God knows how long this series can run it's course. Disney already abandoned it, wonder if it'll happen with the current production company.

It is course, indeed.

Fortunately, the second-last movie is already in production, so after that they'll probably think "Screw it, let's make the last movie."

It's kind of annoying that Disney ditched the series because it "didn't make enough money", only three times its budget. Maybe they sold it to Fox because they're more used to losing money. ZING!

I completely agree. It was okay, but it had serious pacing issues.

A little disappointing, I wanted it to last longer on the parts I liked.

awesome!!!!!!

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa #3 good work bum IT started with another book

when is this series going to die?

When they get to "The Last Battle." In other words, there are 5 more movies to go if FOX keeps it going.
there are 7 books in the series. Most of them are really good. This one I think might be the weakest of them all.

4 more. We've already had 3 movies, and 7 - 3 = 4.
Things that work in books, however, don't necessarily work in movies. For example the pacing of the book wasn't too bad, but translated into movie form, it felt like plotlines were being picked up and dropped all over the place. I'm still wondering how they're going to fit in "The Magician's Nephew" and make it marketable. They should have made the movies in story chronological order, rather than written chronological order.

I keep thinking that too. I want "Magician's Nephew" first! I think it would've been awesome! I mean, how many good movies recently was made near to that timeline? If there's some, there should be more! :D

Weakest? Really? You should study it a bit. It's a rather strong book--it's just different, just like A Horse and His Boy. It doesn't fit with the others, but that's because it's exploring entirely different concepts.

Die? That's a bit harsh, isn't it? We're not talking about Twlilight, here.

Voyage of the Dawn Treader is one of my favorites in the series. But while it's a fun read, the story just doesn't transfer to film very well.

I'm less disappointed with this movie than I am with the exclusion of The Horse and his Boy. I loved that one! Why skip over it?

I loved Horse too...I think they skipped it because the Witch isn't involved in the slightest, so they can in theory skip it since it only takes place during the Golden Age and there's no visible conflict with the seven. The Horse leads up to Lucy's insecurities about her looks compared to Susan's, and later Susan's character development, but hey, who cares about that when you're making money?

They skipped it cause the actors for the Pevensies (spelling?) aren't going to stay young and the movies need to be done before the kids get too old. It makes the most sense really.
^_^

They didn't skip it. They're doing the movies in the order the books were written. The Horse and His Boy was the fifth book.

This was my favorite book out of the whole series I'm glad they finally made it into a movie!

My favorite Bum episode yet! XD I

This was definitely my favorite of the books, can't wait to see the movie!

Hehe. Sea Serpent.

But seriously Bum, you went to see Narnia and not Tangled? I is disappointed.

I always loved the Narnia books (and indeed the complete works of C.S. Lewis) and I honestly got to say I LOVED this movie.

...though they did cut out some my favorite parts, but hey they did the same for LOTR, so I shouldn't be surprised. But it was still awesome.

They cut out stuff for LOTR? Are you sure?
There are several-hour-long Extended versions of all the LOTR movies.

They cut out Tom Bombadil!

I don't think I have ever laughed so hard at one of these. The "sea serpent" had me rolling. Thank you!

Can't wait to see the movie. I know it's not perfect, but I'm going to love it anyways.

XD i thought of the Stay Puff Marshmallow man at that spot to! XD

This movie series is murdering the books. CS Lewis is going to come back fro the dead and kill Disney for these movies

wait wait wait....they added a VILLAIN to the movie? Whiskey! Tango! Foxtrot! Why..how? Just.....so stupid I can't even splutter coherently! How the hell did they get that stupid idea? There was no damn final villain any where in that book how ungodly fucking STUPID are these ignorant, dumbasses that make this filth? A few changes here and there for plotting, pacing, added story etc is one thing, but pulling an entire final villain out of nowhere just becuase "Duh, dis ere talky pic I saw dat one time ad itself a bad guy in it, dat meen all talky moving pics ave to ave one don't it?"

Thanks for making sure I go nowhere near this abomination.

I can understand why they did it. I'm gonna have to reserve final judgment until I see the film so I can see how well they pulled it off, but the original book really didn't have a story, and it would have been difficult to weave the handful of plots in the book, which turn up for a dozen pages and then are never spoken of again, into an over-arching narrative. It sounds a bit like they've taken that Island Where Dreams Come True and made it into the Big Bad? Which at least is something from the book. Again, though, I'll have to see the movie first.

Seraphem, congratulations for having no tollerance to any change. You surely are a bigot.

Don't worry, Bum. NEXT movie (if it comes), there'll be a witch character...and another serpent...ooh, marsh-wiggles!

Also, as the Magician's Nephew is a prequel to the whole shebang, if they make it that far, the White Witch will be present there as we see her origin as well as that of the wardrobe, so don't worry.

I don't really know why...But it felt like the Bum "Change!" was much more violently desperate this time...

This Charity Auction must really have messed him up, our Bum has become agressive!
The end of the world will come!
It's the end!
The Bum is violent, it's a first sign!
Will Smith will play the super-soldier-doctor- coincidently immune to the Bum virus who won't save us all after all.

And you have WHAT against mice? Such a species-ist.

The Pixar Effect... awesome xD

I found this review hilarious, and not only have I not seen the movie, I only BARELY remember the book.

A+ for style, though, man. This was great.

Every single Narnia movie can be summed up with "You must do this!" "...Can't Aslan just do it?-" "ROAR!" "Okay!!!"

I don't like the new Narnia movies that much, but there's a good reason. They're not only not as good as the books, but the old bbc versions are so much better. Seriously, I feel like there was no reason to redo any of the books that were already adapted by bbc.

Are you serious? I hate the bbc version of this movie. Hate it.

Personally, I'm enjoying the new Narnia series; but I agree that some extra TLC needs to be injected by the new director. 'Prince Caspian' is still my favorite of the three.

Another great review, Chester.

How is it that you keep being able to afford to see these movies though?

He sneaks in, obviously

Free popcorn all over the floors, and gum on the seats, and maybe, just maybe, a little bit of loose CHANGE!

Books>Movies

Love the books but hate the movies. Great review!

Why on Earth do they keep plunking the White Witch back into the story? C.S. Lewis knew that her storyline ran its course in the first book. Why does Disney think that "Dawn Treader" needs a big bad villain? Do those bozos actually think that they can improve on C.S. Lewis? Clearly not.

Personally I liked "Dawn Treader" better than "Prince Caspian". It's like The Odyssey for kids! And what's wrong with that? They visit a bunch of crazy islands trying to find the noblemen that Miraz had exiled. There's no need for a final villain. And at the end Caspian marries a star! Yay!

My favorite island was probably the Island Where Dreams Come True. I especially loved the bit in the book where one sailor says, "Oh, I've dreamed that I was married to Nancy," and the other guy says, "No you idiot, not daydreams. DREAMS!" and then everybody on the ship is like, "Oh Crap." Shiver.

That part of the story always bothered me, though, because 'dreams' were automatically a bad thing. I mean, has C.S. Lewis never had any happy dreams in his sleep?

Not really. It's just that an island where nothing but pleasant things happen isn't much to work with adventure story-wise.

Actually, in some of his philosophical works Lewis explores the the wondrousness of dreams and how they can inspire us.

This wasn't Disney.

It was Fox. Disney sold the movie rights to them.

Don't blame the company that had an allibi...

I'm kinda disappointed that both the Narnia film and the Harry Potter one came out around the same time because I really do wanna check this one out too, but as of late, it's been difficult for people in our family to go to the movies on a regular basis these days. Anyway, great BUM review as always, Doug, and one last point that I hope doesn't count as spam: Seriously, is anyone on this site ever going to talk about Tangled. Considering that film is more like a 90's Disney film than The Princess and the Frog was (Which is still saying a lot) I figured someone here would make a vid about it by now... I probably should have saved this for the forum.

I love the books and all, but the books have some serious flaws that can't really be written out in film. The main one being that as you said, for a series that started with the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, there are only two books in the whole series that actually deal with them, the first one obviously, and The Magician's Nephew which is my personal favorite.

The movie feels like it has a weak plot because the book itself had NO plot. The book didn't even have a villain or any conflict whatsoever for this part of the story, so the movie had to manufacture it. It was just a nice fantasy adventure of whimsicalness which actually has quite a lot of charm in the book series, but on film its just kind of pointless. The whole book has no bearing on the Narnia plot. It's just "let's go sailing for a while because ADVENTURE HO!"

As a result, the movies have to manufacture plot, conflict, and tie-ins where none exist in the book in order to keep everything from feeling pointless. Hence your weird villains and random story arcs that are resolved as soon as they are introduced. I mean, if you're wondering why the White Witch keeps making random appearances without ever being used, it's because she isn't even mentioned in the books AT ALL except for Magician's Nephew which I always thought was pretty lame. I mean, if Aslan's in all of the books, then so should the Witch. She's the freakin DEVIL! But no, she's not even in The Last Battle because by then we have a pointless villain called Tash. I actually really appreciate that the movies are trying to tie her into each book in some way.

That said though, the movie could have done a better job with Eustace. Yes, he's supposed to be an ass but I don't think anyone alive is that close minded and 1-dimensional. And you don't see any hint of character growth at all until "magic makes it happen". Just feel like it could have been shown better. That story arc was actually done pretty well in the book.

"I love the books and all, but the books have some serious flaws that can't really be written out in film. The main one being that as you said, for a series that started with the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, there are only two books in the whole series that actually deal with them, the first one obviously, and The Magician's Nephew which is my personal favorite."

I don't think of them as flaws at all. The series is called "The Chronicles of Narnia," not "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." If anything, I would've thought that calling the first book that would give a hint that the series ins't all about those characters, since it's the only one named for them.

"The movie feels like it has a weak plot because the book itself had NO plot. The book didn't even have a villain or any conflict whatsoever for this part of the story, so the movie had to manufacture it. It was just a nice fantasy adventure of whimsicalness which actually has quite a lot of charm in the book series, but on film its just kind of pointless. The whole book has no bearing on the Narnia plot. It's just "let's go sailing for a while because ADVENTURE HO!""

No plot? It's about people going on a voyage to find seven lost lords in uncharted, possibly hostile waters. You don't call that a plot?

No conflict? Lucy's struggle with vanity and poor self esteem, Edmund's with envy & greed, Eustace's with pride and close-mindedness, Caspian's with self-doubt, all put plenty of conflict in the story. Plus there's the veiled threat of the monopods, as well as a freakin' battle with a sea serpent.

No point? It's a journey of self-discovery and maturity for the kids. No, there isn't An Evil Villain Who Must Be Defeated Before Time Runs Out, but not every story has to be about An Evil Villain Who Must Be Defeated Before Time Runs Out.

Shoehorning in a main villain and *another* quest for the Seven Swords felt gratuitous and didn't improve things. It just turned it into yet another Save the World quest, and as a result, it suffers in comparison to other Save the World stories. The makers should've realised that Dawn Treader can't compete with LotR or even the earlier Narnias, because it isn't meant to be the same kinds of stories. This was an opportunity to make a more character-driven, adventurous piece that didn't invite comparisons to LotR.

Apart from that, I agree that the film could've been a lot better - I just disagree that a villain and sense of urgency was the best way to go about it.

Hilarious stuff here. I bet everyone in every cinema world wide thought of Stay Puff the minute that part came up. Also, the use of your hand for the sea monster was strangely histerical.

My view on it? Meh.

The book, while not bad, isn't one that can easily translate to film. It's just full of mini journey's. So I can understand adding a villain for a plot line, but it really wasn't the way it was supposed to go. Guess we'll see how it turns out.

I think the "seriously" message at the end probably applies to all the Narnia movies.