Oh good grief. Reading this thread was probably a good thing... I haven't seen the movie yet but I have to say this sounds horrible. I was highly anticipating this one it being my favorite of the books but it sounds like they ruined it. I'm still going to see it but maybe expecting it to be crap, I'll actually enjoy it rather than be disappointed. I didn't mind the adaptions of LWW or PC but this sounds like crap. I'm bummed.

And it's not the idea per se.... it's that what they added to the movie only hurt it rather than helped it cause they weren't sure what to do with it other than give it a more "epic" reason for the voyage. From the sounds of it, if they would have just went with the whole Green Lady was behind it, it would have been a little better even if I hate that idea too.

Well at least I don't think I could be anymore disappointed than I am now so this film can only improve upon watching it I guess...

Mischief, it's not as bad as it sounds. It isn't the book, but it isn't a bad movie. The way they weaved it into the book parts could have used a bit of work, but I think some of that can be linked to the fact it was such a tightly cut film.

well said starkat
I think it was pretty bad, very under-developed/explained/harnessed, and of course there's just the fact that it sounds so gimiky but apart form that...it didn't really get in the way of anything important, or spoil the movie at all. so I'm okay

I know. I think there should have been some consequence for the people who got fed to the Darkness. Otherwise, the Green Mist isnt much of a threat?

Anyway, I originally thought everyone who got eaten by the mist had died.

I have been thinking about this. It does not really bother me. The way they all wind up OK reminds me of the way the gnomes, etc. in the SC are all OK at the demise of the LotGK.

Maybe they will make the connection in Silver Chair. It could be there that we learn that the LotGK is responsible for the green mist. I actually would rather that also then to just have evil floating around manipulating people which just sounds ridiculous to me.

I know. I think there should have been some consequence for the people who got fed to the Darkness. Otherwise, the Green Mist isnt much of a threat?

Anyway, I originally thought everyone who got eaten by the mist had died.

I have been thinking about this. It does not really bother me. The way they all wind up OK reminds me of the way the gnomes, etc. in the SC are all OK at the demise of the LotGK.

This is a PG film, remember? So nobody gets tragically sacrificed to Green Mists and becomes past redemption. And yes, I agree that the gnomes at the end of SC were freed unharmed in a similar fashion.

My personal feelings about the swords and the lords were summed up well enough by Eustace who said something to the effect that both and the hunt for them were barmy.

How do we know the gnomes were released unharmed? For all we know she was having one of them for a midnight snack every night. These people were trapped inside the dark island for Aslan only knows how long and aren't insane? Rhoop certainly was in the book. It's these kind of silly inconsistencies that will result in a franchise no one takes very seriously. They want to be all dark fantasy and have people sacrificed to a monster, but also want to have the safe everyone lived happily ever after ending.

And it's not the idea per se.... it's that what they added to the movie only hurt it rather than helped it cause they weren't sure what to do with it other than give it a more "epic" reason for the voyage.

I'd agree with that statement. I can accept the basic idea of what they were trying to acheive - linking together all the episodic plot elements from the book through a common theme - providing a central threat to drive the story forward - the problem is that it simply failed to do what it was intended to do.

In the past two films there are scenes which don't really work, but you can always think "well, its like that in the book, and i guess it didn't really work on screen but i'll give them credit for sticking with it". However, when you are adding something brand new that is entirely your own invention there is no real excuse for it not working in the way you intended it to. I'd have to say that two of my favourite scenes in the first two movies are additions/expansions from the book (The Dungeon scene in LWW and the Night Raid scene in PC) and that is generally because they work within the context of the story they are trying to tell on screen. None of the Green Mist / Seven Swords elements even came close to working as well as that, and that is a real shame.

To start with i honestly never really felt it helped to drive the story forward in any way, and in many cases the motivations for the characters moving from one island to the next seems to be even less than it is in the book. Take The Lone Islands for example - much of the necessary dialogue for them furthering their voyage beyond The Lone Islands is perhaps present (Bern shows them the Mist, Rhince explains about his wife) but i was still left at the end of the end of The Lone Islands sequence feeling that a strong motivation for progression had not been fully established - i didn't really feel any desire or urge from any of the characters, or any sense of mystery encouraging the audience to want to venture further. Even the most basic set-up for establishing the urgency and importance of the threat that the Dark Island posed to Narnia was never really given much in the way of explanation - and that surely was the fundamental aim of the whole plot addition.

I also didn't really feel that either the swords or the mist helped to link together any of the episodic plot points in as great a way as it was perhaps intended, though i will admit it was more successful in this regard - scenes such as Coriakin's Island which don't have any connection to the Lords in the book were given extra amounts of Sword related dialogue so it didn't feel like such a deviation from the objective. But still many of the individual sections still felt like their own self contained moments, which i would of been fine with if that had been their intention of telling an episodic story, but the fact that the Mist was added for the very purpose of linking them together was frustrating as it made the whole think rather redundant. Ironically one of the biggest episodic deviations from the plot was actually another added scene - Lucy' dream sequence / nightmare. It didn't really integrate into the plot all too well, and really only contained character development moments which had already been covered in the Magician's Book sequence (although the ending for that scene was severely cut down so as to leave a lack of immediate resolution which did then need tying up)

Likewise for the added Gael/Rhince plot - it was surely added with the intention of helping to tie the Slavery plot from the book (which is perhaps the biggest deviation from the main objective in the book's story) to the central plot surrounding the Dark Island. However the Lone Islands sequence is so brief in the movie that it felt completely unnecessary to even have it related to the main plot at all - they just never really gave it the necessary screentime to make you believe it was in any way an important part of the plot. Again, its not so much the intention to make changes, but the frustration that they couldn't even make it work on the terms that they had designed it for - On the one hand you had these added character arcs which suggested they wanted to make the Slavery Plot more integral to the whole story, but on the other hand you had this editing which suggested that the Lone Islands were completely unimportant and merely just an irrelevant stopping point on the way to bigger things.

How do we know the gnomes were released unharmed?

Because in the SC the gnomes from Bism all have the spell lifted and return home. It certainly is implied they are OK in the conversation between one of the gnomes (an earthman) and Rilian.

For all we know she was having one of them for a midnight snack every night.

For all we know, that is possible. But what happened to them afterwards is written in the book. Are any of them menatlly unstable? I don't know, but a good gnome shrink might.

It's these kind of silly inconsistencies that will result in a franchise no one takes very seriously.

I have no idea who is in the "no one" grouping. But it seems given the industry built up around Narnia the last 5 years, plus the many books on the topics, that lots of people take it seriously. Some, too seriously. Then there are those who become website moderators.

They want to be all dark fantasy and have people sacrificed to a monster, but also want to have the safe everyone lived happily ever after ending.

Who is "they"? It seems that the young adults and possibly critics want the dark stuff and Walden can't deliver b/c of the need to keep it PG. I am comfortable keeping it PG, for the sake of my kids. Perhaps there will be an exteded super dark side directors cut in the dvd package.

The plot could have been developed better. I believe if they had added another 15 minutes to the Lone Island sequence (devloping Bern as a character, showing Lucy and Eustace interacting with the other slaves, developing the relationship between Gael and her mom, etc.) we would have felt more emotionally involved in the plot.

One way of explaining the Seven Swords would have been if the Lords had caused the mist.

For instance I think one way to tie everything together would be for Lilliandil to say that when the Lords were fighting over the knife that killed Aslan and when they touched it, a the Green Mist was released (either by the White Witch's magic in the knife or maybe by Aslan's power as a punishment). The reason the swords of the lords must be used to defeat the mist is because it was the lords who caused the mist in the first place.

One problem I did have with this movie, was not the swords per se. Or the mist. My family, all adults, said they enjoyed the movie immensely, despite only having agreed to go to it because they know I am a Narnia tragic, and because I paid for the tickets. My husband pointed out the bleeding obvious, that it was necessary to change some of the original story to make it more cinematic. And he quite saw the point of the swords, pointing out that even in the book there wasn't all much concern for the lords anyway, given that two of them had died, that three of them were harmlessly vegetating, and Lord Bern, even in the movie, was free to look after himself.

For myself, some of the magic was lost because of all the discussions we have had here, especially about the swords and the mist. I found I recognised far too much of the movie, and I cringed as I was reminded of the gripes, groans and nitpicks about each item as it materialised. It was visiting familiar territory, not only Kings College in Cambridge, a well-known tourist attraction in its own right. I am afraid I put so much emotional energy into defending and discussing this movie as it is, that I failed to appreciate it in the end, in any balanced way.

And in the end, one of the scenes I loved best was on Coriakin's Island. I loved the way the Dufflepuds materialised, as well as the mansion behind it. I saw what icarus and Bookwyrm are saying about Lucy's nightmare, but I could also see the point of it, and how well it ties in with Lucy telling Gael later on, that when she grows up she will grow up to be herself. Similarly, Edmund's nightmares of the White Witch also make a similar important point, especially at the end, that however dead she is, she lives on in his memory, a point which is also made loud and clear in the Harry Potter movies.

I loved the ship, and winced when it was demolished by the sea serpent, remembering that the actual ship was damaged to match, when I saw it last January. The green mist is easily identifiable as an external representation of inner sinfulness, per se, and I don't have a problem with the people on Dark Island being released, once Rhince and his daughter were reunited with Mrs Rhince, probably one of the least damaged people on the island. I'd imagine the people released were undamaged, since they had been redeemed, restored and forgiven, as you would expect. Whether they can survive a trip on such small boats back to the Lone Islands is another thing.

I didn't see much to complain about in the dialogue. I missed bits I was really expecting to hear, such as 'Courage dear heart', but much of the film was otherwise reasonably faithful to the book. All in all, it is Eustace, himself, who summed up the seven swords plot best in one of his rants. And he is the one, in the end, who did most to drive the Swords and Lords plot forward. After he had been undragonned, I note.

For myself, some of the magic was lost because of all the discussions we have had here, especially about the swords and the mist. I found I recognised far too much of the movie, and I cringed as I was reminded of the gripes, groans and nitpicks about each item as it materialised.

yes! that.

of course, i saw the movie first and then felt compelled to spend more time on this board. i am thankful i did not spend too much time here before i saw the movie. i had enough of a barrier with my own expectations. would have been harder to enjoy by bringing in the expectations of others with me.

which is why i encourage eveyone to put his or her expectations down at the theater door and simply enjoy the movie. it may not be how you or i would have made it, but it is a good movie and we should be thankful it was made.

for rjefvh

seriously, if you haven't yet seen the movie and are on this board, try not to get too hung up about the swords. they are pretty silly, and as others have said, the fact that they work so poorly despite being custom-made (not adapted) for the movie is a pretty poor reflection of the movie-makers (unfortunatly) however they shouldn't really be too much of a barrier for us all to enjoy the movie

I haven't seen the movie yet, nor do I have the book in front of me but I don't believe there's a reason given the book for the Dark Islandall the evil around it either. It's just there, again forgive me if I'm wrong, but that's the way it came across to me when I read it.

You are correct about no explanation in the book about the DI, but there is no "evil" surrounding it, unless you count making dreams come true as evil.