This true narnian doesn't feel at home quite yet.. - The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe Reviews

If you are a true Narnia fan, and you found yourself jumping foreward in your seat every time you saw the Narnia preview in theaters, I'm sorry to say that you may be slightly dissapointed. Before I continue with my criticisms, let me first mention the things I am very pleased with about this movie. First, the plot-line stuck remarkably close to the book (if not too close). Second, Tilda Swinton, James McAvoy, and Jim Broadbent as the White Witch, Mr Tumnus, and Professor Kirk, respectively, were magnificent. Third, everything up until the Beavers' dam was just perfect. Perfect! It was magical, yet unfortunately the rest of the movie didn't live up to its promise. In the book The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the first mention of Aslan is when Mr Beaver whispers to the children, "Aslan is on the move - perhaps has already landed." At this point in my reading, a shiver went down my spine. Aslan is only mentioned in precious whispers, as if even the thought of him might drive him away. You constantly read that he is not a tame lion, adding to his gradeur and power. The movie fails miserably in conveying the same sense of mystery, power, magnificence, wonder, and hope. His introduction to the movie is contained within Mr Beaver's screamings of, "what do you mean you dont know who Aslan is!?!? You've never heard of the prophesy?!?!" If you've seen the fourth Harry Potter movie, then you will understand me when I say that Mr Beaver's introduction of Aslan is as fundamentally WRONG as the scene where Dumbledore shoves Harry against the wall and askes how Harry got his name in the Goblet of Fire. This is NOT how it is supposed to happen. In the movie, you don't hear anything about Aslan again until you finally meet him, which makes for a very dissapointing meeting. And when the children meet Father Chistmas, it doesn't help matters when he gives the CHILDREN credit for his return. He says (something along the lines of), "I am here again because you children have given hope to Narnia." Bull crap, I say. Father Chistmas is there because Aslan is there and he is breaking the frosty spell of the White Witch. Also, the transition from winter into summer is so sudden that it has lost all of its magic, and once again, this little miracle is not credited to Aslan. For the creator and savior of Narnia, Aslan is dissapoiningly unimpressive. If you've read all seven books (especially The Magician's Nephew), you know that Narnia belongs to the talking animals. They are the people, the heart and soul, of Narnia. Wenever there was a battle scene or a group shot of Narnians in the movie, I mostly saw mythical creatures: centaurs and fauns and other humanoids. Yes they are citizens and people of narnia, too, but Narnians are mostly animals. These animals are sigificantly under-represented in the movie, and when they are there, I feel like they are circus performers. Don't get me wrong, I loved the Beavers in the movie, but my strongest case for this argument is Phillip the horse and Peter's mute Unicorn. Before Edmund even mounted Phillip, he would have known that Phillip is a talking horse. It is only with special permission or in grave circumstances (eg. war) that one is allowed to ride a talking animal. So the idea that Edmund is oblivios of the fact that he is riding a talking horse is preposterous. It comes off as a cute trick when the horse turns his head around to declare "my name is Phillip." You may think I'm being nit-picky about this issue and the Phillip incident, but watch the movie again and notice how few talking animals you actually see (the main characters don't count). Side note: the fact that Phillip the horse can talk but Peter's unicorn cannot is also rediculous. Riding a unicorn is an even larger privelage than riding a talking horse. As far as the battle scenes go, I'm sorry, but you cannot justify a sacrifice scene and then turn around and take all of the blood and violence out of the battle. There are too many slow motion scenes in the battle; as a result, it drags. Also, Peter and Edmund have not been developed enough to be convincing as warriors. Overall, it was an average adaptation. It's not as fantastic as Lord of the Rings, but nor is it as abysmal as the fourth Harry Potter movie. Go see it on a rainy day, but I wouldn't suggest going out of your way to see it.