The Chronicles of Narnia

There’s been a lot of talk about Walt Disney’s adaptation of C. S. Lewis’s “The Lion, the Witch and The Wardrobe”. Some people have bemoaned the ethics of “a polemic made flesh” on the screen, while others have started handing out tickets (to single mothers no less) confident that the gospel message is being well served. The Guardian’s Polly Toynbee recently argued “Narnia represents everything that is most hateful about religion” (Dec. 5th 2005), while Rev. David Baker thinks that its message of self-sacrifice, love and forgiveness is far better than the ethos of self-gratification, hatred and blame endemic in our society, no matter what your religion. In fact, what doesn’t seem to have been much talked about is Andrew Adamson’s film itself. So, entering the cinema today I was determined *not* to judge the film by its moral/religious/ethical merits or otherwise.

The story is ubiquitous, but since a review just ain’t a review without a synopsis I’ll summarise it thus: Four children – Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy - are evacuated to large country house presided over by a nutty professor type (who may represent God, or C. S. Lewis or both) during the Second World War. Almost immediately little Lucy, a plump cheeked 8ish year old, stumbles through the wardrobe of the title into a wintery land during a game of hide and seek, bumps into a fawn in a scarf, has some tea, nearly gets caught by a wicked witch (again, she of the title) but ultimately returns to the country house and her sceptical siblings. Later she leads her bitter older brother Edmund into the winter land (and of course, this is Narnia). However, no pleasant fawns or sardines for him; he’s accosted by Jadis, the Queen of Narnia (a.k.a the White Witch) and her unpleasant dwarf henchman, bribed by that renowned exotic sweetie Turkish Delight and ends up agreeing to lure his brothers and sisters to her palace for nefarious purposes. Little does he realise that he and his siblings are the subjects of a Narnian prophecy or that Aslan, the “true” King of Narnia “is on the move”, or that in drawing his whole family through the wardrobe he’ll set in motion that story of redemption, salvation and springtime that we know so well. J Beavers, Father Christmas and a battle for the fate of Narnia follows. You know the rest.

So is it any good? Well, yes it is…and no it isn’t. Shot in New Zealand and with special effects provided by Weta Workshop, it looks and feels a lot like Lord of the Rings – it’s beautiful and the CGI is masterly. And that’s fortunate because the central pivot, Aslan, is a particularly attractive talking lion and an unconvincing rendition would have spoilt the entire project. Thankfully he and an entire menagerie of fantastical and non-fantastical creatures are believably, and playfully, executed using the combination of make-up, costume and technology that worked so well for LotR. The editing is anything but sloppy (even if some of the blue screen work screams studio), the camerawork is suitably epic (perhaps even too much so) and the soundtrack, though a little jerky, is uplifting and doom-laden by turns. In fact, the look and sound of the film is generally superb.

Sadly, it’s the acting and scripting – in other words the *feel* - that lets the film down. Child actors are notoriously inconsistent and it shows here – little Lucy (Georgie Henley) has all of two facial expressions (surprise/shock and impish grin), while Peter (William Moseley) and Susan (Anna Popplewell) lack real lustre and occasionally descend into caricature. Edmund (Skandar Keynes) faired better, but that may well have been a result of having a more interesting character to work with. (Perhaps the difficulty with Peter, Susan and Lucy is that Lewis wrote one dimensional children – certainly they’re brave, cute and utterly altruistic, but not much juice to play with there.) I’m sure you’ve heard that the great triumph of the film is Tilda Swanton’s Jadis, and you’ve heard right – Tilda was born to play the ice queen. She outdoes herself, combining cold grace and raging fury to perfection; indeed, she puts Liam Neeson’s subdued Aslan to shame but again, he had little to work with.

The screenplay, composed by a quartet of relatively inexperienced writers (only Adams has been involved in major projects before - "Shrek" and "Shrek 2"), is sadly wanting, having neither the epic qualities of Lewis’s own dialogue or the humour of the Shrek scripts. There are a few smile-worthy moments, mostly involving the fawn Mr. Tumnus (a gentle, but beguiling performance by James McAvoy) and Jim Broadbent’s Professor Kirke, but overall the texture of the dialogue is too earnest and the over-awing aspects of the magic fail to break the surface.

Earnest is, in fact, an excellent way to describe “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”: earnest, well-meaning and gently entertaining but in no way ground-breaking or adventurous. I imagine most thoughtful children under the age of 12 will be thoroughly enchanted, but adults might not be so easily convinced.

_{Fantasybookspot - fantasy book reviews and fantasy book author interviews}