IMDb user comments for
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 41:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

405 comments in total

---

132 out of 200 people found the following comment useful :-
A rousing fantasy adventure., 14 May 2008

Author: ungy357 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Director Andrew Adamson, who helmed the first installment in the series, after making his career primarily in animation (including the original "Shrek") seems decidedly more comfortable in his role as a live action director this time around, and he handles the scope and the pacing of this epic adventure with a polished skill that is a very pleasant surprise. In addition, Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, William Moseley and Anna Popplewell, returning as the Pevensie children, have matured, not only physically, but in their acting ability. There is a deftness and self assuredness this time around that surpasses the original, and makes for an extremely entertaining film.

The story begins with Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes), nephew of Miraz (Sergio Castellito), the leader of the "Telmarines," the human population that is now the dominant race in Narnia, fleeing for his life when Miraz's wife gives birth to a son. Miraz usurped the throne from the rightful King, Caspian's father, and now that he has an heir of his own, he wants Caspian out of the way for good.

Meanwhile, back in London, Peter and his siblings are trying to adjust to life in the real world. Peter is getting into fights because he can't bear people "treating him like a kid," after growing to adulthood before leaving Narnia, only to return at the exact age he was when he first stepped through the wardrobe. But in less time than it takes to board the London underground, the Pevensie's are once again transported back to the magical kingdom - only it is not the place they left. Over a thousand years have passed, and the castle of Cair Paravel lies in ruins.

As the children struggle to find out what has happened, they stumble upon a Dwarf named Trumpkin (Peter Dinklage), who is being taken prisoner by abusive Telmarine soldiers. Susan, who doesn't seem to have had much opportunity to show off her finely honed archery skills at home in Finchley, eagerly takes the opportunity to rescue Trumpkin from his captors, and the surly old dwarf (whom Lucy and Edmund nickname "The D.L.F.", or "Dear Little Friend,") explains that all is not well in Narnia. It seems that not long after the High King Peter and his siblings left Narnia, the land was plunged into a dark age, and the Telmarines have ruled for hundreds of years with an iron fist. The days of the many creatures, including talking beasts, living in harmony together, have long since passed, and no one has seen or heard of Aslan the Lion in centuries. And what's more, the trees are no longer friends to the Narnians - they are just normal, everyday trees.

It doesn't take long before the children meet up with Caspain, who is hiding out in the forest with a misfit band of followers, and soon the young would be heroes join forces in a plot to reclaim Narnia for the Narnians, and place Caspian, the rightful heir, on the throne.

The film moves along at a steady, exciting pace, with skillfully staged action and suspense that will have audience members on the edge of their seats, and while in general it stays very faithful to the source material, there is quite a bit of added embellishment to make for a grander and more spectacular epic, with added battle and chase sequences that are deftly handled and add to the story and the level of excitement, where in less skilled hands they could have easily overtaken it. The level of action, and violence, is really quite a bit stronger than in the first film, and the film has a darker, grittier tone, which makes it something of a surprise that the filmmakers got away with a PG rating for what is clearly a PG-13 film.

As mentioned before, the actors really step up to the plate this time, in particularly Keynes and Moseley as Peter and Edmund. But the most delightful performances come from the great Peter Dinklage (known for his brilliantly subtle turn in "The Station Agent," and perhaps best remembered as the diminutive author of children's books in "Elf") and Reepicheep, a bold and chivalrous mouse (voice of Eddie Izzard), who really steals the show. The effects are absolutely top notch, and in the final third the movie reaches such a fever pitch of excitement that it recalls Peter Jackson's "The Two Towers," arguably the most exciting installment of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.

So, in the end, "Prince Caspian" may not be the profound allegorical tale that "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe" was, or reach the same level of magical wonder, but it more than succeeds at what it sets out to do, and strongly indicates that there is a future in the Narnia franchise.

---

73 out of 90 people found the following comment useful :-
Disappointing, 18 May 2008

Author: A_Bob from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Last warning for spoilers:

After falling in love with "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," I was expecting an amazing sequel from the same people. "Prince Caspian" was a disappointment, however.

The changes made from the book were so many and extreme that Adamson (the director) completely altered the theme of the story. The character of Peter was so changed that one questions what exactly he learned from Narnia that he will not be allowed to return. From the fighting at the beginning of the film in England because he is upset about being young again to the power struggles with Caspian, his title of "The Magnificent" was sullied.

Caspian fared no better. In making him an adult and Miraz the Lord Regent, they made a crown Prince not even knowledgeable about the fact that the throne is his and that no other Lords who are suspicious of Miraz ever talking to Caspian about his birthright. That is unrealistic. Even worse, they turned Caspian into a vengeful man who jeopardized a mission to attempt to avenge his father's death.

What was worse, however, was that Adamson chose action and battle scenes to character development. There were so many characters introduced but none of them were rounded out. It felt as if the characters were background to the action. They did what they did because they were supposed to rather than any meaningful reason due to their personality.

As a Narnia book series fan, this was a major disappointment. It really felt like Adamson redid a mediocre medieval war movie adding Narnian characters for effect.

Bob

---

264 out of 481 people found the following comment useful :-
Great follow up to the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, 5 April 2008

Author: the-gossip-king from Australia

I caught this while on holidays but I won't give any extra details for obvious reasons.

This will definitely go down as one of the best fantasy films of all time. I think Lord of the Rings is going to always be the best but Prince Caspian has really boosted the Chronicles of Narnia. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was great but not groundbreaking. This movie was based on what I think was one of the worst books in the series. It was good but not as good as any of the others. This is now my favorite movie. The action is a lot greater and the visuals have improved as well. The kids are better than they were in the first movie and I really think they will come along way. I also think that when Harry Potter ends the Chronicles of Narnia will be there to pick up all the fans. Overall it was a great movie and I look forward to the next movie.

---

105 out of 165 people found the following comment useful :-
Pretty endearing, 16 May 2008

Author: kovalbhatia from India

This movie isn't half as charming or eloquently magical as the first, but it engages nonetheless.

There's something about the young actors chosen to play the four major roles- Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy. They badly make you wish you were in their shoes. The film in itself is often reminiscent of LOTR, but the major difference being in a childlike simplicity this one retains.

Aslan, despite not having much of a role, manages to be the most striking character, and Lucy is as lovable as she was in the first film.

The battle scenes are brilliant, as are the landscapes. The power politics and senselessness of violence are dealt with a lot maturely in this film as compared to the first installment. At some point you realize you want at least a dozen more films revolving around these four siblings, and to be able to access Narnia for ever.

The only thing that ruins this film is this strange invasion of Hollywood-like romance as a very annoying little subplot, and the sudden intrusion of a ridiculous song at a climactic point.

Apart from that, I am pretty sure any fantasy-hound would enjoy this film a lot, and especially so if you're a big Lewis fan.

I know I am.

---

53 out of 68 people found the following comment useful :-
it might have been better if i hadn't read the book, 16 May 2008

Author: lodijee from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I am a Narnia obsessed nerd, so of course I went to see it the night it was released. I had very high expectations because the first movie was so true to the book. However, with this film that wasn't the case. The screen play was pretty much completely rewritten and included only hints of the original story. I suppose Disney felt it necessary to add in lame typical movie elements that attract mainstream moviegoers. For example a sub-plot romance between Caspian and Susan and battles that never existed. This movie not only failed to develop the characters and events as well as the book, it changed the characters and situations that it did develop.

---

128 out of 219 people found the following comment useful :-
I was surprised, 16 May 2008

Author: jeanieb-1 from United States

Having just come back from a screening of Prince Caspian, I can honestly say that I got the movie fresh in my mind...and it was amazing! Not only was it better than the first in every way - the story, the acting, the screenplay - but it managed to have more of an edge without sinking into the pitfall that movies such as Pirates of the Caribbean have slipped into.

Meaning that unlike the Pirates sequels (don't get me wrong, I love Pirates, but this is something that bothered me a little), the makers of Prince Caspian did not believe that to make it better and more exciting, they had to gore and bloody it up. Instead, while it is darker, the blood and gore is kept to a bare minimum considering this is an action flick.

Anyway, that now aside, I highly recommend this! It's a great movie - great action scenes, a tad bit of romance but not overly so, and a good plot. Plus the young cast are even better in this film than they were in the first, and Ben Barnes - well, it's right that he is the title character,because he very nearly would have stolen the floor from underneath the original kids if they were even the slightest bit less perfect (William Moseley was the weakest of the five, as he was in the last movie, but he still stepped it up quite a bit).

Granted, I've not read the books, so I don't know if this is as dedicated to the book as many fans would like it to be. Then again, most movies adapted from the books never are. However, if they can find it in them to accept changes for theatrical purposes, I'm sure even the most die-hard fans will admit it "wasn't bad."

---

72 out of 108 people found the following comment useful :-
Disappointing in the extreme!, 18 May 2008

Author: revran from Hemet, CA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Since the Chronicles of Narnia are a series of widely read and revered books I had to give my first rating of a 1 for this film. We went opening night and I was very disappointed and my wife was in tears by the end because of her disappointment. So much of Lewis' humor was lost in favor of an action movie plot with running battles, some added that aren't in the book while other important pieces from the book are left out. It became just one long tedious battle. And a romance between Caspian & Susan? We love those books so very, very much that it was painful to watch. Our children ages 21, 18 & 15, who were raised on Narnia, were not just disappointed but angry... My eldest daughter was livid. Her close friend whom we had introduced to Narnia just two years ago was very unhappy with what was left out of the film not to mention all that was added. My wife and I felt it was as if the person who wrote the screenplay hadn't read the books at all. Two revealing things we noticed too were during the opening credits with Actors and Directors and Producers names in huge type, it seemed to us that "From a book by C.S. Lewis" was in much smaller type. Also, during the previews of coming attractions, there was another fantasy movie advertised and it had in large print, "From a writer of the Chronicles of Narnia". They must have been referring to a screenwriter, but it was very aggravating! There was only one author of the Chronicles of Narnia and it was C.S. Lewis! Interestingly, they decided to cast all the Telemarines as evil Spaniards. I found that fascinating and would like to know the rationale behind that? In the books, the girls do not participate as warriors, Aslan having said war is unpleasant and decidedly so if girls participate. However, in the movie, Susan is a major warrior and is seen leading Narnians and firing her arrows into Telemarines all over the place. At the final climax and their departure from Narnia, (she and Peter for the last time) she and Prince Caspian first exchange longing glances, which you've been aware of all throughout the film, and then they passionately kiss! I'm all for that of course, but not in this movie about this book... to quote a little boy who was sitting with his grandfather in front of us, "That was yucky!"

---

60 out of 92 people found the following comment useful :-
If you liked the book, you'll hate the movie, 17 May 2008

Author: mattster5 from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I'm obligated to say that this review contains "spoilers," but I use this term reservedly since I'm not sure this movie can really be spoiled. At least, I'm not sure how you would be able to tell.

Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2, part of his theory of relativity, explains how it is physically impossible for the opening chapters of Lewis' "Prince Caspian" to be rushed through any more quickly than was done by Adamson's abomination of the same name. It literally made me dizzy. I'll just lay it out there and get it over with; Adamson follows the storyline of the book very well. In the book, the Pevensies come to Narnia, help Caspian gain his rightful throne, and then go home; Andrewson has all three of these things happen in the movie. That's about where the similarities end. In a pathetically feeble attempt to keep fans of the book happy, Andrewson plugs in a few scenes or references from the book that don't interfere with his plot. At first, it's kind of interesting to see what kind of events he makes up to tie in the other events he made up with the events from the book. We miss this later in the movie, though, as he pretty much abandons the events from the book until the end. All this happens because he really wants the Pevensies to meet up with Caspian earlier; I have absolutely no idea why this was so important to him. It doesn't really add anything and it wreaks havoc with the storyline. In his determination to be as faithful as possible to the spirit of the book, Adamson hacks out all the events in Narnia that lead up to the blowing of the horn and almost all of the Pevensie's journey to Aslan's How. Shockingly, cutting out the first half of Lewis' story and replacing it with his own leaves the scenes taken from Lewis' story, both those later in the movie and the few scenes randomly inserted in the beginning, seeming somewhat incongruous and forced. You can almost tell what scenes or dialogue are from the book even if you haven't read it, simply by noticing the discontinuity. Whenever, a character seems to be acting out of a character or a scene seems to have little to do with the plot, it's probably from the book.

I can't imagine what could make this Andrewson character (his real name is Andrew Adamson, by the way) think he has the artistic credentials to make such a massive revision to such a great work. It's not like he's on the short list for a lifetime achievement award here. Does he honestly think he can improve on Lewis? Does he realize that the whole reason this movie is being made is because so many people love Lewis' story? Does he think Lewis' plot isn't good enough? It's not like Lewis' story lacked dramatic tension or action or character development. Andrewson didn't supply what was lacking, he just changed for no apparent reason, exhibiting monumental arrogance in the process. I'm going to harp some more on this because it really baffles me, what was gained by all these revisions? Did Andrewson just decide to use Lewis' story as a platform for his own ideas because he has no respect for a great author, or did he actually have the arrogance to think he could somehow improve on or tell Lewis' story better than Lewis could? I wish I could know what was going through his mind… "hey, I just read this book by a guy named Siyes Lewis, or something like that. Alright, I really just skimmed it. The point is, it gave me some great ideas for a movie"… "Look, Lewis spends way too much time with the Pevensies once they get to Narnia. This movie is not about the Pevensies. I'll have them immediately find Cair Paravel, immediately recognize it as Cair Paravel, immediately rescue the dwarf (whatever-his-name-is) and leave Cair Paravel, and almost immediately get to Aslan's How. That way I can spend more time with the central characters, the Telmarines, who Lewis barely even thinks to mention during this time. Plus, I really need to develop the Telmarines for the viewers since I cut out the whole beginning of the book where Lewis did that." If Andrewson feels no ethical constraint to respect the integrity of another artist's work, you would think he would at least be bright enough to realize that the easiest way to make a brilliant movie is to stick as closely as possible to the brilliant book. That's what Peter Jackson did with Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, and it worked out okay for him.

---

164 out of 300 people found the following comment useful :-
Simply amazing, 14 May 2008

Author: bruce-246 from United States

I was fortunate enough to be invited to a screening in Washington, DC prior to release. This production has what it takes. Great production, true to the story line, lots of nail biting and fascinating.

It never felt like it was over two hours. I'd have to say that Walden did an amazing job of staying true to the storyline and that Disney's magic is back. I will recommend this movie and absolutely plan on adding the DVD to my library when it comes out. I may even go and pay to see it again.

The only recommendation I have is to continue with the other 5 books. I've seen every one of the productions of The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe, and it took Disney to make it right. Now they've continued with Prince Caspian, and I'm anything BUT disappointed. As long as the storyline and production keep improving, it can only get better.

---

106 out of 187 people found the following comment useful :-
A Dark and Mature Sequel, 16 May 2008

Author: Tanmay Toraskar from India

This is something you wouldn't want to miss. If you thoroughly enjoyed the first film, then this one is a darker adventure than the first one. Everything in Narnia goes totally out of control and tough to handle.

The film starts off with a Spanish group who have invaded Narnia and wiped out all the creatures living there. As it goes, the Pevensie kids are summoned to Narnia to fix up the wrong doings. A lot of conspiracy is thrown into the movie, but it feels like a plot well presented. It's pace is quick and starts right off not waiting to re-introduce everything again.

The cast is absolutely fantastic. The Pevensie kids, just like the last time, add the right amount of drama and humor to their respective roles. Especially Georgie Henley who plays Lucy is the standout yet again. But a worthy addition would also be Prince Caspian, played by Ben Barnes. He acts like a courageous and brave Prince born to lead an army. This is a good breakthrough for him. Also worth mentioning is King Miraz, a great villain since Tilda Swinton. As for a few cameo appearances you should also look out for, the performances are remarkable.

The other outstanding details I loved to see yet again in the film were the Cinematography, The Production Design, and Visual Effects. The shots were lavish and grand. Specially the Long shots, reminded me of The Lord Of The Rings. The Art Direction and the locations are astounding, very vibrant and unlike anything you would have ever seen in film. And of course the Visual Effects, those everlasting details adds another level entirely. You will love watching all this come together.

Even the action and battle sequences feel like a last stand to something no one can win. Its against all odds. You would cringe just because of the turn the film takes. It is filled with dark themes and more mature elements which would be a little hard to take. You might feel that the first one was pretty good. But give it another chance and you would feel this movie is just as good as the first.

For what I feel, this is a really good movie. 9 out of 10. Go to Narnia.

---

---

Page 1 of 41:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history