The Chronicles Of Narnia
#1
Posted 04 December 2005 - 06:38 PM
Will it give Harry Potter a run for his money? Will Disney muck it up? I'll have to wait and see I supose, but meanwhile have a look at the trailers and decide whether you want to see this film for yourself.
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/c/The-Chronicle...ndex-47730.html
#2
Posted 04 December 2005 - 08:01 PM
I'm quite happy to accept this as a flaw in my personality, but I really don't feel that I could go along to see it without this being at the back of my mind
#3
Posted 05 December 2005 - 12:58 AM
#4
Posted 07 December 2005 - 02:53 AM
#5
Posted 07 December 2005 - 01:34 PM
What was it Freud said..Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
#6
Posted 07 December 2005 - 07:30 PM
| QUOTE (Caractacus @ Dec 7 2005, 02:34 PM) |
| loved the book as a kid. Seriously looking forwards to the film. Stuff the supposed religiuos implications, most people havenot got any idea about that stuff. Its just a film. What was it Freud said..Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. |
CS Lewis wrote the Chronicles of Narnia as a way to introduce kids to Christianity; that's why the Churches are excited - they think they've got their Harry Potter.
There was an article recently about The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe in The Guardian.
But the point that a lot of the symbols today will be missed by kids is a good one - I may yet see it...
#7
Posted 08 December 2005 - 09:32 AM
#8
Posted 08 December 2005 - 11:43 AM
#9
Posted 08 December 2005 - 01:44 PM
| QUOTE (Harlequin @ Dec 8 2005, 10:32 AM) |
| Oolongcha: That write up in the Guardian has put me right off the film. |
Sorry
#10
Posted 10 December 2005 - 06:24 PM
| QUOTE (dbddbd @ Dec 7 2005, 02:53 AM) |
| |
Blah, blah, blah.
When (if ever) has anyone interperated something by it's original meaning?
No matter what an author, artist, musician creates; there will be a different meaning to everyone who reads, views or hears it. All good work is subject to multiple interpretation.
Tolkien and C.S. Lewis can turn in their graves for all I care: The religious undertones are lost on me because the stories they wrote have an even more significant meaning than they intended weather they like it or not.
So there
#11
Posted 11 December 2005 - 01:13 AM
#12
Posted 13 December 2005 - 02:43 PM
| QUOTE (FBG @ Dec 11 2005, 01:13 AM) |
| Well my 7 year old went and saw it today and he said it was really good, better than lord of the rings, so I looked him in the eye and asked him if he was telling porkies, and he said no dad it was the dogs danglys. So it must be a good film if he says so |
How dare he denounce the greatness that is the Lord of the Rings!!!!!
He's excused because of his age but I expect you to re-educate him as he gets older!!!!
I'm definatley going to reserve my oppinion of this film until I see it. I've heard that the visual FX are not up to stratch though, and from the trailers I've seen all of the effects budget went on the lion. The sets and other CGI stuff looks a bit ropey....
#13
Posted 13 December 2005 - 03:25 PM
| QUOTE (Dace @ Dec 13 2005, 08:43 AM) | ||
How dare he denounce the greatness that is the Lord of the Rings!!!!! He's excused because of his age but I expect you to re-educate him as he gets older!!!! I'm definatley going to reserve my oppinion of this film until I see it. I've heard that the visual FX are not up to stratch though, and from the trailers I've seen all of the effects budget went on the lion. The sets and other CGI stuff looks a bit ropey.... |
blah blah blah, I thought you just typed that you weren't going to reserve judgement until you have seen it, lol, once again another who cannot have it both ways....
#14
Posted 13 December 2005 - 07:20 PM
| QUOTE (dbddbd @ Dec 13 2005, 03:25 PM) | ||||
blah blah blah, I thought you just typed that you weren't going to reserve judgement until you have seen it, lol, once again another who cannot have it both ways.... |
I just said the Special Effects are shite........I've got loads of films with low budget effects that I love, so technically I could still be a potential fan of this film.
So Fcuk You
Here's an example of such a film for you.......The Terminator. Absolute classic film with some really shoddy (for my generation) visual effects. But I still love the film and still chuck it on to watch now and again.
A film that I think was good, but wouldn't get into my top 20 favourite films is the new War of the Worlds. This has beaten everything I've ever seen for visual effects, but it's not the best film ever.
Do you see where I'm coming from now....or do you need more explaining?
#15
Posted 13 December 2005 - 08:21 PM
| QUOTE (Dace @ Dec 13 2005, 01:20 PM) | ||||||
I just said the Special Effects are shite........I've got loads of films with low budget effects that I love, so technically I could still be a potential fan of this film. So Fcuk You Here's an example of such a film for you.......The Terminator. Absolute classic film with some really shoddy (for my generation) visual effects. But I still love the film and still chuck it on to watch now and again. A film that I think was good, but wouldn't get into my top 20 favourite films is the new War of the Worlds. This has beaten everything I've ever seen for visual effects, but it's not the best film ever. Do you see where I'm coming from now....or do you need more explaining? |
Only thing I choose to say in response, and not to your common vulgarity, but to the fact that the Lord of the Rings book was better than the movie. But still a decent movie, haven't seen the third entry of the silver screen though. I'll have to reserve judgement on whether the book is better or not. Now, I would enjoy possessing a "phase plasma rifle" in the forty watt range.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











