The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe - Lost in Adaptation

I think as a non-Christian kid I never liked the books because some of the Aslan-Jesus metaphors were just too overpowering. Especially because I went to a church school and grew up in a small, fairly Christian, village. I could see all the allegories and I knew I didn't believe. It was frustrating! I think that's one of the nicest views of the film I've ever seen though, I thought it was decent enough as an experience, though I didn't like the next two (except Caspian, he was hot).

Even as a kid who loved Christmas, I was never impressed by the "No Christmas" threat. "The White Witch has killed all our crops and caused famine for a century! And we're not allowed to have a bitching party!"

Am I the only one who saw the animated film? That was my first exposure to that story, I was so young when I saw it I hadn't even heard of the book.

Twisted Wishes

Probably the last too XD

Dominic Noble

I believe that this is the first time you've used the phrase "book-daddy"

Mr Freddo Renton

How much is the ASMR tier? Take my money.

PushingUpRoses

On a side note, even though the icon says this is unlocked & you have comments over there, it's not showing up in my YouTube subscriptions. I even had to check to make sure I was still subscribed to you. :-( The sexism might be bad in this, but it's nothing compared to Lewis' Space trilogy - which is about a dude who travels to other planets to find each in a different Biblical state, such as one that's entered it's apocalypse, another that is still Eden and will remain so as long as their Adam & Eve don't sleep on solid land, etc. In the 3rd book there's a feminist character who's basically convinced that women are inferior and need to submit to their husbands.

"Film senpai," omg.

Ok not gonna lie, the end was sexy, Dom.

I actually like the softer tone in the openings. Gives a sense of reverence to the proceedings, like announcers for classical music stations.

shadowscribble

On the changes on Peter and Edmund, I think it works. Not only is it necessary due to the change of medium (Peter would have come across as bland and boring, while Edmund would probably be too unlikable), I think it is also one of those things that works more because of the tone and way the book describes it, rather than Peter's character being "well written" in the book. In fact, I would argue he is a slight deconstruction of the "Incorruptible Hero" since he also makes everyone around him feel inadequate and/or is overprotective of everyone, regardless of their feelings about it. It may even be Peter trying to emulate their father, who is fighting the war. If we go with the movie addressing the casual sexim in the book, I do think Peter's change of character and how strict he is with Edmund is also an effect of this. He treats Edmund like crap over every little bad thing he does... because they are no logner "kids", the two of them are supposed to be The Men, the ones who take care of Susan and Lucy. That Edmund needs to grow up, to man up, to be more responsible for Lucy and Susan's sake... except Edmund is still a kid and younger than Susan. Peter's arc is, among other things, understand this, that what he was expecting of Edmund was unreasonable and only pushed Edmund away. When he finally stops putting pressure on Edmund to be perfect and be responsible, and accepts him as he is, Edmund proves himself on his own terms by breaking the wand. On Edmund, like I say, Book Edmund is pretty unlikable, which would fall flat in the movie. He doesn't really joins back to the siblings necessarily because he realized the wrong of his ways, but rather because of how awful everything was. In the movie, him changing sides is more understandable given Peter's treatment of him, plus the fact that Tilda Swinton offered to adopt him. Likewise, what made him see the err of his ways wasn't that the queen treated him like crap when they met again, but rather Mr. Tumnus being turned into stone, which happened because of Edmund. At that point, he doesn't need more proof that the queen is evil, but it makes him be witness of the effects his own actions had, which in turns shows him he needs to change. This also makes a slight change on the meaning of Edmund being the one to break the wand, and why it was a good thing they showed it: It represents Edmund's redemption. Not because of trying to betray his siblings or having tried to side with the queen, but of Mr. Tumnus "death". As far as he knew, Mr. Tumnus was as well as dead and there was no way to undo being turned into stone. What he did to Mr. Tumnus could not be fixed, but he could at least make sure it never happens again.

Locuas

The BBC adaptation is the definitive version...and this is a hill on which I am willing to die.

My "meh" opinion definitely comes from... I enjoyed the book. And it's easy to ignore the religious allegory when reading the book the first few because, as you mentioned, it reads like a fairy tale. But watching the movie, while not bad definitely drew a bold line under all of the religious allegory which soured my enjoyment of the story in general and made subsequent readings of the book hard to get through. There's something to be said about taking a fairy tale story and trying to make it highly realistic to really sour the mood for the fairy tale

Siona Larsen