Narnia Doing Better Than Hoped?
Narnia Doing Better than Expectations?
Whose expectations? Let’s assume that film reviewers are a fair minded bunch. Let us also assume the bulk of them are to the left of the average voter in 2004. Does anyone believe Bush carried the film reviewer demographic?
I will acknowledge that my opinions on the Narnia films may be slanted because I am a Christian and love C.S. Lewis. Can’t we also acknowledge that if you really, really dislike Christianity and traditional values that it may also slant your notions of the film? After all, if Narnia does well, then there will be more “religious community friendly” films. You can count on it.
Granted any one review may not be biased in itself and Narnia is not Citizen Kane. But how else can we explain reviews (many reviews) that spend as much time dealing with religious “controversy” (in a country where eighty-five percent are Christians) as with the film itself. Doesn’t this impact reviews, especially on the web? Remember if only a quarter of the reviewers are harder on Narnia for being based on the book of a Christian author, then that will impact any composite score of critics (normally a good measure of a film’s value). Does anyone doubt that Brokeback Mountain benefits by its cultural politics while Narnia suffers from it?
A sane example, I will review the insane example at www.boxofficemojo.com later, is at the www.the-numbers.com.
Here under the expectations for the film we read:
Name: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the WardrobeStudio: DisneyOfficial Site: Narnia.comRelease Date: December 9th, 2005 MPAA Rating: Rated PG for battle sequences and frightening moments. Source: Based on a BookMajor Genre: FantasyGenres: Animated Characters Production Budget: $150 million Box Office Potential: $225 million Notes: Just to get this out of the way, there is no organized boycott of this movie by secular groups, despite what some people are trying to report. If you do a search for "The Chronicles of Narnia" and "Boycott" all you'll find is some groups are dropping their boycott of Disney, partially because of this film. As for the movie itself, every time I see the trailer I think, "Meh. Lord of the Rings did it better." The reason for the comparison is obvious; the same company did the creature effects for both movies. This comparison will hurt the film at the box office, but not by enough to keep the film from showing a profit and getting a sequel or two. In fact, it might do well enough worldwide that the next two or three are given the go ahead and filmed simultaneously. Those movies, on the other hand, won't be success, as this is the only book in the series that is easily adapted into a mainstream movie.
In a one paragraph film summary about one-third is taken up with quashing a rumor that nobody in my religious community has heard. Remember accusation of bias is not the same as “boycott.” The argument about the film (which the reviewer now concedes understated the film’s success) concludes by saying that the other books in the series cannot be made into mainstream movies.
Why? What is “mainstream?” Prince Caspian (the next film) has a battle scene and a climactic sword fight. In fact, it centers on a band of rebels against an evil tyrant. That plot has worked well in a few movies I could name. It has the brave and knightly “talking mouse” Reepicheep, the single best character in the books. All kids can relate at a deep level to the main theme: the conflict between an aging monarch and his younger heir.
To go further, The Horse and His Boy or Voyage of the Dawntreader strikes me as more mainstream than Narnia if “mainstream” means less overtly Christian. They also have plots that are easy to summarize and some big action sequences. This is particularly true of Dawntreader which has sea monsters, pirates, mystical/magical encounters, and comic relief (Dufflepods anyone?). Has the reviewer actually read these books? In any case, Narnia’s expectations were all about problems with the franchise and not about potential. Religion is viewed as a problem, not as a way to tap the largest single group in America (and the world). There are more than one billion Christians on the planet after all and Christians are the most rapidly growing group on the planet. We are, after all, the one’s making babies so family films better start to cater to us (or to the religious in general).
Whose expectations? Let’s assume that film reviewers are a fair minded bunch. Let us also assume the bulk of them are to the left of the average voter in 2004. Does anyone believe Bush carried the film reviewer demographic?
I will acknowledge that my opinions on the Narnia films may be slanted because I am a Christian and love C.S. Lewis. Can’t we also acknowledge that if you really, really dislike Christianity and traditional values that it may also slant your notions of the film? After all, if Narnia does well, then there will be more “religious community friendly” films. You can count on it.
Granted any one review may not be biased in itself and Narnia is not Citizen Kane. But how else can we explain reviews (many reviews) that spend as much time dealing with religious “controversy” (in a country where eighty-five percent are Christians) as with the film itself. Doesn’t this impact reviews, especially on the web? Remember if only a quarter of the reviewers are harder on Narnia for being based on the book of a Christian author, then that will impact any composite score of critics (normally a good measure of a film’s value). Does anyone doubt that Brokeback Mountain benefits by its cultural politics while Narnia suffers from it?
A sane example, I will review the insane example at www.boxofficemojo.com later, is at the www.the-numbers.com.
Here under the expectations for the film we read:
Name: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the WardrobeStudio: DisneyOfficial Site: Narnia.comRelease Date: December 9th, 2005 MPAA Rating: Rated PG for battle sequences and frightening moments. Source: Based on a BookMajor Genre: FantasyGenres: Animated Characters Production Budget: $150 million Box Office Potential: $225 million Notes: Just to get this out of the way, there is no organized boycott of this movie by secular groups, despite what some people are trying to report. If you do a search for "The Chronicles of Narnia" and "Boycott" all you'll find is some groups are dropping their boycott of Disney, partially because of this film. As for the movie itself, every time I see the trailer I think, "Meh. Lord of the Rings did it better." The reason for the comparison is obvious; the same company did the creature effects for both movies. This comparison will hurt the film at the box office, but not by enough to keep the film from showing a profit and getting a sequel or two. In fact, it might do well enough worldwide that the next two or three are given the go ahead and filmed simultaneously. Those movies, on the other hand, won't be success, as this is the only book in the series that is easily adapted into a mainstream movie.
In a one paragraph film summary about one-third is taken up with quashing a rumor that nobody in my religious community has heard. Remember accusation of bias is not the same as “boycott.” The argument about the film (which the reviewer now concedes understated the film’s success) concludes by saying that the other books in the series cannot be made into mainstream movies.
Why? What is “mainstream?” Prince Caspian (the next film) has a battle scene and a climactic sword fight. In fact, it centers on a band of rebels against an evil tyrant. That plot has worked well in a few movies I could name. It has the brave and knightly “talking mouse” Reepicheep, the single best character in the books. All kids can relate at a deep level to the main theme: the conflict between an aging monarch and his younger heir.
To go further, The Horse and His Boy or Voyage of the Dawntreader strikes me as more mainstream than Narnia if “mainstream” means less overtly Christian. They also have plots that are easy to summarize and some big action sequences. This is particularly true of Dawntreader which has sea monsters, pirates, mystical/magical encounters, and comic relief (Dufflepods anyone?). Has the reviewer actually read these books? In any case, Narnia’s expectations were all about problems with the franchise and not about potential. Religion is viewed as a problem, not as a way to tap the largest single group in America (and the world). There are more than one billion Christians on the planet after all and Christians are the most rapidly growing group on the planet. We are, after all, the one’s making babies so family films better start to cater to us (or to the religious in general).
posted by The Shark at
2:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home