February 03, 2006
I'm shocked that it got made because: 1) that makes the third high-budget, effects-dependent adaptation of popular books that the studios executives haven't managed to screw up and 2) the Christian overtones are so obvious. In fact, it was a very well-done evangelical movie. Nothing wrong with that, but it was startling to see it done so well. Would this film have attracted the appropriate level of capital if Mel Gibson hadn't cleaned up so handsomely with The Passion of the Christ?
It's hard to know. But I see an underground backlash occurring against the blandness and amorality of a lot of what's being produced. Even The Incredibles was a stunning piece of propaganda for family stability and healthy household interactions, and I begin to hope that the Hollywood Resistance will win out over the amiable idiocy that prevails right now.
More, perhaps, after I read the actual reviews (I try to avoid reviews before I see a movie, so I can go in as "cold" as possible). Or, perhaps, after re-reading the first volume of The Chronicles of Narnia. With the Harry Potter series, I haven't been able to be objective since the films are only a few years behind the books, and I've read all of them at least 2-3 times (with the exception of the last volume, which I've only read once). The Lord of the Rings was different: I hadn't read the books since childhood, and felt that I should hold off and therefore have more objectivity about the movies. With the Narnia series, I think I'll read each of them after its respective movie comes out.
My favorite quotation about the Narnia books comes from one of Michael Medved's kids. The way Medved tells the story, one of his daughters began taking classes on the Bible in college, and reported back to him excitedly that "the gospels are a lot like the Narnia books."
Posted by: Attila Girl at
09:23 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 3 kb.
206 queries taking 0.1678 seconds, 430 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








