Voyage of the Dawn Treader: film and book review
Steve Hayes
finished reading the book for the fifth time, and noted some of the
differences between the film and the book.
I hadn't seen the previous two Narnia films in the current series, perhaps for
the same reason as I never saw (and don't want to see) the films of Lord of
the Rings, because I don't want the film to interfere with the pictures in my
head when I read the books. But The voyage of the Dawn Treader is different.
It isn't set in Narnia itself, and is more like a series of short stories.
In the prepublicity leading up the the film release there was some talk of the
film removing all the "Christian" elements of the book, and interviews with
the producers in various publications, in which they said that they weren't
Christian, and so hadn't handled it as a Christian story.
Well, I don't think C.S. Lewis himself regarded it as a specifically Christian
story, though it is, of course, informed by his Christian worldview. The most
overtly Christian thing about it is at the end, where Aslan says that he is
known in our world by another name, and the children returning to our world
need to learn to know him by that name, and that was retained in the film.
What disappeared in the film was a lot of the theological nuances, and as it
was written as a children's story, they wouldn't be apparent to most children
on a first reading either. Perhaps seeing the film might encourage childrent
to read the book.
One of the things that stood out for me was that Reepicheep came across as a
much more sympathetic character in the film than in the book. The first couple
of times I read it I found him rather tiresome, and sympathised with Caspian,
when Reepicheep said to him, 'Your Majesty promised to be a good lord to the
Talking Beasts of Narnia.'
'Talking beasts, yes,' said Caspian. 'I said nothing about beasts that never
stop talking.'
And perhaps something of the film lingered when I reread the book, because I
saw Reepicheep in a new light.
The film handled Eustace Scrubb fairly well, and showed his change from an
unpleasant character to a somewhat improved character fairly well, though some
of this was lost because in the film most of the changes took place in his
dragon form, and not his boy form. Edmund and Lucy, however, appeared much
older in the film than they do in the book. Perhaps it was difficult to handle
their appearing to be older while in Narnia and reverting to the chronology of
this world on their return.
One of the things I found interesting was the things that the film added to
the book, and those that it removed, or emphasised less.
One of the first additions was people from the Lone Islands disappearing into
the mist, and a girl from the Lone Islands stowing away on the Dawn Treader
and becoming a kind of companion to Lucy, though her role is not clear, and it
is not helped by her somewhat wooden-faced performance.
What gets lost in that part of the story, partly because of the changes and
spurious additions, is the point that comes out strongly in Lewis's narrative
-- that bureaucrats who pay more attention to statistics and economic trends
than to people tend to lose sight of justice, and are unworthy of their
office. I can't help wondering if this was perhaps a bow to political
correctness on the part of the film's producers, in a time when governments
keep telling us that cuts in spending have to be made because of the
statistics, regardless of the effect that they might have on people.
The order of events is also changed somewhat. In one sense this does not
matter very much, since each episode on the voyage, each island or archipelago
visited is independent of the others. But in the book there is a progression.
At the first stop, at the Lone Islands, the voyagers are faced by mainly human
evil - slave traders and a corrupt bureaucracy.
In the book the next stop is at the dragon island, where Eustace is briefly
transformed into a dragon, and there, of course, magic enters the picture,
certainly in the actual transformation. But it is also human evil, in that it
is linked to Eustace's dragonish thoughts. The actual transformation is
handled quite well in the film. Where it is different, and not improved, is
that while in the book Eustace is transformed back into a boy before they
leave the island, in the film it is moved much later, and Eustace stays in
dragon form for longer, I suspect because the film producers wanted him to
fight the sea-serpent in his dragon form rather than his human form.
The sea-serpent episode is also moved closer to the end of the film, and that,
to me, is one of its greatest weaknesses. It tends to turn the film into a
B-movie like Anaconda, and I got the impression that the producers simply
could not resist the temptation to play with Anaconda-like special effects in
3D, with close-ups of the lunging head that kept snapping but never seemed to
actually do any significant damage. In the book it is the boy Eustace, rather
than the dragon, who attacks the sea-serpent, his first significant (though
ineffectual) act of bravery in the story.
The other significant addition in the film is the quest to collect the swords
of the seven missing lords, and to bring them together on Aslan's table, and
the change in Eustace is marked by him being the one to put the last sword
there, which is supposed to make everything right.
What is missing from the film is Ramandu.
Ramandu's daughter makes an appearance, and she is a star, and goes back to
being one, instead of marrying Caspian (though the film does show the
attraction he feels towards her). But Ramandu, though mentioned, does not
appear at all, and this is where some of the theological nuances get lost in
the film.
'In our world,' said Eustace, 'a star is a huge ball of flaming gas.'
'Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is, but only what it
is made of. And in this world you have already met a star; for I think you
have been with Koriakin.'
'Is he a retired star, too?' said Lucy.
'Well, not quite the same,' said Ramandu. 'It was not quite as a rest that
he was set to govern the Duffers. You might call it a punishment. He might
have shone for thousands of years more in the southern winter sky if all had
gone well.'
'What did he do, Sir?' asked Caspian.
'My son,' said Ramandu, 'it is not for you, a son of Adam, to know what
faults a star can commit.'
And so Lewis hints, briefly, at the possibility of the repentance of fallen
angels. And while the Bible, and other books, like the Book of Enoch, speaks
of the sons of gods marrying the daughters of men, Lewis has a son of Adam
marrying a daughter of the gods. But the film skips this episode.
I suppose one of my disappointments, with both the film and the books, is the
sea-serpant episode. In the film the sea-serpent is reduced to a lunging,
snapping, special-effects reptile, with no real significance for the story.
But in the book, while the sea-serpent could have had some Rahab-like
characteristics (cf Isaiah 55:9-11), Lewis makes it merely dim-witted.
See also: http://su.pr/2qwWRH
I'd be interested in knowing what others who have read the book and seen the
film think about it.
--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.goodreads.com/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
Steve Hayes
laraine
> went to see the film of The voyage of the Dawn Treader last night, and today
> finished reading the book for the fifth time, and noted some of the
> differences between the film and the book.
I need to go back and read the book again too
(and see the movie again).
The story is somewhat like a dream, so the details
get a little hazy for me at times.
>
> I hadn't seen the previous two Narnia films in the current series, perhaps for
> the same reason as I never saw (and don't want to see) the films of Lord of
> the Rings, because I don't want the film to interfere with the pictures in my
> head when I read the books.
Highly recommend them, though the
special effects in this one might
be better.
>But The voyage of the Dawn Treader is different.
> It isn't set in Narnia itself, and is more like a series of short stories.
Right, a series of stories... not entirely
a cohesive plot, but that's deliberate.
A very visual story, so it was helpful to
see the movie.
>
> In the prepublicity leading up the the film release there was some talk of the
> film removing all the "Christian" elements of the book, and interviews with
> the producers in various publications, in which they said that they weren't
> Christian, and so hadn't handled it as a Christian story.
Well, you have to figure out the moral
lesson... thought I had it, but don't recall
now... theme of sleep --evading responsibility
maybe? Sloth? Though that might be a theme in
The Silver Chair too. So maybe in this book, greed
for riches and/or fame(?) is a primary flaw addressed.
(That's just a theory, of course.)
>
> Well, I don't think C.S. Lewis himself regarded it as a specifically Christian
> story, though it is, of course, informed by his Christian worldview. The most
> overtly Christian thing about it is at the end, where Aslan says that he is
> known in our world by another name, and the children returning to our world
> need to learn to know him by that name, and that was retained in the film.
> What disappeared in the film was a lot of the theological nuances, and as it
> was written as a children's story, they wouldn't be apparent to most children
> on a first reading either. Perhaps seeing the film might encourage childrent
> to read the book.
I think kids might love this movie,
the only problem being the hazy plot.
The fight scenes between Eustace and
Reepicheep worked well as action, I thought.
>
> One of the things that stood out for me was that Reepicheep came across as a
> much more sympathetic character in the film than in the book. The first couple
> of times I read it I found him rather tiresome, and sympathised with Caspian,
> when Reepicheep said to him, 'Your Majesty promised to be a good lord to the
> Talking Beasts of Narnia.'
>
> 'Talking beasts, yes,' said Caspian. 'I said nothing about beasts that never
> stop talking.'
>
> And perhaps something of the film lingered when I reread the book, because I
> saw Reepicheep in a new light.
Reepicheep was a real friend to Eustace
in the movie. Don't recall if he was so much in
the book, but the dragon scenes had a lot
added. In the book, I recall that Eustace had a
private conversation with Aslan, and painfully
had the scales removed (which is sort of in the
movie too), and that was it. Little interaction with
Reepicheep and the others at that time. The dragon
didn't help them out either.
>
> The film handled Eustace Scrubb fairly well, and showed his change from an
> unpleasant character to a somewhat improved character fairly well, though some
> of this was lost because in the film most of the changes took place in his
> dragon form, and not his boy form. Edmund and Lucy, however, appeared much
> older in the film than they do in the book. Perhaps it was difficult to handle
> their appearing to be older while in Narnia and reverting to the chronology of
> this world on their return.
The Eustace actor was good. I liked
the way he kept wrinkling his nose or
whatever.
There was an added plot of Lucy
being jealous of the attractive Susan.
And when Lucy looks at the magic book,
she sees Susan rather than her friend
who said unkind things about her.
Hmm, I never thought of a falling star
as an angel. I've seen Renaissance poetry
with images of living stars, though.
>
> I suppose one of my disappointments, with both the film and the books, is the
> sea-serpant episode. In the film the sea-serpent is reduced to a lunging,
> snapping, special-effects reptile, with no real significance for the story.
> But in the book, while the sea-serpent could have had some Rahab-like
> characteristics (cf Isaiah 55:9-11), Lewis makes it merely dim-witted.
>
> See also: http://su.pr/2qwWRH
>
> I'd be interested in knowing what others who have read the book and seen the
> film think about it.
>
>
It's true that the sea serpent didn't
seem too quick to inflict destruction, but
I thought this a colorful and suspenseful
scene.
Other watery scenes were done well, e.g.,
the beginning and end where the water
comes out of the painting into the room,
and also the waves to Aslan's kingdom at the
end of the Narnia part.
I would have liked to have seen this film
in 3D.
C.