Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 16 comments in total 

8 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
A tale of two tales; "Will no-one silence this mouse!?", 24 June 2001
9/10
Author: Tom May (joycean_chap@hotmail.com) from Sunderland, England

"Prince Caspian" and "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" should be reviewed separately, as they are patently separate installments of the Narnia saga.

"Prince Caspian"

A rather expositionary chapter in the series of seven stories, tying in the "Lion, The Witch..." with later chapters, by phasing out Peter and Susan and introducing Caspian. The production, viewed twelve years after I saw it as a child, is rather disappointing, with no sense of spectacle or proportion at all conveyed. Particularly, the locations used for Narnia are distinctly unimpressive, dour and unsuitable; not beautiful enough at all. The budget for this story was clearly kept to minimum to save for the following comparative epic. What we get is a fairly drab English wood in glum weather conditions. The acting is far from compelling here, with the good but misguided dwarf whose name evades me at present particularly unimpressive, and the badger unimposing. The voices are often inappropriately jokey and lightweight - the dwarves and the badger set. Of course, Aslan is well voiced indeed, by Ronald Pickup, but is rendered immobile by the impracticalities of the B.B.C. producing a talking, walking lion... Miraz, is as Caspian effectively says at one point ("The witch is an evil a thousand times worse than Miraz!") composed of small-fry villainy. The duel between Peter and Miraz is laughably free of any suspense and power. One thing that stands out is that Susan has virtually nothing to do or say at all in this two-part story, and seems tangibly redundant. The main memorable scene, though, is a classic of sorts. It involves "a hag and a werewolf" getting up to some devillry trapped in a cave with Caspian and others. The acting by Barbara Kellerman as the witch is completely OTT and simple words are dragged out to accommodate innumerable syllables; "Who-oo-oo e-e-e-ev-err-r her-er-r-eard o-of a-a wi-i-i-tch that re-e-ea-eally di-iiieeed...!" lunacy! Could have done with being underplayed, and it would have been more successfully scary, although as a child I was scared by this scene, although it was the sombre, weird-looking werewolf creature who disturbed most I suspect. Overall, this story is frankly inconsequential, and just useful for that scene and its exposition, setting things up for the next tale. While far from the best book, it could have been done better than it is here; a very mediocre production.

Rating:- ** 1/2/*****

"The Voyage of the Dawn Treader"

Where to start? This four-parter is immensely superior in every way to "Prince Caspian". The then-still-flourishing B.B.C. children's drama department shrewdly and inventively dramatized a marvellous book, the fifth in the Narnia series, "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", which ties in the Narnia ethos with a strong impression of Homer's epic narrative poem, "The Odyssey". Each of the islands visited on King Caspian's ambitious voyage is well conveyed, and unique, helped by wise choices of sublime locations, plain good writing and music. The Lone Islands, controlled ineptly by the wonderfully named "Governor Gumpas", and filmed around Sicily I think, are well created; unlike "Prince Caspian" a sense of scale and culture is created, by some use of extras and a wide filming of areas of the island, including vinyards etc. The other islands, including the almost haunting "Goldwater Island", the Dragon one, the Magician one, filmed nicely at a Welsh country house and grounds, and the last one with the dining table, are all well conveyed. Importantly, the actors generally make the most of their parts all the way through this story. Samuel West, as Caspian, portrays him with the right combination of precocious arrogance, gravitas and good humour. Particularly good is John Hallam, playing the role of Capt. Drinian with a wonderful world-weary diction, steady wisdom and charm. He is a completely convincing character, unlike any in "Prince Caspian". Shame that Hallam seems to have had relatively few substantial film roles, as he really is a fine presence in this production. The great C.S. Lewis character, the noble, swashbuckling dreamer, the mouse Reepicheep (wonderfully named!), is wonderfully costumed and acted and voiced by Warwick Davies. His yearnings to see what is past "The end of the world" and Aslan's country, are compellingly conveyed, in verse ("...Where the waves grow sweet/Doubt not, Reepicheep/You'll find all you seek, there, in the utter East"...) and in Davies' likeable portrayal. His temper is short with the obnoxious Eustace constantly moaning on, and their confrontations are often downright hilarious. Eustace's obnoxious, spoiled English schoolboy characterisitics are well played by a child actor also physically perfect for the part. Even his transition towards becoming a well-behaving young chap is well conveyed. Lucy and Edmund aren't as interesting in this story as Eustace, but are reasonably worked into the plot. Lucy, though, is a little wearing in her habit of whining, I would have to say. Other members of the ship's crew are jovially played, as well as Preston Lockwood's magician and the fine Geoffrey Bayldon's star Ramandu, who has a splendid lyrical speech in the last episode when he describes his life. The quality of the incidental music should be noted, especially its hymnal, elegiac quality in the last installment of this four-part tale. The only downsides to this sublime production are the cliffhangers - which are often too similar to each other, usually involving a sea monster, and fail to match a good "Dr Who" surprise cliffhanger - and, the voices of the "Duffers" on the Magician's island are too jokey and distinctly colloquial. Overall, a wonderful sense of adventure and atmospheric mystique is created in this production, which adapts an intoxicating book full of sublime mystery as well as anyone could have expected. The gap in quality between this and "Prince Caspian" is tangible, but the whole series seems worthwhile. "The Voyage of the Dawntreader" is as good a nostalgic, escapist series as the generally well-written and underrated (by the B.B.C. notably) "Dr Who" (any fan of this should check out the Narnia adaptations and vice versa), and a tangible reminder of just how good the B.B.C. once was at making TV drama of all kinds...

Rating:- *****/*****

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Very well done., 18 July 2003
9/10
Author: Sparrow_in_flight from United States

Personally, I prefer the adaptations of Prince Caspian and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader over The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and The Silver Chair. the two books were always my favorite of the series, so I grew up watching these two the most. They're a very good adaptation of the books, staying very true to the storylines and events. I only wish they'd done all 7 of the books.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Wonderful Screen Adaptation., 4 April 2005
6/10
Author: karalynnn from United States

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader (1989) Well this was one of the hardest parts of the book series for me to read and even as a motion picture it was kind of slow. I think all the children did a better job performing in this movie than in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. The animated effects were of greater quality in this installment of the miniseries as well. Again the filmmakers were very true to the story penned by Lewis and deserved commendation for that. Again my kids enjoyed the story but since it was painfully slow and at times the film didn't hold their attention quite the same as The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Very faithful adaptation, beautifully acted., 11 December 2000
9/10
Author: Liza-19 from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

I grew up with this movie, and it still means a lot to me. The books are wonderful, and this miniseries followed them all very closely. Prince Caspian and Voyage of the Dawn Treader were never my favorite books in the series, but these are certainly worth watching. The entire production is very loyal, and the actors are all wonderful.

Although, I cannot help smiling when I watch a ridiculously young Samuel West walk around in tights as King Caspian - that guy was Leonard in Howards End??? Well, he's a great actor, I guess! I love these movies, and whether you have read the books or not, it is a wonderful story that the kids will love.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Superior To LWW, But Not As Good Silver Chair, 24 August 2007
6/10
Author: CalvinValjean

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This is the second of my three-part review of the entire BBC Narnia serial. The second BBC miniseries combines two books, and come off feeling like two separate movies rather than a whole. So I will review each separately:

PRINCE CASPIAN Most everyone I know agrees the Capsian segment has problems, primarily because the entire book is crammed into less than an hour. Whereas the other entries are all very slow-paced, PC is the opposite. By changing the structure of the book, the entire first 20 minutes are dedicated to Caspian, who is hardly developed. 5 minutes in and he's already on the run for his life. Next the movie switches over to the Pevensies who're thrown into Narnia, but they get very little to do before its time for a battle. So in conclusion, NO CHARACTER really gets developed very well, and by the end of the 50 minutes, we've met about 10 new characters whom we hardly know. I think a non-book reader would have hardly understood the story.

On the positive side: Caspian and Miraz both act very well in their limited screen time. Trumpkin also gets a few funny lines. And the badger Trufflehunter is done A LOT better than the Beavers from LWW.

WEAKEST MOMENT: The ABSOLUTELY MOST laughably bad scene in ALL of the Narnia BBC serials occurs in Prince Caspian when Dr. Cornelius reveals that he's part dwarf to Caspian. Despite the fact that Cornelius is blatantly a dwarf from the moment he first appears, and is even the same height as Caspian, apparently no one in the castle seems to notice this. Great guards you've got there, Miraz. So how does he reveal that he is part dwarf? By taking off his hood! Caspian's eyes widen and go: "You're a...!" Wow, I never knew that seeing someone's bald head would reveal that he is a dwarf. I realize the series had a small budget, but it's not asking much to reveal that he'd been standing on clogs or was doing something else that made him seem taller, rather than revealing his bald head, which is the most irrelevant thing!

THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER

The remaining two hours of the miniseries are an adaptation of Dawn Treader, and in doing so suddenly the entire miniseries improves tremendously, mostly because the story of VDT focuses less on battles and visual f/x and more on adventure, scenery, and discovery. The acting again is great. Eustace is great, and so is Caspian, played by Samuel West as a confident and articulate young king, sort of a Prince Valiant type. Stealing the show is Warwick Davis as Reepicheep. Yes, his costume is ridiculous, but you come to accept it after a time. And at a well-plotted two hours, this is the only time where the pacing is actually perfect!

WEAKEST MOMENT: There is still one laughably bad scene in VDT, and it's when Eustace first discovers that he is a dragon. The problem is that they try to film it EXACTLY as its written in the book. He wakes up, hears dragon noises, and assumes there is one beside him, then sees his reflection in the lake and realizes he has become a dragon. Great on paper, looks stupid filmed. The camera shakes around as it is his POV, then looks into the lake, and sees what's supposed to be his reflection, but is obviously a fake image of a dragon superimposed on the shot of the river! Oy vey! Together these two adaptations make an amusing miniseries, but the final entry would prove to be the best.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
These movies get better and better as they go., 27 July 2007
5/10
Author: clck2001 from United States

Truly, these two were much better than The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, which I thought was dull. Why does Caspian look so different in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader than he did in Prince Caspian? The book says it was only three years between the two events in Narnian time. In the movie, it looks like he has aged three times that much. I was picturing him to look mostly the same, a little more world-weary perhaps, though. I thought that the boy that played Caspian in Prince Caspian overdid it. On the other hand, I thought the guy that played him in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader was quite good. But, alas, the action will always be the same- mediocre. The stunts were acceptable, but certainly nothing better than that. I do not like how Aslan just breathes on people or things to make them be fixed, such as Reepicheep's tail. The reason for this is because in the books, when Aslan fixes something, it just happens. Besides, when Aslan does that breathing rubbish, it looked like he was yawning. If he does have to do the breathing, at least make it look good. I would never have guessed that Reepicheep was Warwick Davis. I'm sure the cast regretted their decision to be in this movie when they found out they would have to have a mouse as a castmate, even if it was Warwick Davis. But again, the filmmakers did the best they could with their tight budget. Besides, it was '89, and not everybody can do it as good as Star Wars can!

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
There story is great, but I wish it had had a larger budget. 10/10, 25 March 2000
2/10
Author: LT-10 from Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

The Chronicles of Narnia are, without doubt, some of the best books ever written. Turning the books into live-action movies would be very hard to do because there is a number of special effects that would be hard to do, and all of the animals talk. Today thanks to CGI and big budgets we would probably be able to make Narnia on film. 11 years ago, with a small budget it would have been very hard to do. Sometimes it looks great, but sometimes it is really hard to belive what you are seeing. The actors do really well. They were really comited to the movie. Alex Kirby's direction is also great. The movie sticks well with the books, good thing it did or a lot of people would be mad! Also the locations are EXCELLENT. So what I'm saying is this movie is really good, if you don't compare it to todays standards. 10/10

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
An Excellent Adaption Of 2 Of C.S. Lewis's best books., 18 December 1998
10/10
Author: anonymous from Earth

This has got to be the ultimate dream for any C.S. Lewis fan, it is hard to find but the search is worth it! 10 out of to

Was the above comment useful to you?

a step forwards, 24 January 2009
Author: ricky_says_hi from Ireland

OK i'll review the two stories separately since they're both, well, separate

PRINCE CASPIAN:

well, the last BBC version was slow moving and drawn out so this one came across as really rushed and crammed. of course Prince Caspian is the weakest of the four books i've read and it doesn't look like much here.

the acting is very divided. the children are all a little older and more comfortable here. Peter's voice has finally broke so it helps improve how his lines sound anyway. Lucy and Susan are both better in this. Edmund's voice is a little weird and hard to take. now the kid playing Caspian is just...omfg. i can see why Disney went with an older actor for their Caspian since this kid is so bad. and there is no extra E in dwarfs, mate. i didn't realise Barbara Kellerman was back in this but it looks like she's calmed down a bit, playing the hag and actually coming across as creepy. its interesting that Trufflehunter was played by a woman, i liked that idea and 'Big Mick' as Trumpkin was good too. i hated Warwick Davis as Reepicheep simply because you cant think of him as a mouse, he stays a midget in a bad mouse costume. the actors playing Nikabrick and Miraz were decent.

the effects are meh. yet again they use hand drawn animation mingled in with live action but its not used as much here so it works.

the setting is very dull looking. i always thought of Narnia as being exotic but we just have a lot of plain English countrysides here. i do like the claustrophobic element of Aslan's How.

the fight between Miraz and Peter is just bad. no suspense and too quick. they are also missing the other huge battles that happened at the end of the book. and no river god either. when i first saw the end i was surprised how it set up the next one.

in short Prince Caspian comes bottom in the ranking of the BBC versions of the Chronicles of Narnia

VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER:

need i say "wow!"? this is excellent, best of all of them. it was the best book and they put tonnes of effort into this and it shows

the acting is great. Lucy has improved well and Edmund is decent. the boy playing Eustace does a good job too and the older Caspian knocks the younger one out of the water completely. too bad we have annoying life size Reepicheep again. the acting is terrible when Edmund and Caspian fight on the Deathwater island. i love this exchange: Edmund: "it's all quite plain. he came here on a hot day, took off his clothes, dived in--" Lucy: "Don't!" (her delivery is excellent)

the design for the ship is lovely and very detailed. each of the different places they visit look unique and interesting. another thing that makes this version great is that they only have one brief scene of cartoon animation.

the effects are strange. i was surprised they actually made a sea serpent and dragon to use. they didn't look real but they look better than the puppet Aslan. the scene in the dark island was excellently done.

one of the main reasons i think this worked is because Voyage of the Dawn Treader is a very episodic book and so works as a TV series. i was disappointed that they left out the bit with the mermaids though

Was the above comment useful to you?

Too short to be truly excellent, 8 August 2002
Author: Alasdair_Wilkins from United States

What is the problem with this movie?? Not the acting, which is fantastic. Not the special effects, which are quite good. Not the general feel, which manages to truly capture the spirit of Lewis's books. No, the one problem with this fairly (if not entirely, but I am a nitpicker when it comes to faithfulness) close adaptation of Lewis's classic is its length. Prince Caspian is give hardly anytime at all to unfold, and seems more of a prologue to Dawn Treader than anything else. Dawn Treader is perhaps the best adapted of the four books, as it was easily the hardest and yet done exceedingly well. However, this is unbalanced by the shortness of Prince Caspian, which is nothing if not unmemorable. For anyone who has read the books, I think most would agree that the book Prince Caspian IS a weaker entry, but still, it needed more time than this. The whole thing is rushed with so little development that people who aren't familiar with the books won't know what is going on. So, here are my ratings: Prince Caspian: 2 out of 4 stars Dawn Treader: 4 out of 4 stars Combined: 2.5 out of 4 stars

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Plot keywords Main details
Your user comments Your vote history