Sign in with Facebook
Madeline's Reviews > The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (Chronicles of Narnia, #1)
by C.S. Lewis
by C.S. Lewis
Madeline's review
bookshelves: fantasy, kids-and-young-adult, the-movie-is-better
Jul 22, 2009
bookshelves: fantasy, kids-and-young-adult, the-movie-is-better
Read in July, 2009
Rather than spend this review explaining what I thought of the book, I will instead devote my time to justifying placing this on my "the movie is better" shelf.
Reasons the Movie Version Is Better:
1. Watching it will take about the same amount of time it takes to read the book, because good lord does everything get wrapped up quick.
2. We actually get to see some real fight scenes, and even though there's no blood and it's all very PG, at least it's not just "There was a battle going on but then Aslan showed up and it was over yay!"
3. The dialogue is considerably less dated and irritating. The kids in the book speak like plummy old British men watching a cricket match in 1800: "'We've fallen on our feet and no mistake,' said Peter. 'This is going to be perfectly splendid. That old chap will let us do anything we like.'"
Meanwhile, the movie has lines like this: "When Adam's Flesh and Adam's bone sits at Cair Paravel in throne, the evil time will be over and done." "You know that doesn't really rhyme."
4. Aslan becomes much less of a dick when he's voiced by Liam Neeson.
5. Since the book is so short (see Reason 1) there's plenty of time for the film to do justice to everything in C.S. Lewis's material, and even add some things. For instance, did you know the Pevensie kids actually have a mother? With a face? Shocking, I know.
6. William Mosely is a pretty, pretty boy. Peter the Magnificent, indeed.
DON'T YOU JUDGE ME.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0608440/
Reasons the Movie Version Is Better:
1. Watching it will take about the same amount of time it takes to read the book, because good lord does everything get wrapped up quick.
2. We actually get to see some real fight scenes, and even though there's no blood and it's all very PG, at least it's not just "There was a battle going on but then Aslan showed up and it was over yay!"
3. The dialogue is considerably less dated and irritating. The kids in the book speak like plummy old British men watching a cricket match in 1800: "'We've fallen on our feet and no mistake,' said Peter. 'This is going to be perfectly splendid. That old chap will let us do anything we like.'"
Meanwhile, the movie has lines like this: "When Adam's Flesh and Adam's bone sits at Cair Paravel in throne, the evil time will be over and done." "You know that doesn't really rhyme."
4. Aslan becomes much less of a dick when he's voiced by Liam Neeson.
5. Since the book is so short (see Reason 1) there's plenty of time for the film to do justice to everything in C.S. Lewis's material, and even add some things. For instance, did you know the Pevensie kids actually have a mother? With a face? Shocking, I know.
6. William Mosely is a pretty, pretty boy. Peter the Magnificent, indeed.
DON'T YOU JUDGE ME.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0608440/
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
| 02/22/2016 | marked as: | read | ||
Comments (showing 1-12 of 12) (12 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Well, I am easily entertained. And also I read the book after seeing the movie, so I imagine my reaction would be different if I'd done it the other way around.
The kids in the book speak like plummy old British men watching a cricket match in 1800: "'We've fallen on our feet and no mistake,' said Peter. 'This is going to be perfectly splendid. That old chap will let us do anything we like.'"YES.
I think it was during Prince Caspian that I started thinking to myself, "if Peter says 'by Jove' one more time, I may have to stop reading."
For some reason, I just didn't like the new movies. I love and own the lower budget BBC ones and cartoon but the Disney version just didn't charm me.
The movies were my first exposure to the Narnia stories, which I probably why I can't summon any real dislike of them, even after reading the books. When I watched the movies, they were just fun fantasy stories, and I never assigned any greater importance to them.
I suspect this is definitely a case of preferring whichever one you were exposed to first. I love old children's books, plummy didactic language and all, and I REALLY didn't like the movie Lucy. (Totally agree that Peter is a dreamboat, though far, FAR too young for me.)
Speaking as someone who was born and bred a Lewis fan, brer rabbit, I have to say--these are all valid points.Especially #6.
The movie would have been great if they had cast different kids. They were the most unlikable kids I've ever seen cast in a film. But otherwise I can see you points!
Number 4 - all the way.
I have never seen the movie but only read the book. How is the movie?
Twas a charmless desecration with garden ornaments as ancient monuments, and a wigga witch.