Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter T Chattaway

Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Recommended Posts

Your point about the significance of the sun in Lewis's book is well taken; but, speaking as one who has the read the book a couple times in his life, and as one who never once thought the name of the boat had any significance while I was watching the film, I'm just not sure that the average viewer (or reader) will be hooked by an argument that begins by saying, in effect, "Did you wonder why they never explained the meaning of the boat's name?"

As a point of literary strategy, this is well taken; I'll consider how to phrase it more compellingly over the weekend as I work on the second piece.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a point of literary strategy, this is well taken; I'll consider how to phrase it more compellingly over the weekend as I work on the second piece.

Running this through my "Villainator 2000":

Curses! Foiled again! But I will be back!!!

;):D


"You know...not EVERY story has to be interesting." -Gibby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a point of literary strategy, this is well taken; I'll consider how to phrase it more compellingly over the weekend as I work on the second piece.

Running this through my "Villainator 2000":

Curses! Foiled again! But I will be back!!!

;):D

Dude. TELL me you aren't still using Villainator 2000! Join the 21st century man! Don't you know everybody laughs when that thing goes "ONE MILLION DOLLARS!"?


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we're filing complaints: My favorite exchange in the entire Narnia series is an chat between Ramandu and Eustace.

"In our world," said Eustace, "a star is a huge ball of flaming gas."

"Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of..."

In the movie? Of course not.


P.S.  I COULD BE WRONG.

 

Takin' 'er easy for all you sinners at lookingcloser.org. Also abiding at Facebook, Twitter, and Google+.

 

"Forget it, Jake. It's Funkytown."    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While we're filing complaints: My favorite exchange in the entire Narnia series is an chat between Ramandu and Eustace.

"In our world," said Eustace, "a star is a huge ball of flaming gas."

"Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of..."

In the movie? Of course not.

Not only that, Ramandu himself is entirely missing -- though the island is still Ramandu's Island and the girl is still Ramandu's daughter! Of course it would have been easy as pie to transfer this dialogue from Ramandu to his daughter, and yes, it's a shame that they didn't.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a point of literary strategy, this is well taken; I'll consider how to phrase it more compellingly over the weekend as I work on the second piece.

Running this through my "Villainator 2000":

Curses! Foiled again! But I will be back!!!

;):D

Dude. TELL me you aren't still using Villainator 2000! Join the 21st century man! Don't you know everybody laughs when that thing goes "ONE MILLION DOLLARS!"?

True, the firmware upgrades have been glitchy...but I haven't been able to get the Villainator360 yet. It's pricey. :)


"You know...not EVERY story has to be interesting." -Gibby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude. TELL me you aren't still using Villainator 2000! Join the 21st century man! Don't you know everybody laughs when that thing goes "ONE MILLION DOLLARS!"?

True, the firmware upgrades have been glitchy...but I haven't been able to get the Villainator360 yet. It's pricey. :)

Of course it's pricey. Because anyone who would actually buy a licensed copy of Villainator360 deserves to get ripped off.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are making me laugh. But SDG is right--the sun IS absolutely central to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, according to Michael Ward's Planet Narnia hypothesis.


There is this difference between the growth of some human beings and that of others: in the one case it is a continuous dying, in the other a continuous resurrection. (George MacDonald, The Princess and Curdie)

Isn't narrative structure enough of an ideology for art? (Greg Wright)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You guys are making me laugh. But SDG is right--the sun IS absolutely central to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, according to Michael Ward's Planet Narnia hypothesis.

The Planet Narnia hypothesis does strengthen the case. But I don't think it's necessary. It's pretty clear from the book, if you pay attention to imagery as well as plot and theme.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: "In our world," said Eustace, "a star is a huge ball of flaming gas."

: "Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of..."

Which reminds me, one other possible difference in nuance between the book and the film is in the way it presents a certain aspect of Eustace. In the book, I vaguely recall Eustace being presented as a materialist, along the lines of the dialogue quoted here. But in the film, Eustace at one point says he's going to do something because it's "logical", and we're clearly supposed to chuckle at this poor boy who hides behind "logic" because he can't handle living in a fantasy world. But is this how LEWIS presents him in the book? I could be wrong, but I suspect not. (Amazon.com doesn't let you scan inside this book, alas, at least not as far as I can tell.) Lewis LOVED logic, even as he recognized its limits, and I don't think he would have put "logic" on the wrong side of the skeptic-believer divide if he could have helped it. (This is reminding me of how The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe similarly pooh-poohed "logic" by aligning it with the skeptical Susan and not with the Professor.)


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like Michael Apted did a lot of fighting with the studio heads, so much so that it got to the point where he just had to pick and choose his battles.

Harrison also writes:

I went to see this by myself, due to time constraints, and one of the advantages of seeing a film by yourself is that you are free to cry as much as you like at a boy and a computer-generated mouse saying goodbye to each other.

My favorite single line from a review of this film so far.

On the other hand, part of me was feeling frustrated that, due to the story changes, Reepicheep no longer has to go to Aslan's country, but just goes because he wants to, with no particular good coming out of it. Which means, essentially, that he commits suicide. Which is rather depressing and, I suspect, not what Lewis was going for (but then, I have similar issues with Frodo and the Grey Havens, so maybe it's just me that sees it that way).

Nah, Reepicheep doesn't die any more than Edmund & Lucy do, he's just going to an-other world for greater adventures. The only difference being, he's going to the Aslan's country for good (where he's always had a longing for - think more Narnia's Enoch or Elijah), while Edmund & Lucy are going back to earth for now that they're ready to know Aslan's name there.

Well, anyhow, this is without question the best of the three Narnia films so far in my opinion, and, for the moment, it may have just pushed its way to the top of my 2010 list. How fantastic is it, by the way, that we get to see Will Poulter come back for two more films? Also, in spite of everything everyone's complained about in the last two films, remember that Skander Keynes and Georgie Henley have always been two of the very best things about this franchise, and that doesn't change for this one. Keynes is growing into a man. Henley, and that radiant smile of hers, is looking as saintly as ever. But that's not all, Ben Barnes, who really sort of annoyed me in Prince Caspian, is genuinely likeable in The Dawn Treader. Seeing his character grow into a stronger friendship with Edmund was a pleasure.

Reepicheep ... I knew I remembered loving his character years and years ago. This film adaptation helped me remember why. I forgot how important his relationship with Eustace was - pretty damn important. "Look at me when I'm talking to you. I'm a Mouse! Look at you! You're a dragon with scales for armor who breathes fire!"

By the way, who else is talking about how beautiful this film is? For a smaller budget, they sure managed to make a great looking film.

Devin Brown, author on C.S. Lewis and English Professor over at Asbury University, liked it -

But does the film say what the book says? The best way to answer this is to turn to the book’s central characters: Lucy, Edmund, Caspian, Reepicheep, and Eustace. Their film counterparts convey every bit of spiritual truth that Lewis’s original did—messages about courage, sacrifice, temptation, steadfastness, envy, pride, real beauty, real friendship, duty, and our eternal destiny. About these vitally important topics, the film tells us just what the book tells us.

Visually the film is breathtaking and does justice to Lewis’s great imagination—which is saying a lot. The wonderful ship alone is reason enough to see the movie. Audiences will love the film versions of Lucy, Reepicheep, and Eustace (as boy and as dragon) as much as they do Lewis’s originals—and this is really saying a lot. An entire essay could be devoted to the extraordinary way that these three beloved characters—the real highlights of the third Narnia book—have been brought to life and developed in the film.

So I'd be just fine with Apted getting to direct The Silver Chair. And whoever they cast for the witch, I think the far more important question is - who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman? I honestly wasn't really looking forward to this one, but now I have to see The Dawn Treader again. However, I also really want to see the next one now, which is not something Prince Caspian did for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it with my wife and two kids (4 and 8) this afternoon, and I thought it was excellent. The most fun of the three, certainly. The Dufflepuds were funny (though a different sort of funny from the book), Reepicheep was valiant (but friendlier than in the book), Eustace was annoying (though as my wife pointed out, while he annoyed the characters in the movie, and believably, he never annoyed US to the point where we wanted him offscreen. Bravo!), and Aslan was more Aslan-like than he was in any of the other movies.

More on Eustace - his journey seemed to be more based on growing in courage than anything else, which was great, given that they made Reep his teacher. The friendship between Reepichep and Eustace was believable and touching, as was the growing friendship between Edmund and Caspian. I thought they pulled off Lucy's beauty fixation VERY well.

I agree that the movie felt a bit rushed, and could have used more breathing room. But that gave it a brisk pace, and I was never bored. The closing scene with Aslan was wonderful, and made up for a LOT of bad Aslan scenes in the other movies.


In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are making me laugh. But SDG is right--the sun IS absolutely central to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, according to Michael Ward's Planet Narnia hypothesis.

The Planet Narnia hypothesis does strengthen the case. But I don't think it's necessary. It's pretty clear from the book, if you pay attention to imagery as well as plot and theme.

"pay{ing} attention to imagery as well as plot and theme" are certainly three major contributors to Ward's analysis of all the books, of course. It's not really an either/or kind of thing :)

The recent positive comments/reviews by board members are certainly making me anticipate seeing the movie tomorrow. Thanks. I won't expect TOO much, of course!


There is this difference between the growth of some human beings and that of others: in the one case it is a continuous dying, in the other a continuous resurrection. (George MacDonald, The Princess and Curdie)

Isn't narrative structure enough of an ideology for art? (Greg Wright)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Persiflage wrote:

: Henley, and that radiant smile of hers, is looking as saintly as ever.

That radiant smile of hers was actually beginning to become a problem for me in this film. The scene where the snow falls inside the room and Lucy SMILES and SMILES and SMILES felt somewhat phony, staged, theatrical, forced, over-the-top, call-it-what-you-will. (I'm not saying it deserves to have all those adjectives thrown at it at once; I just can't quite figure out which one I'd pick.)

: . . . who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

Interesting question. The only Harry Potter actor who has turned up in a Narnia movie, AFAIK, is Warwick Davis, who played Professor Flitwick and one or two other characters in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone and all of its sequels and then played Nikabrik in Prince Caspian -- though he also played Reepicheep in one of the BBC Narnia productions over 20 years ago, so who's to say which franchise had him first, there? On the other hand, one of the Narnia actors did turn up in the Harry Potter franchise afterwards, i.e. Jim Broadbent, who played Professor Kirke in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and then, four years later, played Professor Slughorn in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. So the cross-pollination has gone both ways, there. (Bill Nighy almost turned up in both franchises, too; he plays the Minister of Magic in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and he ALMOST provided the voice of Reepicheep in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader.)

CrimsonLine wrote:

: The Dufflepuds were funny (though a different sort of funny from the book) . . .

The Dufflepuds were one of the few things that elicited an audible reaction from my daughter ("That's so silly!"). :)

: I thought they pulled off Lucy's beauty fixation VERY well.

Is it a beauty fixation in the book? The only temptation I can recall Lucy dealing with in the book was more of a gossip thing, where she overhears what one of her classmates is saying about her and she now has to deal with the fact that she can never un-hear it.


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hollywood Reporter, Thursday night: "'Dawn Treader' Likely to Top Weekend With $35-45 Million".

Deadline Hollywood, Friday night: "Estimated Friday $8M, Estimated Weekend $28M".

And just for comparison's sake, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe opened to $65.5 million five years ago, and Prince Caspian opened to $55 million two and a half years ago.


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: . . . who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

Kinda would, yeah.

Hugh Laurie? Alan Cumming? David Tennant? Rowan Atkinson?

Daniel Radcliffe? (Who says the actor has to be old?)


Let's Carl the whole thing Orff!

Do you know the deep dark secret of the avatars?

It's big. It's fat. It's Greek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a good review in (of all places!) National Review Online by Mike Potemra.

He first deals with the Liam Neeson "Christ-figure" controversy by referring to Lewis and Chesterton, then gives his review of the film:

So much for the controversy. As for the film itself, its messages are powerfully Christian without being tediously preachy. One of my favorites -- I don’t remember whether it was in the book, of which I do not have a copy at hand -- was in a scene in which a human character, who had been transformed into a monster, had been transformed back by Aslan. No matter how hard I tried, says the character, I couldn’t move toward Aslan; he had to move toward me. Whether it was C.S. Lewis’s line originally or not, I’m sure his Protestant heart would have been warmed by seeing this particular sentiment on the big screen. (Martin Luther, and St. Paul, would doubtless have approved as well.)

The long and short of it: a fine movie, and appropriate for just about all ages. (Very young children back in my own youth -- I’m 46 -- might have found some of the computer-generated monsters too frightening; but I understand today’s children are made of sterner stuff.)

I don't personally remember that line from the movie in that form, do you?

: I thought they pulled off Lucy's beauty fixation VERY well.

Is it a beauty fixation in the book? The only temptation I can recall Lucy dealing with in the book was more of a gossip thing, where she overhears what one of her classmates is saying about her and she now has to deal with the fact that she can never un-hear it.

The beauty fixation WAS in the book, but it wasn't a theme that stretched through the whole work. Lucy was tempted by the spell to make her beautiful, but in the moving pictures that surrounded the illuminated manuscript, she saw what the results would be - people fighting wars simply to be able to marry her, and stuff like that. She decided not to recite the spell, but the fact that she decided not to recite that one made her more determined to recite the gossip one.

...who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

When I read the book to my kids, I read Puddleglum with a voice somewhere between the guy who did the Motel 6 commercials ("we'll leave the light on for ya") and Eeyore. :)

Edited by CrimsonLine

In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't personally remember that line from the movie in that form, do you?

That is not the line. The line is something to the effect of "No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't turn back into a boy."

Is it a beauty fixation in the book? The only temptation I can recall Lucy dealing with in the book was more of a gossip thing, where she overhears what one of her classmates is saying about her and she now has to deal with the fact that she can never un-hear it.

The beauty fixation WAS in the book, but it wasn't a theme that stretched through the whole work. Lucy was tempted by the spell to make her beautiful, but in the moving pictures that surrounded the illuminated manuscript, she saw what the results would be - people fighting wars simply to be able to marry her, and stuff like that. She decided not to recite the spell, but the fact that she decided not to recite that one made her more determined to recite the gossip one.

Fixation, no. Temptation, yes. It's only that one scene, although Lucy is so tempted that she defies her conscience, saying, "I will say say the spell. I will. I don't care." It's only the sudden appearance of Aslan (as a picture in the book) that deters her.

And it's very clear from the book that Lucy is at least wistfully envious of Susan's beauty, since the vision in the book includes Susan becoming plainer and envious of Lucy, and no one caring about Susan any more.

Huh -- that's the opposite of the dream sequence in the movie, isn't it? In the movie dream sequence, Lucy becomes Susan and then Lucy herself is forgotten, instead of Susan being forgotten.

...who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

When I read the book to my kids, I read Puddleglum with a voice somewhere between the guy who did the Motel 6 commercials ("we'll leave the light on for ya") and Eeyore. :)

!!! That's just exactly the voice I use!

Actually, I sometimes hollow out the voice a bit to sound like a friend of ours who is widely considered an excellent Puddleglum.

Edited by SDG

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And it's very clear from the book that Lucy is at least wistfully envious of Susan's beauty, since the vision in the book includes Susan becoming plainer and envious of Lucy, and no one caring about Susan any more.

Huh -- that's the opposite of the dream sequence in the movie, isn't it? In the movie dream sequence, Lucy becomes Susan and then Lucy herself is forgotten, instead of Susan being forgotten.

Interesting observation. As I was watching the unfolding of that theme in the film, and when Aslan visited Lucy in her dream-room, I kept wanting Aslan to say, "You are beautiful to me" or something like that, to show that her true value came from being known and loved by Aslan. But I guess that was probably too much to ask for. :)


In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that Lucy and Susan have both grown up before, when they were Queens in Narnia, so Lucy shouldn't really be going through all this adolescent stuff right now as though it were for the first time. (This is more of an issue for the films than it is for the books, since the films have already made a big deal of how Peter and Edmund resent being treated like children again after having grown up in Narnia.)

mrmando wrote:

: Hugh Laurie? Alan Cumming? David Tennant? Rowan Atkinson?

Heh, re: Tennant. The BBC Puddleglum was played by a former Doctor Who as well (i.e. Tom Baker). Plus, Tennant is a Harry Potter veteran, having played Barty Crouch Jr. in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: . . . who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

Kinda would, yeah.

Hugh Laurie? Alan Cumming? David Tennant? Rowan Atkinson?

Daniel Radcliffe? (Who says the actor has to be old?)

He doesn't have to be old, but should be tall--despite all that can be done with special effects these days. Rhys Ifans? Christopher Eccleston?


There is this difference between the growth of some human beings and that of others: in the one case it is a continuous dying, in the other a continuous resurrection. (George MacDonald, The Princess and Curdie)

Isn't narrative structure enough of an ideology for art? (Greg Wright)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: . . . who they are going to cast for Puddleglum? Would it be a cliche to give the part to Alan Rickman?

Kinda would, yeah.

Hugh Laurie? Alan Cumming? David Tennant? Rowan Atkinson?

Christopher Walken?

Here's a good review in (of all places!) National Review Online by Mike Potemra.

The writers over at National Review write a number of film reviews, most of which are pretty thoughtful. You left out Potemra's first controversial paragraph -

I just saw The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and I have a heretical admission to make: I enjoyed the film more than I remember enjoying the book. (Before you send me enraged e-mails, please know that C.S. Lewis is, in general, one of my favorite writers.) Two important factors made the difference: The character of Eustace, whom I remember from the book as being simply loathsome, is in the movie more of a Larry David figure — you can understand why people dislike him but he’s basically an entertaining curmudgeon. (Larry David, at least in his fictionalized self-presentation on Curb Your Enthusiasm, is the misanthrope as Everyman. In most of the fixes he gets into, the audience is given enough information to see that he’s in the right; but the other characters lack this information and become very angry with him.) The other key change is in the character of the courageous mouse Reepicheep. In the book, I found him too cloying; in the movie, I thought him quite noble and inspiring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The writers over at National Review write a number of film reviews, most of which are pretty thoughtful. You left out Potemra's first controversial paragraph -

I just saw The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and I have a heretical admission to make: I enjoyed the film more than I remember enjoying the book. (Before you send me enraged e-mails, please know that C.S. Lewis is, in general, one of my favorite writers.) Two important factors made the difference: The character of Eustace, whom I remember from the book as being simply loathsome, is in the movie more of a Larry David figure — you can understand why people dislike him but he’s basically an entertaining curmudgeon. (Larry David, at least in his fictionalized self-presentation on Curb Your Enthusiasm, is the misanthrope as Everyman. In most of the fixes he gets into, the audience is given enough information to see that he’s in the right; but the other characters lack this information and become very angry with him.) The other key change is in the character of the courageous mouse Reepicheep. In the book, I found him too cloying; in the movie, I thought him quite noble and inspiring.

Potemra's first claim, regarding Eustace, is defensible. The second, regarding Reepicheep, is like a black hole of absurdity collapsing on itself.

Seriously, "cloying"? That can't be the word he meant to use. At least, assuming he's talking about the Reepicheep of Dawn Treader; the Reepicheep of Prince Caspian is a different and rather more comical character.

Even so, "cloying" can't be the word. It must be a spell-check substitution error. Or else it's been so long since he actually read the Narnia books that when he tries to think of Reepicheep his memories are confused by vague echoes of Cynthia Rylant picture books. Or else he's been misusing the word "cloying" all his life and no one told him. I can't tell which.

Edited by SDG

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You left out Potemra's first controversial paragraph -

I left it out intentionally. I don't like quoting entire entries, I want people to click through and read it at the originating site.

Potemra's first claim, regarding Eustace, is defensible. The second, regarding Reepicheep, is like a black hole of absurdity collapsing on itself.

Seriously, "cloying"? That can't be the word he meant to use. At least, assuming he's talking about the Reepicheep of Dawn Treader; the Reepicheep of Prince Caspian is a different and rather more comical character.

Even so, "cloying" can't be the word. It must be a spell-check substitution error. Or else it's been so long since he actually read the Narnia books that when he tries to think of Reepicheep his memories are confused by vague echoes of Cynthia Rylant picture books. Or else he's been misusing the word "cloying" all his life and no one told him. I can't tell which.

"Cloying" means so sweet it's sickening, right? I can imagine someone being annoyed at Reepicheep, or finding him annoying. But I can't imagine anyone calling him "sweet."


In case you were wondering, my name is spelled "Denes House," but it's pronounced "Throatwobbler Mangrove."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hollywood Reporter, Thursday night: "'Dawn Treader' Likely to Top Weekend With $35-45 Million".

Deadline Hollywood, Friday night: "Estimated Friday $8M, Estimated Weekend $28M".

And just for comparison's sake, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe opened to $65.5 million five years ago, and Prince Caspian opened to $55 million two and a half years ago.

So it looks like the speculation about additional installments in the series was premature. Even if it holds up well through the holidays on a percentage-decline, week-to-week basis -- and I'm not sure WHAT to expect in holiday-viewing patterns once kids are out of school -- I don't see how this movie makes the kind of money that would justify additional installments. Not in North America, anyway. International grosses may save it, but how sad that domestic audiences aren't responding to this decent, sometimes exciting film, while they flock to the critically beloved (STILL a huge head-scratcher to me!) Deathly Hallows.


"What matters are movies, not awards; experiences, not celebrations; the subjective power of individual critical points of view, not the declamatory compromises of consensus." - Richard Brody, "Godard's Surprise Win Is a Victory for Independent Cinema," The New Yorker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...