Mich and I finally agreed on going to see Prince Caspian yesterday. Overall, I thought the movie was good - say a 6 out of 10, or so. However, I had to force myself to watch it as an action/adventure film, rather than as a film adaptation of the book, because on a scale of 1 to 10 in terms of actual similarities to the book, it scores about a 2, and should have been more appropriately labelled "A Film containing the characters of Prince Caspian, and some other similarities to the book." I won't give any spoilers here, so don't worry if you haven't seen the film - I'm not going to ruin anything.
I've always been a book person, much more than I am a film person, although I obviously enjoy both. I grew up reading the Chronicles of Narnia, so even though I haven't read some of them in years, the pictures are still engrained in my mind. Having given that background, I'll settle into my (more or less) rant now.
I accept that making a film adaptation of any book is remarkably difficult. A 250 page book can contain more background and nuances than a film can capture. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but the right thousand words are better than any number of pictures. That being said, I also accept that in order to adapt a book to film, there are going to have to be some shortcuts, and things will not be exactly the same. In order to move the story along, there can't always be a voice-over giving the background of each character, as it might be laid out in the story.
However, Prince Caspian (the film) demonstrates what I think is a terrible trend in book-film making and falls remarkably short of the book in any number of ways. What I do expect in a film is that it will (1) not extrapolate from the book, and (2) not contradict the original text. Prince Caspian contravenes both expectations. The film creates conflicts and interests not seen in the original text, and creates at least one 20 some-odd minute diversion ostensibly for the sole purpose of putting more action into the film. It also maligns the character of one of the main individuals, which is at odds with the original book. To boot, there are certain scenes where the dialogue is clearly at odds with not only the original text, but also the author's intent.
In some ways, it reminded me of the freedoms taken by Peter Jackson when he created the Two Towers. While there were certainly freedoms taken in the other films, the Two Towers was one that really made me angry. (Spoiler alert: If you haven't seen/read the Two Towers, skip to the next paragraph.) As you may recall, towards the end of the Two Towers film, Faramir finds Frodo, finds that he has the ring, and takes him back to Gondor to assist with the fight. After arriving and confronting the enemy, he realises his mistake, and allows Frodo to go. Of course, the book contains none of this. In the book, Faramir is one of the most noble persons we meet, and although Faramir is well aware that Frodo doesn't tell him the entire truth, he guesses the rest, and allows him to travel on, at the peril of his (Faramir's) own life. I have yet to find the point of this segment of the film, other than to add 20 minutes to the length and to assassinate Faramir's character - which should be sterling.
The liberties taken in Prince Caspian are not nearly as atrocious as those in Two Towers, but they are the same in many ways - pointless, and clearly contrary to the actual story. While some of the original scenes are maintained, the story itself has been rearranged so that one might be forgiven for thinking that they were watching something else altogether. It would be difficult to say more without actually discussing the content of the movie, so I'll leave it at that.
Considering the film separately from the book - which is difficult to do, but I'll give it a try, I found it reasonably good, in the sense that any adventure film with plenty of CGI is good, but nothing overwhelmingly spectacular. So, if you go to see it, plan on seeing an action film, but without a whole lot of substance...or resemblance to the book, for that matter.
2 comments:
Thank goodness I read this before seeing it. I'll just wait for it on DVD.
Think I'll go see Wall-E today instead.
I am probably even less of a movie person than most, and it is always a tug-of-war when Hollywood releases a printed story near and dear to me-- I'm certain I won't enjoy it as much as the book, and when it gets chopped up or changed in essential ways-- grrrr. So consequently I haven't seen too many of my favorite reads on film, but I did see The Narnia Chronicles, and I liked it well enough. As I recall the filmmakers captured enough of the book's essence to satisfy me, even though I have a particularly hard time "suspending disbelief," a requisite for film lovers.
One example of a film (I should check back to see if this made the top 30 list) I have not seen and likely never will is "A River Runs Through It." The story is in a book of other stories, all excellent reading, and Norman MacClean is a revered writer to me-- I don't believe the feeling or meaning could ever be captured adequately on film. Just don't want to chance the heartbreak! Also, if I'm in need of entertainment, jeez-- why not just re-read the story? Yeah, I'm much more of a book person.
Now I will commit heresy and admit that I only read "The Hobbit" recently (AFTER the movie came out, under strong pressure from friends), and have not read any of Tolkein's other works (yet). This is shocking because Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, and The Narnia books were practically required reading among my siblings, and the books were just laying there, waiting for me to pick them up. The upside to this is, I can see any of the Ring trilogy without getting angry! Although I do wait until the DVD comes out so I can fast-forward through the horrifyingly long battle scenes (which are strangely similar to how Tolkien wrote them-- too long!).
Hope you all are well, we are having a hazy time here in Oregon, with smoke from California blowing up, if you can believe it! In exciting news, Eugene is hosting the Olympic track and field trials right now, so cool! No, I have not been there in person, but it is interesting to have a national event in your town, even if only for ten days. Good blogging, keep it up!
Post a Comment