Though the title might lead you to believe otherwise, this post is actually not about ME. But thanks...it was a nice thought.

The scenery was stunning, the battles intense, and the creatures realistic, but they focused too heavily on these features and the story suffered as a result. The complusion to add to and even distort the original storyline leads me to believe the script writers must not fully appreciate the beauty and brilliance of Lewis' narrative.
Lewis' gentle cadence and rather-unadorned appeals to the imagination arouse in me a childlike delight and sense of wonder, while his artful weaving of Biblical symbolism, imagery, and theology bring to mind beautiful and profound truths. These qualities combine in a unique way in Lewis. Beatrix Potter writes with a similar gentle cadence, A.A. Milne evokes the childlike delight, Tolkien weaves the imagery, but none of these - for me anyway - incorporate them all to the effect that Lewis does.
When the cadence and profound simplicity are removed, as they are in the movie, the story only marginally resembles the original. The imitation is good, but the original is a masterpiece.
2 comments:
You were easier on the movie than Doug Wilson was:
http://is.gd/i0A
Yes, well...one of my goals in life is to be a little less caustic than Mr. Wilson! So thanks for confirming my success in that endeavor!
He provides a more thorough and detailed evaluation of particular scenes that were overlooked or added, but I actually thought we said very much the same thing...at least he said what I thought and MEANT! Thanks for the link. I enjoyed his review and agreed wholeheartedly!
Post a Comment