so this blog has been quiet for a while. i got terribly bogged down in my last semester of seminary as i was trying to graduate. other factors contributed to this, but since graduation is over i hope to have a lot more time to devote to blogging.

perhaps there is no better return to blogging than an experience that really gets your juices flowing, for good or bad. this definitely happened with me as i sat in the theater watching the latest film adaptation of C.S. Lewis’s masterpiece, The Chronicles of Narnia. the film in question is the second installment of the franchise and is based on the book Prince Caspian (PC hereafter).

let me start by saying that PC the book is my least favorite of the Narnia series. i can’t exactly pinpoint why, i just don’t enjoy it near as much as i do the other six books. that’s not to say, however, that there aren’t some really great moments in the book, and of course it is here that we first meet my favorite character in the series, Reepicheep. so because it’s my least favorite, if there was any film where much could be changed without my really caring, it would be PC. this of course being under the assumption that an attempt would be made to preserve the underlying message and intent of the author in such a film.

sadly, however, what was done by the filmmakers to this book is, frankly, atrocious. the narrative of the film is largely unrecognizable to someone familiar with the book. so much has been changed, so much has been added, and the message and intent has been completely removed that it’s a wonder that this film can even be called “Prince Caspian.”

putting what was done to the actual story aside for a moment, the film, as a piece of art, is also horrific. the film is basically a Michael Bay version of PC (and i say that as a fan of Michael Bay films) where cheap thrills and violence are the order of the day, and the story is a secondary matter, almost an afterthought. the effects in the film, though better than those of the previous film, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe are not very well done and the film seems to be a pretty poor, cheap ripoff of the Lord of the Rings films, especially in the first ten to twenty minutes of the film.

with the exception of a few bright spots, the actor who plays King Miraz in particular, the acting is pretty painful. two of the children, Lucy and Edmund, are alright, but Susan and Peter are just awful. much of the dialogue is awkward and stilted and there just doesn’t seem to be much chemistry between them. it almost appears as if they don’t want to be there. Liam Neeson, much more in this film, is unconvincing as Aslan (more stilted dialogue here), and perhaps the biggest disappointment of all was the noble mouse Reepicheep. i was skeptical on Eddie Izzard providing the voice, and for me it just didn’t work at all. of course this might of had to do with more stilted dialogue. i mean it literally sounded to me that when Reepicheep spoke there was someone pushing play on a tape recorder and then pushing stop when the line was finished. that’s how awkward and disjointed the dialogue was.

so as a piece of art on its own, the film, while mildly entertaining, is just not very good.

many people around the web have commented on and detailed the points at which the film strays from the book, so i won’t take the time to do so here. if you want to know, it’s not that hard to find. the changes, as i said before, are so numerous that it’s a wonder that this film can even be called Prince Caspian. it’s also a wonder that Douglas Gresham, Lewis’s step-son, allowed such a raping (in my opinion) of this story to take place.

i actually wasn’t that surprised at the changes in themselves, but i thought enough of a vestige of the book and the author’s intent would remain untouched. however, if the filmmakers couldn’t get the conversation in the Beavers’ house right in the first film, i don’t know why i expected the more profound parts of this book to be handled with care and delivered faithfully (how you can mess up that great line of Aslan’s, “every year you grow, you will find me bigger” is just beyond me; “as you grow, so do i,” the line in the film, means nothing even in the same vain as what Lewis intended. ugh!)

i will mention one specific change, however, that i actually thought was an interesting and good one. many people are incensed at the invented romance between Susan and Caspian that the film portrays, saying that Lewis would never have approved of such a change. they may be right, but i think the change is actually in keeping with what Lewis tells us of Susan’s later life. the kiss she plants on Caspian, that so many are outraged over, shows the beginning of Susan’s pursuit of worldly things. in The Last Battle we are told that Susan is no longer a friend of Narnia and that all she cares about are “nylons, lipstick, and invitations.” so concerned with becoming an adult, Susan rejects the childlike wonder of Narnia in pursuit vain worldliness. her romantic interest and bold kiss in the film gives us an idea of where Susan is going, especially since this will be the last we see of her (assuming the filmmakers remain mostly true to the story for the remainder of the films, something that seems much more in doubt after this latest chapter). so i actually like that change and think it suits Lewis’s intent pretty well.

overall, though, i really did not like this film and i would have no problem with it being the last adaptation from the Narnia books. i shudder to think what the filmmakers will do with The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and The Last Battle.

on this day in 1892, the greatest author of 20th century was born. in commemoration of this event, The Tolkien Society sponsors a worldwide toast for folks to show their appreciation to the good professor, his work, and the legacy he left behind. a fantastic tradition and one i plan to practice until the end of my days.

in addition to later raising a pint, i am celebrating by watching the three extended editions of The Lord of the Rings films in succession (something i’ve never done before and am excited about) as well as breaking in the new pipe that i got for Christmas.

“the professor!”

this was easily one of my top 5 favorite movies of 2007. it’s the story of a pregnant teenage girl faced with the choice of what to do with the fruit of her exploits. while it never seems that keeping the child is an option, she does consider both of the other options, adoption and abortion, and decides on the former. she then looks for a worthy family that can adopt the baby and finds, through a personal ad, no less, a seemingly perfect couple with a seemingly perfect life. the movie then goes through the events that transpire leading up to the birth of Juno’s baby.

now, there are several reasons that i loved this film. first, it’s just funny. i mean really hilarious. the conversations, especially between Juno (played by Ellen Page) and her best friend Leah (played by Olivia Thirlby), are brilliantly written and never seem forced or contrived. when the two girls are together they pretty much only talk in slang, which can be hard to keep up with but is terribly funny if you can. the word choice is amazing and it’s interesting that they can use certain words to convey meaning that could have nothing to do with the actual meaning of the word they use. that’s probably confusing, and i can’t remember any specific examples, so you’ll just have to see the film to see what i mean. but it’s brilliant. i also found it very refreshing that the majority of the humor in this movie is in the dialogue. frankly, i’m a little burnt out on comedies that are nothing but situational or gag humor. i want something witty, something intelligent. and Juno definitely fits that bill.

a second reason i loved this film is the relationships of the characters. i think one thing that hollywood often fails to convey is the reality of relationships. there are a number of reasons for this, of course, and some of them are justified, but one thing this film does really will is to portray the messiness and complexity of relationships. every relationship in this film is flawed, even the one between Juno and Leah. yet all the characters seem to be conscious of this and do what they can to work through their various issues. they don’t do so perfectly, of course, but through the trouble and pain comes love and redemption. and i think this film does a very good job at showing that.

a third reason i loved this film is what it says about life. now let me be perfectly clear in saying that i don’t think this film was in any way intended to be an “anti-abortion” film, nor do i think it was intended to make any kind of political statement whatsoever. it may, but if so then i am completely unaware of it. nevertheless, i think this film is a wonderful testament to the miracle of life and pregnancy. as i mentioned earlier, Juno does contemplate having an abortion. like one of Job’s friends, perhaps, Leah makes the calls for her and sets up the appointments, trying as hard as she can to help Juno with the situation in the way that she thinks best. but when Juno gets to the abortion clinic she meets a classmate, a stereotypical anti-abortion Christian, protesting the abortion clinic with a picket sign and chanting “all babies want to get borned.” the “Christian” is made to look like a fool, but what she tells Juno, that her baby has fingernails, completely changes Juno’s attitude towards what she is about to do. it’s through watching the nervous, unsettled fingernails of the other “clients” in the clinic that cause her to run out and choose adoption, and she never wastes an opportunity to tell everyone around her that her baby has fingernails. in her own quirky way, Juno comes to realize the wonder that is growing inside of her. and even though she refers to the baby as “this thing” or to her pregnancy as “a fat suit i can’t take off,” even though not having an abortion will bring scorn upon her from classmates and parents, she refuses to do the easy thing and to respect the life that is growing inside of her. it’s beautiful.

there are other things i loved about this film. the soundtrack is really great, the casting is perfect, Dwight has a cameo (i really wish he had more scenes), etc., etc. it’s just a completely brilliant film. this film has definitely aided in changing my attitude towards indie films. i’ve seen several of them lately (Once and Waitress being the best of the lot), which is unusual for me. i think i’ve been kind of leery of indie films because of the people that are really into them. i saw it as just another thing to be a snob about, and saw some that weren’t particularly great that just solidified my view. but that view has completely changed now. i’m not going to be one that ONLY watches indie films from now on, i love popcorn blockbusters too much to do that, but i definitely won’t be as suspicious toward them as i was little more than a month ago. like with Juno, in the best ones there’s a profound realism, and that’s something i’ve been looking for in film for a long time.

read the full press release here. this is such exciting news!! many Tolkien fans thought this day would never come, so it’s completely wonderful that Jackson, New Line, and MGM have been able to work out their differences enough to let this happen. i would have loved to hear that Jackson would also be directing the two films (though, i suppose, there is still hope until they officially announce a director), but oh well. executive producer (along with his wife, Fran Walsh) is much more than we had hoped to get at all.

as far as the details go:

The two “Hobbit” films – “The Hobbit” and its sequel – are scheduled to be shot simultaneously, with pre-production beginning as soon as possible. Principal photography is tentatively set for a 2009 start, with the intention of “The Hobbit” release slated for 2010 and its sequel the following year, in 2011.

2010 can’t get here soon enough!!!

UPDATE: The Hobbit: The Official Movie Blog has been launched.

is now available (larger, higher-res version here).

as someone who was less than impressed with the adaptation of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, this second installment actually looks pretty good. i’ll reserve judgment until i see the film, however.

that’s what this site says. my first couple of thoughts:

PJ directing? freakin’ awesome and about damn time.

3D? hmm…..

now i haven’t seen Beowulf in 3D (and i probably won’t because of the changes i’ve heard they made to the story; Beowulf is one of my favorite books), but i know some people that have and they said the effects were pretty amazing. the only complaint i’ve heard is that emotion still doesn’t translate and the eyes of the cgi actors are still lifeless and dead.

that’s my fear of doing The Hobbit (probably my favorite book of all-time) in 3D. i suppose this could be a non-issue if they can achieve the 3D effect without cgi actors, and i truly hope that this is the case. i just can’t imagine Bilbo, Thorin, Gandalf, etc. as lifeless, soulless cgi animation. the one thing that makes me think this will be a non-issue is the article’s mention of Jackson wanting to go back and do the LOTR films in 3D as well. i guess we’ll just have to wait and see how all this pans out.

another interesting note from the article is the mention that there will be two films. presumably, the first film will be The Hobbit and the second film will be a sort of prequel to The Lord of the Rings, speculating on events that took place in the 60 year period between the two. should be interesting, to say the least, but if there’s anyone we can trust to do this right, it’s Peter Jackson.

(HT: TORN)