If there were suddenly a bunch of men dropping down towards you with swords drawn, wouldn't you try to protect yourself and the group with your weapon? They were being attacked. Caspian took action. That's self defense, not murder.

What was Caspian supposed to do, drop everything and give out a good scream?

The protagonists of LWW killed a great many creatures, but never once did they kill any other humans. The general Christian belief seems to be that the killing of a human is a much greater evil than killing a random creature.

Sorry, but this is certainly not my belief.

It's true that Christians believe that killing a human is a greater evil than killing an animal but in reference to the Lone Islands incedent, I believe there's a huge difference between cold-blooded murder and self-defence. One of the Ten Commandments is "you should not murder", not "you should not kill in self-defence... ever". Good question though. That scene was well-done and I enjoyed it very much. It's the fighting after this skirmish that irked me and felt contrary to the book.

It honestly should count as self-defense. The slavetraders certainly posed a threat. I am not going to judge Caspian for this.

I think that the problem was that they did not attack first. Caspian did. Yes, they surprised the group of Caspian, Lucy, and Edmund, but Caspian was the one to kill first, to attack first.

It bothered me too.

Hmm, I have to say that is a bit troublesome. If I understand the scene right, they basically snuck into this tower, right? So for all they knew, these guys were just upset that they were trespassing and Caspian's reaction is to kill someone? Not even a single line of dialogue, a "Hey, what's up, can we not fight?"? So how did he actually know these were people to be killed? They could just as easily have been anti-slave trade forces.

In the film "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", Caspian, Edmund and Lucy enter a seemingly empty bell tower. They find a book with a list of names, and many of the names are crossed out. Caspian concludes that the book must belong to slave traders. Moments later, men with swords swing down from ropes. Caspian's immediate reaction is to shoot the nearest man. We see and hear the arrow's impact and his following scream of agony as he falls to the ground. It can be assumed that the wound was severe enough to kill the slave trader.

Is Caspian a murderer?
I do not understand the necessity of showing something like this in a movie that was supposed to distance itself from PC and return to the tone of LWW. It does not seem appropriate at all or even necessary. They could have just had Caspian pull his sword out and start battling the slave traders without shooting one of them first.

If it was included to satisfy the people who think action and battles and killing is "cool", I doubt it quenched that thirst [for blood].
The protagonists of LWW killed a great many creatures, but never once did they kill any other humans. The general Christian belief seems to be that the killing of a human is a much greater evil than killing a random creature.

The rest of the Lone Islands sequence, which in the book is a peaceful transition of power that is carried out in a hilarious way, is reduced to nothing more than a battle that lasts 60 seconds. This VDT film, which was supposed to be aimed at a younger audience, is considerably more violent than the book.

I did not like Caspian shooting the slave trader. It pulled me out of the moment. I felt sorry for that slave trader, as he had just lost the only life he will ever have and will never again be able to experience the world.

I think this is hilarious that you even noticed that!
I don't think Capsian is a murderer....first off they were clearly being attacked. People came from the ceiling yelling with swords. They were clearly outnumbered and it was actually a very good move of him to start attacking right away because it would give them a fighting chance.

I do agree that the movie was more violent than the book.....but this was by far the LEAST violent of all the narnia movies. And there were MILLIONS of more important things that they changed in their adaption that it would seem as if this isn't important at all (in my opinion).

Well although the books are "Christian" Fox is not a Christian company and probably doesn't care at all about instill Christian values in this movie. Although I am not a Christian, I think that in Narnia killing a talking animal is the same as killing a human.....so I dont' think its fair to call anybody in Nanria a "random create." It is rather degrading to them.

I do agree that the movie was more violent than the book.....but this was by far the LEAST violent of all the narnia movies.

I agree. VDT was aimed at a younger audience than the other two movies, though. Including a huge injection of violence (more than there is anywhere else in the movie) that are at the levels of the previous two movies in the first act of the movie seems like a foolish waste of money. I doubt anybody who enjoys action is going to remember a 20-second swordfight and a 60-second battle that take place in the first half hour of the movie.

And there were MILLIONS of more important things that they changed in their adaption that it would seem as if this isn't important at all (in my opinion).

There are already topics discussing all of the other millions of important things that they changed in the adaption. I wanted to add something new.

Well although the books are "Christian" Fox is not a Christian company and probably doesn't care at all about instill Christian values in this movie.

Fox wanted to adapt a book that is considered very "Christian". And they still included the "there I have another name" line by Aslan at the end, and beat the audience over the head with moral lessons throughout the movie.

Although I am not a Christian,

Sorry about that. Most people around here are, so I thought it might be relevant.

I think that in Narnia killing a talking animal is the same as killing a human.....so I dont' think its fair to call anybody in Nanria a "random create." It is rather degrading to them.

I meant a creature such as a minotaur, cyclops, werewolf, or someone who would be in the White Witch's army.

It's true that Christians believe that killing a human is a greater evil than killing an animal.

A shame

[I think that in Narnia killing a talking animal is the same as killing a human.....so I dont' think its fair to call anybody in Nanria a "random create." It is rather degrading to them.

Indeed.

Although Lewis was a Christian, I think there were messages throughout the books that went beyond Christian beliefs.

Yes, I agree it is a shame that humans are not on an equal footing with animals in Christianity. I'm sure that there are some humans around in the world that we could all do without instead of a deserving animal. Though I'm not too keen on mosquitos, flies, etc. Not to mention a mouse in the house.

I meant a creature such as a minotaur, cyclops, werewolf, or someone who would be in the White Witch's army.

I expect there is the old argument in the army about having to kill or be killed which applies in this case. Yes, that does happen even in VDT. The party were about to be attacked by armed men, who meant no good. Just as they were attacked in the book. The difference is that at least the book slavers offered them a last snack first.

What was Caspian supposed to do, drop everything and give out a good scream?

Isn't that what Eustace the pacificist did essentially? Which is how they came to be caught.

Really VDT isn't all that violent, despite the slave trader incident. The film does rather make a point that there are other ways of making oneself useful as well as by fighting.

I think that the problem was that they did not attack first. Caspian did. Yes, they surprised the group of Caspian, Lucy, and Edmund, but Caspian was the one to kill first, to attack first.

Although King Caspian shot first, the slavers did make an aggressive and threatening and startling move first. As far as I'm concerned, that qualifies as part of an attack. I think Caspian's Telmarine training probably kicked in and used his weapon quickly to not only defend himself but also those who were with him.

Though I do think Caspian wasn't just shooting to wound, there is only an assumption that this fellow was killed. We don't really know with absolute certainty. At any rate, the slave traders had to know there was a risk involved in surprising and attacking some armed people; and that would include being severly injured or killed.

If there were suddenly a bunch of men dropping down towards you with swords drawn, wouldn't you try to protect yourself and the group with your weapon? They were being attacked. Caspian took action. That's self defense, not murder.

I've seen that seen multiple times now and I think the response was justified, as per Skilletdude's quote above.

No I think it is self-defense. Also, in Narnia killing a talking animal would be the same as killing a human since the talking beasts are sort of like humans in animal bodies.
In LWW, they were at war and they had to fight. There was no other way to be free from the Witch and her evil followers.

Hmm, I have to say that is a bit troublesome. If I understand the scene right, they basically snuck into this tower, right? So for all they knew, these guys were just upset that they were trespassing and Caspian's reaction is to kill someone? Not even a single line of dialogue, a "Hey, what's up, can we not fight?"? So how did he actually know these were people to be killed? They could just as easily have been anti-slave trade forces.

I'd be tempted to agree.

There is a comparable scene in Prince Caspian in the forest, where Peter jumps out from behind the bush to attack Caspian and the Minotaur. Perhaps that movie would of been much more interesting if Caspian had likewise fended off this surprise attack with a swift crossbow shot to the head of his unknown assailant - it would of saved us all another hour or so of Peter being a jerk to everyone.

How is it a shame that human life is considered more sacred than an animal's? If you're a Christian, you recognise humans are made in God's image and therefore are extremely special. If you're not a Christian, you can at least recognise humans are different to animals. Otherwise, this is the sort of thinking that encourages ridiculous PETA philosophies. Ugh.