You are correct. Neither the movie nor the themes are childish. My fear, however, is that this film will be labeled as one for families and for pre-teens, thus limiting its exposure and influence.

This is why word of mouth is so important. LWW succeeded because of word of mouth in my opinion. I went and saw it with a friend. Went back with more friends. I know some of them went back with other friends. And every single viewing the crowds were mainly families.

I have begun stopping in places and talking with people who can help spread the word about the film. Bookstores, friends, etc. I will gladly share the word that this is definitely a good movie and a much better adaptation than PC. Word of mouth is our best advertising tool and it's one that we the viewers can wield instead of relying on tv commercials.

Josh, like I said, it depends on the kid. I know some kids who can easily handle the death of Aslan. I also know children who can't. I walked out of PC with a mom who wished she'd known ahead of time how dark it was going to be because she wouldn't have brought her younger kids. I'm kind of making a blanket statement based on my LWW, PC, and young kids experience. As a rule of thumb, I wouldn't take someone age 10 or younger. However, if the child can handle it, then go for it. It's pretty much that way with all movies imo. When you reach that young of an age, it has to be a decision based on the child.

I think we're looking at it from two different perspectives and that's a good thing. We can offer people two different views on the film.

True, what would be the fun in these forums if we all thought alike?

Anyway, like I said before my judgement on the tone of the film may be because it came right after the darkest film in the series (so far) and it seemed to stand out more.

Although I'm not a big fan of the green mist, I actually thought it was a good way to illistrate spiritual warfare. When Lucy, Eustace, and Edmund were being tempted everything seemed normal around them but the audience was able to see how they were being influenced by the supernatural evil. Often we think we have complete control of our lives and that no force that we can't see can influence us. I like how this film demonstrated otherwise.

I was a bit surprised that they didnt provide an explanation for Dark Island. I don't care how it came to exist, but they didnt explain why it was growing more powerful. For some reason, when teh sea serpant was sinking into the water (after being killed) I expected the Lady of the Green Kirtle to come up. Fortunatly that didnt happen.

I think some of you underestimate what kids can take, the LOTR were some of my favorite movies before I was even 10, maybe we just have stronger nerves or something but none of my siblings(I have 11), really ever get scared watching a movie. My 4 and 6 year old brother and sister love PC and the LOTR.
Maybe girls get more scared in movies, but I really have a hard time imagining a normal ten year old boy having trouble watching the CON or the LOTR or just about anything like that.

It really does depend on the child. I wasn't allowed to watch Star Wars until I was 14 for various reasons. My young nieces would have nightmares from some of the stuff in VDT. My male cousins would have been fine at that age.

But we're sliding a bit off topic here...

And to clarify a few lines, Reepicheep calls Eustace a "Hysterical Interloper" not "Sterile Interloper".

Ahahaha! I love it! Much, much better. Thanks for clearing that up, Josh!

^I agree with you there! That really does describe Eustace!

By the way, I know you can't go into too many details, but was Dragon Eustace (and the visuals) more satisfactory in the movie then in what we're seeing? If you can't answer, that's fine, or if you can say a little bit about it, a "yes" or "no" works too. I'm just going crazy with all these awesome reports!

I have no complaint about the visuals, whether it was EustaceDragon or any other bit of CGI. It all looked really amazing to me. Granted, I'm not CGI specialist, but what I saw was convincing enough for me NOT to really notice it, which is the point, right? If you get drawn out of the movie enough to think, "Wow, that looks amazing," or "Wow, that looks awful," then either way, the filmmakers haven't succeeded because the CGI breaks the spell of the film either way.

I think the CGI was just fine. The film was unfinished also, so it should be even better then what I saw. The one effect I had issue with was the first appearance of the green mist. During its debut scene, it looked like a green version of the Smoke Monster from LOST. Aside from that though, the visuals were fine.

And the design of Dragon Eustace does work in the movie. It just looks weird in the posters. And the minotaur looks awesome and not CGI.

I think the only effect the lower budget had on the visuals was the removal of some things. None of the effects we saw looked fake, but they removed things such as the first dragon Eustace encounters, the sea people, and Aslan transforming from a lamb to a lion because all of those would have cost more money to design.

And the design of Dragon Eustace does work in the movie.

Oh good! So he doesn't look as much like a grasshopper-cow-goat-thing as we thought. I think he'll be much better now that his CGI is finished, not to mention that he looks a lot better in the clips in the 4th trailer.

^Yes, thank goodness we don't have to worry about Dragon Eustace looking as weird as what we've been seeing!

Thanks guys! Just like from the trailers, I can be assured that I'll be drawn in the right way by the visuals!

So he doesn't look as much like a grasshopper-cow-goat-thing as we thought.

The dragon looks good. They did a good job with the close ups. In fact there are times when its expressions are downright human.

No complaints with the CGI. I was pleasantly surprised by how "real" the "fake" elements - water around the Dawn Treader, the top of the sail - looked.

My only real issue with the cut I saw was some of the editing. There was a scene with Lucy and Gael that was fine by itself, but seemed out of place. The movie was humming along, but all of a sudden there was a detour into the DT cabin where Lucy and Gael had a heartwarming moment, after which the film sort of "resumed." It was the kind of situation where you wondered, what was that scene for?

Otherwise, I left the screening wondering...if THAT is the movie they can produce on a $140M budget, what on earth did they need $220M for Prince Caspian?

Well Prince Caspian did feel grander in scale and it had much more designs for creatures and battles and backgrounds.

I think I like Prince Caspian better as a movie, though Vogage of the Dawn Treader is a better adaptation. They do a great job at capturing the feel of C.S. Lewis.

Caspian and Lilliandil have better kiss in the final cut! They need to have most of the audience know that they should say good bye to Suspian. Thyey need to have Caspian and Lilliandil kiss, I don't care Fox/Walden!! You guys need to do it!!!!!!!!!

Everything else sounds good but I want my kiss!

Maybe there is a kiss and it just wasnt put in.

And even if there isnt, they could always show Caspian and Lilliandil kiss in flashback form when the Owls tell the story of Lilliandil's murder and Rillian's abduction.