUST check out the book called “Planet Narnia.” it’s by a British scholar who is also a college chaplain or something like that. glad to have found another serious Narnia fan!
Will do.
Popcorn from home at a movie theatre? You people grew up in a different world from the one in which I was raised, either that or I am a more older than you than I realized. We had to wait until late to make popcorn, because only then did we let the fire burn down to the coals, which is when you pop corn. And of course by then it was too late to go to town (10 miles, a thirty minute trip), and also, the house was getting cold so it was time to crawl under about six inches of quilts and watch the ice crystals form on my bedroom windows.
John Fariss
Born in the ’50s, raised in the ’30s
John, in the times you are talking about, you could buy a house for what popcorn and a coke cost at the theater today.
I was a Narnia fan long before there were any Narnia movies, too. I’m going to see VODT tomorrow, even though I don’t like the way Aslan’s character is generally distorted in the movie series.
I just saw the movie in 3-D and enjoyed it thoroughly. You’re theory about it being an allegorical representation of the path to good being through the defeat of the 7 Deadly Sins is spot on. It was plainly obvious to me watching the movie, something I did not pick up on reading the book. Of course, that was 40 years ago, when I was 9 years old, so just comprehending Aslan was Christ was pretty advanced stuff from me. I’ll add to the theory that the Lords frozen at the table were there because their gluttonous appetites froze them there. I’ll also add that Susan’s mirror gazing envy of her sister blinded her from her own self-worth. The seven swords represent their embrace of the 7 Heavenly Virtues, and the power they have to clear the path to God. Entertainment in its highest form, in my opinion. And the 3-D effects were quite special as well.
interesting perspectives.