Letters to the Editor
calibellus
Published Letters: 2 Editor's Choice: 1
-
Stephanie Zacharek was wrong
[Read the article: I've got a bow and arrow, and I intend to use them]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My wife and I saw the movie, and we both loved it. Afterward, my wife sat down with the book for the first time in years, and went through it to see what had changed and what hadn't. Based on what she found, we were both even more impressed by the movie.
Without getting overmuch into spoilers, the movie expands on the problems of the book, specifically the role of Aslan's inaction as a deity and the difficulty the children must have found in returning to England having grown to maturity (as rulers, no less) in another world. Susan's reply to Lucy's joy at returning to Narnia is a well forshadowed, 'As long as it lasts.' Peter's role as a leader is better fleshed out in the book, Edmund gets his moments of glory, and Lucy is ever the bright spark, but it's Susan who really comes into her own.
She out-Legolases Legolas in the battle scenes. Her losses cut deeper than any of the others except perhaps for Peter, and her awareness of those losses is greater. (Peter's mistakes in this film, which are not in the book, underline what it really means to be in a position of leadership. The framing of the movies with World-War II, with Peter in a position of being nearly old enough to join the army in a war that isn't even close to won, gives his story much more freight than Lewis ever managed.)
And Adamson and the writers manage all this without fundamentally changing the nature of the books, which takes some doing.
-
On the Matter of Susan
[Read the article: I've got a bow and arrow, and I intend to use them]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For those who felt the film lacked heart, I'll just say I thought we were watching different movies. There's quite a bit of heart there. It's just not pulled, still beating, from someone's chest for all to see. You have to know what you're looking at. (Edmund's reprise with the White Witch means a lot if you know his back story and what it means for him to deny her. If you don't, then it's 'what was that all about?) I do defy anyone to look at Peter's choice to attack at the castle and tell me it doesn't show a lot of character. It also leads directly to his choice to face the enemy king in single combat to the death rather than have any of his followers die. It's a lesson in leadership and what it really means to be 'High King of Narnia'. In the book there was no castle battle, no leadership quarrel, and Aslan showed up much earlier to cement Peter's role as head of Narnia's forces. This robs Peter of almost all of his character development.
As far as Susan eventual fate, this movie sets it up as more tragic than in the books. Not only did she lose Narnia as a girl, she lost it as a woman. She lost a man she might have loved and respected and made a life with. Small wonder that, when faced with the prospect of going back again, her reaction is dismissive: when you've had paradise taken away from you twice, through no fault of your own other than 'growing up', it's perfectly rational to not want to have it happen again, particularly if you've gone and made a life for yourself in the mean time. Of course while her family 'won't get to see her again', she winds up faced with her entire family dying as far as she's concerned. Not, perhaps, the equivalent of being condemned to hell, but bad enough.
I was somewhat disappointed with Caspian's rescue of Susan in the glade, much like another poster, but the scene salvages itself by proving to her that Caspian actually has some worth. He hadn't doing particularly well in her eyes up until then. She'd also took down, alone, a small squad of horsemen armed only with a bow. Caspian was just left to mop up the last man. No rescue, no romantic angle, or at least much less of one, and then less tragedy at the end.