Movie Reviews
It is strange how “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” compares to “The Lord of the Rings” both as a movie and as a book. I’ve always felt that the two works of literature were equally good, and yet despite them both being fantasies, they were good for totally different reasons. Tolkien’s world is in-depth and meticulously detailed. C.S. Lewis’ Narnia is too, but not as. Tolkien’s world is dark and dreary, and so is Lewis,’ but not as. I think, though, that the biggest difference between the two was the way they viewed a conflict. Tolkien loved to pound dread and fear into the minds of his readers before letting a battle ensue. It’s very effective, but unrealistic. Lewis, on the other hand, would casually kick us into a battle that, for example, might already be going. It’s spontaneity like that that made Lewis’ world real, because life is much more a casual kick than an arduous buildup.
The film versions are much the same. Peter Jackson would much rather us wait in total agony for a barrage of arrows to fly at the start of Helm’s Deep. Andrew Adamson, director of “Narnia” has his characters state that a battle is about to happen, and then it just does.
To talk about Narnia and Lewis to me would be to define the later half of my childhood. Before I was reading, my dad would read The Chronicles of Narnia to me. Then when I began to appreciate reading, I started to read them myself. Since then, Lewis and his writings have become close by at all times, sustaining me through some tough periods and encouraging me to understand some of life’s biggest mysteries. Lewis was not only a great writer, he was, and continues to be, an important writer.
When Lewis wrote The Chronicles of Narnia, his good friend and fellow scholar Tolkien was also working on The Lord of the Rings. Both were veterans of the First World War and both had a profound respect for literature and language. Lewis, a former atheist, was determined to write an allegory for Christ that would attract children. Tolkien was just writing for his own pleasure. Lewis appreciated Tolkien’s creation for its perpetual relevance. Tolkien, on the other hand, didn’t share the same enthusiasm for Narnia. He didn’t like allegory, perhaps because allegory is too specific.
So with “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe,” Lewis told his story something like this: Four children living in London are forced to leave their home during the German air raids of World War II. They’re sent off to live with a professor in a luxurious, historical mansion. The four children consist of Peter, the oldest of the bunch, Susan, the oldest girl, Edmund, and Lucy. In hiding from the temperamental maid, they stumble upon an old wardrobe that transports them to the magical land of Narnia; a land where animals talk and where a witch’s curse has made it always winter and never Christmas. With the acquaintance of Mr. and Mrs. Beaver comes the truth behind the horrible curse. The White Witch has made herself Queen of Narnia and left all of Narnia in ice and snow. A prophecy tells us that the only way the spell can be broken is if two sons of Adam and two daughters of Eve sit in thrown at Cair Paravel on the tip of the shore. Of late, many signs are showing that the prophecy is about to be fulfilled: the Witch’s secret police are dispatched to kill the four humans, armies are being assembled on both sides, and Aslan the lion, the true King of Narnia is on the move.
This is where the allegory comes in. All that jazz about the prophecy is much like a real prophecy straight out of Revelation. Susan and Lucy become the two Marys who witnessed the crucifixion. Edmund is Judas Iscariot, a traitor and a criminal, although Edmund’s fate is a trifle better than Judas’. Aslan is Christ, the one who willingly gives up his life, and then resurrects. The Witch has been interpreted as Satan for many years, but I believe she represents sin. After all, it is the Witch who kills Aslan.
Of all the characters, though, the hardest to interpret is Peter. His name would lead us to believe that he is the evangelist Peter from the Bible, but his initial opposition to the prophecy reminds me of Paul (formerly Saul).
Director Andrew Adamson is making his live-action debut with this film. His previous credits include both of the “Shrek” films. By now we get it that Adamson understands how myth and magic coincide with both despair and charm. We get a lot of nods to modern day customs, like why we shake hands. But Adamson never strays too far away from the book, even amid working with children and loads of special effects. I can only imagine the difficulty of giving direction to an inexperienced child-actor who is supposed to be having a conversation with a character that isn’t there (i.e. Aslan, who looks entirely real, I might add).
These stories are near sacred to me. Beside the fact that they are so charming, The Chronicles of Narnia was written by an author who faced more tragedy and heartache than most of us ever will. That aspect of C.S. Lewis is what seals the connection between him and his readers. And this film is helping to bring Lewis even closer. ****