Home
ESSAYS
Most comprehensive guidebook in
print to outdoor sculpture in Manhattan

more info -
order



|
The Chronicles of Narnia,
The Lion, the Witch
and the Wardrobe:
Movie
Reviews and How to Write Them
Part 1
of a 3-part series (read Part 2
or Part 3)
Copyright (c) 2005 Dianne Durante
In a magical world
that they've stumbled into by accident, a group of ordinary siblings
(sensible and brave Peter, smart but cautious Susan, sweet and
optimistic Lucy) must first save their angry, rebellious younger brother
Edmund - and then themselves - from the wrath of the power-hungry,
sadistic, murderous White Witch. Those who love The Lord of the Rings
series often love The Narnia Chronicles, too: same type of magical
setting, same innocent heroes who don't intend to save the world but
find that they must, same implacably evil and utterly ruthless foes.
Even for those thoroughly familiar with the Narnia series, the movie
offers some surprises, since the screenwriters considerably livened up
the action, although they managed to do it without distorting the spirit
of the book.
As anyone knows
who's seen the trailer for this movie, the special effects are
remarkably sophisticated - the multitude of computer-generated
characters interact seamlessly with the actors. It's a credit to their
creators and the skills of the human actors that the movie doesn't
become just another CGI extravaganza. The youngsters who portray
guileless Lucy and rebellious Edmund are particularly convincing, but
the White Witch is in a category by herself. It's startling to watch her
toggling the charm on and off. Later, when she's taunting an enemy
before killing him, she lets her emotions erupt with chilling effect.
Although we see little blood shed, the White Witch and her minions would
probably terrify small children.
For some who read
the story as children, the Christian symbolism may now be so startlingly
obvious that it's distracting. I'd recommend the movie for children who
like action-adventure movies; they would probably not agree with me that
a few chase and battle scenes should have been shortened. I'd also
recommend Narnia for parents who want to see a film with their
children that isn't explosions interspersed with expletives - a movie
that's entertaining, and whose plot and characters they'll be able to
discuss later.
************
All too often I
read movie reviews that give away the plot, or focus on one obscure
point that doesn't help me decide whether I want to spend my time and
money seeing a film. Below I've tried to capture the process that I went
through to write the review above.
*****************
Today I will write
a review of Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the
Wardrobe. OK, fingers, start typing.
Can't. Don't know
where to start. The movie was over two hours long, full of images and
dialogue and pretty scenery and fantastic computer graphics, and then
there's the Christian symbolism and that annoying plot twist (almost
literally a deus ex machina) near the end … J.K. Rowling wouldn't
have introduced "new" magic at a pivotal point in the plot. Hrumph. My
daughter, a big fan of fantasy books and movies, thought Narnia
"rocked out loud," and my husband, a fan of murder mysteries and
political discourse, thought it was entertaining but not gripping. Does
any or all of that information belong in my review?
That depends on who
my audience is: family, friends, the general public or a very specific
audience such as Objectivists. This review will be for a general public
who wants enough information within five minutes or so to decide whether
to see Narnia. Flat-out statements of my likes and dislikes won't
help them. Discourses on Christian symbolism or on the use of the
deus ex machina from Ancient Greek drama to the present won't
interest most of the general public, either.
What then, should I
include in a review that aims to help strangers decide whether to see
Narnia?
Don't know.
Fingers, take a rest while the brain works this through.
All right, we'll
try something simple. Review this coffee mug for potential buyers.
What's the first question? How well it fulfills its purpose. Its purpose
is holding hot liquid for me to drink. That means the mug has to be
strong enough to hold nearly boiling liquid, and of some shape that I
can pick up to sip from. It has to be some color, but the color's not
important. It has to be some shape, but it can be many different shapes,
as long as it serves the purpose.
What's the purpose
of a movie? Art, according to Ayn Rand, is "a selective re-creation of
reality according to an artist's metaphysical value-judgments," and its
purpose is to give man "a concretized projection of [his] values, an
image in whose likeness he will re-shape the world and himself."
Stop!
This is a movie
review, not the Third Discourse on Esthetic Theory. Anyone who's
interested in the theory of art will have to read Rand's Romantic
Manifesto and Leonard Peikoff's comments in Objectivism: The
Philosophy of Ayn Rand. In a movie review aimed at a general
audience, there isn't room for this sort of discussion.
Is there some
common-sense ground on which I can assume I and potential viewers of
Narnia can meet? I'll assume that like me, they're interested in
movies as entertainment. Random sequences of images and sounds aren't
riveting entertainment. To hold my attention for a couple hours, I need
a plot. The movie has to tell a story in dialogue and images. The story
has to be a progression of events that logically follow one after
another and build to a climax, or else it's just like a home movie - it
may have significance for a few people, but for most viewers it'll be
meaningless, hence boring. Elements such as camera work, costume design,
and even acting are essential to the movie, but they must all work to
convey the "bones" of the movie - the story.
How can I tell
potential viewers about the story without giving away the ending? A plot
synopsis would ruin the suspense the film-makers strove to create. What
I need to do is give the "plot-theme," the situation that drives the
action. I'll briefly describe the main characters and the conflict they
face, without giving even a hint of the outcome. That way viewers can
decide 1) whether they're likely to care what happens to the characters,
and 2) whether the story line intrigues them enough to spend a couple
hours of their life watching it unfold. If they're intrigued by the
situation and the characters, they'll probably be glad to have seen the
film even if the ending isn't exactly as they would have wanted it.
OK, I need to work
out the plot-theme for Narnia. I've done this before, and it's
almost always much harder than I expect.
So who says writing
is easy? Get going.
First, who are the
viewers supposed to be rooting for - whose actions drive the story?
That's easy: the four Pevensie children. They're given distinct
characters from the very beginning of the movie, where Edmund rushes out
in the midst of an air raid to rescue a photo of his father, and scowls
rebelliously when his sensible older brother, who unhesitatingly rushed
out to save him, berates him for his thoughtlessness. Susan is the smart
one, but it tends to make her reluctant to try new things - occasionally
even pessimistic. Lucy, the youngest, is sweet, charming, optimistic;
she never stays angry with anyone for very long.
I can see right
away that this is going to be a difficult plot-theme, because I need to
incorporate these four very different children, with a few adjectives
that will help explain their motivation. So: Peter is sensible but
brave, Susan is smart and cautious, Lucy is sweet and optimistic, Edmund
is angry and rebellious. Oh, and I should replace "children" with
"siblings." If these kids were strangers their determination to rescue
Edmund wouldn’t be at all credible, given that they seldom show much
affection to each other. With siblings, though, explicit displays of
affection tend to be scarce.
It's tempting to
add Aslan to the list of protagonists in the plot-theme. However, he
doesn't actually appear in the movie until halfway through. While he's
vital to the story, it's the children's actions that move the story, in
the sense that until they appear in Narnia (quite by accident),
everybody including Aslan is just waiting for them.
All right, what do
the children want, and who's stopping them from getting it? Who (the
antagonist) is easy: the White Witch, who has ruled Narnia for the past
century, condemning it to be "always winter, never Christmas." She's
determined to stay in power and is ruthless about torturing or
destroying her enemies. She takes ferocious pleasure in their pain. The
White Witch is murderous, power-hungry and sadistic.
Is the siblings'
goal to save Narnia? They fit the prophecy for the humans who will do
so, but that's not what they yearn to do. At first they're simply
curious. Then they want to save Lucy's friend Mr. Tumnus. Then they have
to rescue Edmund, who was beguiled by the White Witch on his first visit
and has gone off to join her. In time, they discover that they have to
help the Narnians fight the Witch or lose their own lives.
One more element
that's necessary in this particular plot-theme is a mention of the
setting. Potential viewers don't need to know that Narnia is reached
through the back of a wardrobe in the country home of an English
professor, but they do need to know that magical beings dwell in Narnia,
and that the siblings stumble into that world purely by accident.
Now I have the
elements of the plot-theme. Let me give it a shot. "In a magical world
that they've stumbled into by accident, a group of siblings (sensible
and brave Peter, smart and cautious Susan, sweet and optimistic Lucy)
must save their angry, rebellious younger brother Edmund - and then
themselves - from the wrath of a power-hungry, sadistic, murderous
queen."
Well, that's wordy
but enticing. It captures the fantasy elements and the battle to the
death between the siblings who are trying to save lives, and the
powerful enemy who's willing to kill as often as necessary to keep
control of her kingdom.
If I were posting a
Yahoo! review, I might confine myself to stating the plot-theme. But
suppose I want to go a bit further. I could say whether I've seen
similar situations in other movies, and whether the plot as unfolds here
is predictable or has unexpected twists and turns. C.S. Lewis's Narnia
series is often compared to Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings: same
magical setting, same innocent heroes who don't intend to save the world
but find that they must, same utterly evil foes. For those who love
LOTR, chances are Narnia will be very appealing. For those
who haven't read the Narnia series, many of the events of the plot will
indeed be unexpected. Even for those who have read the book, the movie
offers some unexpected twists, since the screenwriters livened up the
middle and end of the book considerably.
Beyond the
plot-theme, there are all those subsidiary elements that help tell the
story and make it believable. Foremost among them I'd place
characterization. Are the characters well-motivated, so that I
understand why they behave as they do, or do they act unpredictably,
leaving me wondering what got into them? In Narnia, the plot
hinges on Edmund's reckless behavior and Peter's apparently habitual
response (brave but exasperated elder brother to the rescue), both of
which are set up in the opening scene of the film. The characters aren't
deep, with hidden layers of thoughts or internal conflicts, but they act
consistently unless (as in Edmund's case) something drastic happens to
change their beliefs.
Characterization
emerges via both action and by dialogue. Is the dialogue in this movie
exceptionally revealing, witty, or distinctive? Does it sound like that
guy talking to his friend at the next table, or like a fascinating
stranger I'd love to chat with? In Narnia the main characters are
polite and clear-spoken, but there were no particularly memorable lines.
This is not a movie I'd have enjoyed just for the dialogue. However,
since the dialogue (like the background music) is not especially good or
bad, I don't think I'll even mention it in my final review.
Then there's acting
- the delivery of the dialogue and the actions of the characters on
screen. Are each actor's speech and movements consistent with the
character he plays? Do his gestures, movements, the tics in his face and
the timbre of his voice, all contribute to showing the character he's
portraying? Occasionally a film has a character so stoic that the viewer
isn't meant to know his feelings - Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice,
for example. In most cases, though, the actor should be letting me see
quite clearly, from what he says and does, what's driving his character
at any point in the story. In Narnia I found guileless Lucy and
rebellious Edmund particularly well portrayed. The White Witch is in a
category by herself: I could see her toggling the charm on and off with
Edmund. In one of the later scenes, when she's taunting an enemy before
killing him, she lets her emotions burst out with chilling effect.
As a movie reviewer
I can also consider the look of the film. This encompasses the way the
movie was shot, from the framing of each scene to the camera angles,
close-ups, use of sharp or soft focus, bright or dark lighting, or the
use of jerky, hand-held cameras vs. smooth, long shots. (See the Lumet
book in the Suggested Readings.) If a film is shot well, the camera-work
tells the story and emphasizes all the right points so unobtrusively
that I don't even notice it. The camera-work in Narnia is
integrated to the story, never distracting.
The pacing of a
movie depends on whether only essential scenes are kept, and whether
they're edited together so that the narrative flows. Bad editing can
make the most intriguing story seem to drag. Narnia had some slow
bits (mostly chase scenes and battles that could have been shortened),
but in general the narrative moved along at a brisk clip, as it should
in an action-adventure movie.
Finally, there are
costumes, scenery and special effects. In Narnia the special
effects are astoundingly good. Many of the characters were entirely
computer-generated, yet utterly believable. As for the scenery, I did
not have a mental image of Narnia, but the landscape seems completely
appropriate: dense forests, distant mountains, craggy hills. It looks
like a kingdom of considerable size, providing a satisfying series of
obstacles to the siblings as they travel through it. The queen's ice
castle was stunningly beautiful yet forbidding, perfectly suited to her
character.
For viewers still
undecided about seeing the movie, a few final comments to give an
overview might be useful. Is the mood of the movie upbeat or depressing?
Did I spend more time with the good guys or the bad? I wouldn't want to
stress this too much, lest I give away the ending, but particularly for
parents considering taking small children it's worth mentioning that
Narnia is suspenseful with a few rather scary sequences. Not much
blood is spilled, but the White Witch and her minions are frightening.
Every viewer's time
is limited, and as a final point, I should say whether I thought seeing
this movie was worth over two hours of my life. Did I come out feeling
relaxed, refreshed, exalted, happy? Did it provoke me to think about
some aspect of my own life? Would I go see it again? Would I recommend
it to anyone else, and if so, to whom and for what elements? I came out
of the theater feeling relaxed (not exhausted, as I often do after
boom-bang-splat action-adventure movies) and eager to discuss the plot
and characters with my husband and teenage daughter. Although I don't
think I could get more out of it on a second viewing (unless I wanted to
study a detail such as the CGI effects), I would recommend it for
children who like action-adventure movies. I'd recommend it to parents
who want to see a movie with their children that's not explosions
interspersed with expletives - a movie whose plot and characters they'll
be able to discuss later. I'd also recommend the movie to those who read
the Narnia series as children and remember it fondly: it's a fairly
accurate rendition of the spirit of the printed books, including the
Christian elements (which grown-ups may find are now so obvious that
they're distracting).
Now I collect the
plot-theme and the subsidiary elements that seem worth mentioning - that
are so good or so bad that they might influence whether a viewer decides
to see the movie. And here's my review of The Narnia Chronicles: The
Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. [LINK TO TOP]
******************
In a sequel to this
article [LINK], written just in time for the Academy Awards, I discussed
evaluating movies, especially what is and what should be involved in
judging a film "Best Picture."
In the meantime,
some suggested readings:
-
Sidney Lumet,
Making Movies. New York: Vintage Books / Random House,
1995. Lumet states that when he decides to do a movie he first works
out the theme, then gears everything else toward conveying that
theme. He writes about revising the script, setting up a scene for
shooting, use of different camera angles and colored filters, art
direction, costume, editing, music and more. The book is an easy
read, and is illustrated with examples from Lumet's own movies:
Twelve Angry Men, Network, Murder on the Orient Express, [LINK]
and others. This is not a book that will give you all the answers
about every film, but it indicates some very useful questions to
ask. Seeing Twelve Angry Men after you read it will be a
completely different and fascinating experience.
-
For highly
intelligent comments on directing, camera angles, lighting, etc.,
try Joss Whedon's commentaries on assorted episodes of Buffy the
Vampire Slayer and Firefly. The man can not only write
zippy dialogue, he can talk intelligently off-the-cuff. You might
also try DVDs of your favorite movies with directors' commentary.
-
Ayn Rand,
The Romantic Manifesto. New York: Signet / New American
Library, 1971.
-
Leonard
Peikoff,
Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. New York:
Meridian / Penguin Books, 1991. See especially Chapter 12, on art.
Dr. Peikoff's taped lecture course "Eight Great Dramas" (available
through the Ayn Rand Bookstore) is particularly useful for learning
about the structure of a story meant to be presented visually,
rather than read.
-
McKee, Robert.
Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of
Screenwriting. New York: Regan / HarperCollins, 1997. The
indispensable textbook for screenwriters, but also a fascinating
read for movie fans, since it sets out basic rules for putting
together a good story for a movie.
|
UPWARD GLANCE
screensaver

CD with
350 JPGs of New York City
architecture

$15 including shipping and handling
(within the U.S.)

BUY NOW

|