The second film based on the Narnia books, "Prince Caspian," roared like Aslan the lion at the box office in its first weekend, grossing an impressive $56 million in theaters, and supplanting "Iron Man" as the most successful movie in America.
Why the continued success of the "Chronicles of Narnia" films? Time movie reviewer Richard Corliss takes a stab at that question, with a unique angle, comparing "Caspian" to "The Golden Compass," the first movie installment of Philip Pullman’s dark atheist trilogy which viciously attacked God, Christianity, and the Catholic Church in particular.
"Narnia" author C. S. Lewis was a fervent Christian theologian. "Compass" creator Pullman proclaimed his books were about "killing God."
Before any of the "Caspian" box office figures came in, Corliss asked in Time magazine: "Can God make one movie franchise a hit and another a flop?" It’s quite clear that "The Golden Compass" flopped badly. It debuted last December to a seriously disappointing first-weekend gross of $25 million, and finished its sorry American run with only $70 million. No sequel is expected for that God-killing trilogy. Meanwhile, "The Lion, the Witch, the Wardrobe" grossed $291 million in the U.S., and "Prince Caspian" is off to a soaring launch, and the third Narnia installment, "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader," is already slated for release in May 2010.
But Corliss argued that "Caspian" and "Compass" are alike in that they "did their darnedest to mute elements of religion. Anyone unaware of the books’ underlying religious themes would not have become aware of them from the film versions."
Sadly, there’s some truth to this argument. Yet unfortunately, Corliss wasn’t complaining. "The changes were inevitable and probably for the best. Not many kids beg to be told a ripping yarn with a feline Messiah." He suggested the religious elements were for the adults to ponder, and praise or protest.
This is baloney. Religious elements in films can provide an important foothold for children to understand the religious faith of their parents, and they are worthy of discussion in the public marketplace of ideas, not just the private dinner tables of the faithful.
This is one crucial reason why religious audiences have embraced the Narnia films, and the unspoken answer to the Corliss God question. It is not God playing favorites with the public. It’s the market playing favorites with God. There is no public appetite for atheist fantasies about "killing God," but ask Mel Gibson if he can fill a movie theater with a film with explicitly positive Christian themes in it.
Was "Caspian" toned down from the book? Yes, perhaps because there are bureaucrats in Hollywood who still presume that explicit faith is a commercial problem. When the first Narnia film came out late in 2005, Disney publicity executive Dennis Rice rushed to distance the film from Christianity. "We believe we have not made a religious movie," he told the Washington Times. "It's just a great piece of cinema that is true to a great piece of literature."
That statement surely would have horrified the author. The central theme of the first Narnia book (and the film) was the passion and resurrection of a sacrificial savior. And this is precisely why the book is so famous and beloved.
Religious people will sense a strong religious undercurrent in "Caspian." Even toned down, the plot echoes the Acts of the Apostles, and how those early believers could have faith in Jesus after His ascension to Heaven. The religious themes are re-organized so that only the little girl Lucy sees Aslan and trusts he will eventually aid the children. That’s unlike the book, where all four of the Pevensie children, those kings and queens of Narnia – Peter, Edmund, Susan, and Lucy – each meet with Aslan in their walk of faith.
Aslan seems to be a minor character in "Prince Caspian," and the film’s major theme becomes the feeling that God is absent in a world gone mad. One of the most memorable lines in the movie has Peter asking why Aslan wouldn’t do more to prove his presence, and Lucy rebuts that maybe humans need to do more to prove themselves to Him.
If American audiences want more films like the Narnia series, then they need to prove themselves by turning out at the multiplex. Walt Disney and Walden should be praised for their risk-taking business strategy to please a "niche" market that can turn out in millions across the fruited plain. It doesn’t hurt that "Prince Caspian" is a rollicking good yarn.















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
CS Lewis rolling over ...
May 21, 2008 - 10:56 ET by Meandering... in his grave. Such a wonderful writer and a devote Christian would not believe the smack these liberal nuts jobs are doing with his masterpieces. But liberals can do that after someone dies because then they think they can't stand up for themselves. Taking God out of his novels is like taking Frodo out of the Lord of the Rings books. Idiocy!
This isn't completely
May 21, 2008 - 12:10 ET by RickTaLifeThis isn't completely true...CS-Lewis' stepson was a co-producer on the film, there's actually a very good interview with him about the movie over at National Review Online.
I saw the movie, and I thought that anyone familiar with the author could hear the theme of god loud and clear. Those not familiar will have to do a bit more reaching to find it...but regardless of hollywoods attempts to push god out of the movie, they didn't really succeed in my opinion. By not believing in Aslan, the narnians fail miserably...and it is only when they put their faith in him completely that they succed.
I saw it this weekend and
May 21, 2008 - 15:04 ET by mjgI saw it this weekend and was impressed with it. Though I thought there was some kind of reference to Aslan being a Christlike figure. All in all I for one am glad it did better than Compass. I always liked Lewis and Tolkien. Leave it to Hollywood to make sure that there is little religious references in those type of movies. But they certainly know who to market it too. Disney likes to market it to Christians. When Passion came out I was so glad that someone finally did a movie like that. I was also glad it did so well. I felt like someone needed to slap Hollywood in the face. Mel Gibson certainly proved them all wrong.
Sorry, but are you blind?
May 21, 2008 - 12:42 ET by ArcherBI don't recall God being mentioned directly in the books either.
But, let's see what we do have:
In "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe" Aslan, a perfect (as in 100% free from sin), all powerful creature sacrificed himself for the sins of the "son of Adam", leading to forgivenes of those sins and the resurection of Aslan, who then returned to vanquish evil. Where have I heard that story before?
This translated from the book to the movie quite well. For me, it was even MORE obvious in the movie (although, to be fair, I read the book in the third grade).
"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara
Correct! Lewis didn't write
May 21, 2008 - 12:58 ET by Jack BauerCorrect! Lewis didn't write a trilogy lecturing about Christianity.
He wrote exciting children's fantasy books based around the Christian themes of the savior, good trimphing over evil, God, redemption and ressuretion.
The aim was to lift up, enlighten, entertain and send a message within the tale. He was not a polemicist bent on mind-control.
The central theme of the
May 21, 2008 - 11:05 ET by balboaThe central theme of the first Narnia book (and the film) was the
passion and resurrection of a sacrificial savior. And this is precisely
why the book is so famous and beloved.
Yyyeah...I don't think so. Brent, you're trying too hard to make the success of these movies about religion.
Balboa, Please read up on CS
May 21, 2008 - 11:10 ET by futbolisgreat1Balboa, Please read up on CS Lewis and his reason to why he wrote The Chronicle of Narnia books. CS Lewis admitted that these series are all about God, passion, resurrection of a sacrificial savior, etc, etc. I guess now you believe you know more than the author of these books. CS Lewis wrote these books to have a religious tone to them. Read his words before you attack Brent. Unless of course now you have a direct line to CS Lewis house in Heaven.
All I'm saying is I don't
May 21, 2008 - 11:16 ET by balboaAll I'm saying is I don't think the success has anything to do with religion. These are great, fantastical books about a hidden world where lions and badgers can speak, mythical beasts exist, and there's magic, heroics, good triumphing over evil.
That's why kids love the books. Not because they thought "Hey! A book with religious overtones! I LOVE those! Gimme!"
Possibly True
May 21, 2008 - 11:25 ET by MeanderingWhile religion might not be the largest reason that the Narnia books did so well as movies, you cannot deny however that it is a part of the story that has attracted so many people to love the books as they loved the movie. As mentioned above, Gibson's Passion of the Christ did EXTREMELY well and there's no denying the theme of that movie. Then you have the Golden Compass movie that flopped, might not have been directly related to its anti-God theme, there is evidence that it was a large part of its floppage. I agreeing with you and disagreeing with you at the same time.
I haven't seen Golden
May 21, 2008 - 11:56 ET by balboaI haven't seen Golden Compass yet, so it's hard to speculate a whole lot. But for one thing, The Narnia Chronicles are much more well-known than the Compass books. I don't know. Reading reviews, it sounds like the script was a poor adaptation of the book. That couldn't have helped.
That's true as well. I
May 21, 2008 - 12:04 ET by MeanderingThat's true as well. I haven't read or seen the compass, so I can't say either, but I did hear the hub-bub when it came out about its underlying theme and I didn't go see it even though I saw the Naria movie and loved it.
You neglected to say why
May 21, 2008 - 12:09 ET by Dan The Man 2You neglected to say why the screen adaptation was poor. It was because much of the more atheist views and the killing of God was left out. That is why many of the Godless reviewers believe it ws a poor adaptation.
As far as the movie, I go with what God said "Be all things to all people" meaning dont adulterate the message but tell it in a way non believers can understand, on their level.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Balboa, Ok, I
May 21, 2008 - 11:36 ET by futbolisgreat1Balboa,
Ok, I misunderstood you. Thanks for clarifying.
However, to go back to Brent's point, how come "The Golden Compass" didn't do nearly as well?
It is also filled with magical characters, mythical beasts, etc, etc, right?
If you are right, "The Golden Compass" should have done as well as "The Lion, The Witch..." right?
Fut I think the only reason The Golden Compass didn't do well
May 21, 2008 - 12:09 ET by Dee Bunkis because the author was open about his anti-Christian message. Liberals always have to hide their message for it to succeed. Harry Potter did well because the author didn't come out against Christians
hated Golden Compass
May 21, 2008 - 12:57 ET by HypocriteHaterI just saw Compass over the weekend and was not impressed at all with the movie. I had a hard time following the plot and the ending was lame. I didn't much care for the characters either.
The first Narnia movie was so much better. Easier plot to follow, and the characters were very well-developed.
I tried to watch it a few
May 21, 2008 - 14:13 ET by HelenSI tried to watch it a few weeks ago (out of desperation to find something new to watch, my husband suggested it so I said "sure, why not") and it was so boring and contrived that we finally just shut it off and didn't bother with struggling through to the end.
No idea how it ended and don't care. Basically a boring movie.
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
Desperation was the main
May 21, 2008 - 16:00 ET by HypocriteHaterDesperation was the main reason we watched it too. There aren't always many movies to choose from to rent on any given week (we don't care much for going to the movies). If it looks stupid or boring, we're don't want to waste our money on it.
So we took a chance on the Compass and I'm sorry we did.
It's the parents who pay for tickets and books
May 21, 2008 - 13:04 ET by ArcherBI think you are missing the point here. The vast majority of Americans have a religion of some type, the vast majority of those are Christian. Religion is about values. Parenting is about values. If you're a parent, do you want to take your kid to see a movie about religion and values? Or would you rather take your kid to see a movie about killing God (religion) and therfore a destruction of values that a vast majority of Americans hold dear?
Yes, you can have a story about values that does not involve religion directly, but throw in Christian overtones and you get the backing of the Church as well. Make a movie about killing God and the Church is actively against your movie.
"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara
you're both right
May 21, 2008 - 11:29 ET by wizardjrThose who are Christian or who have spent any time to know about Chritianity easily find the religious references in CS Lewis' books and these movies. Those who know little about Christianity or are oblivious still respond to the moral lessons in the (books and) movies. Either way you cut it, it is still religious as (generally) religion is based on a moral law and even though we often fail, we recognize it is our moral imperative to try to live up to this moral law.
So, yes - some are enjoying it as religious metaphor. The rest are enjoying it as morality play - good guys against bad guys, redemption of the morally fallen, etc. Everytime Follywood makes a film of good guys versus bad guys with clear cut differentiation they get a box office winner. Oh shock and surprise, the public likes morality plays (not immorality run amok).
"(generally) religion is
May 21, 2008 - 14:56 ET by Cortillaen"(generally) religion is based on a moral law" It's the other way around, Wizard. Morality is based on religion or faith.
www.rhjunior.com Great comics with a hefty dose of Christian and anti-nutjob goodness.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." -Miyamoto Musashi
???
May 21, 2008 - 22:15 ET by candanceBal, you do know CS Lewis was a famous Christian theologist who wrote several books on the faith? It's not a secret by any means that he wrote the series as a metaphor for Christ's relationship with Earth.
That's like saying HP's success has nothing to do with children enjoying magic.
I'm firmly an agnostic, but
May 21, 2008 - 11:23 ET by KillgraveI'm firmly an agnostic, but atheists irritate the hell out of me.
People of faith believe that there is something bigger than themselves. What they do what that faith is another matter, but there it is.
Atheists refuse to acknowledge anything beyond their own puny, tiny existence.
Atheists fool themselves into thinking they are somehow more intelligent by refusing to believe in anything that they can't immediately prove. My question to them: How do you know that the earth revolves around the sun? Have you performed the observations and calculations yourself? Or do you chose to "believe" the consensus?
Atheists are tiny, angry people whose illusions of ego are off the map. No wonder most of them are on the left.
Frankly not everyone has the
May 21, 2008 - 11:42 ET by FoolicanFrankly not everyone has the opportunity nor resources to go up to space in a manned satellite and see for him/herself.
Correct me if I'm wrong...
May 21, 2008 - 13:04 ET by ontheright...but I don't believe Galileo had the opportunity to "...go up to space to see for himself..."
If I'm not mistaken, he used a telescope (among other tools) to calculate movement of celestial bodies and as a result was able to apply the much maligned (at the time) helocentrism that was supported by the mathematical computations of Copernicus in the 16th century.
Why would space travel be required, again?
Fine, this a better example for you?
May 21, 2008 - 13:08 ET by ArcherBIf you must nitpic:
Fine, would most people posses the mathmatical and astronomical knowledge to make the observations and calculations themselves? Do most people care?
"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara
The original argument...
May 21, 2008 - 13:16 ET by ontheright...was not whether the layman could/would do what was necessary to prove/disprove what was thought to be "the truth".
The argument, as I read it, was; if the common man does not have the resources/faculties/initiative to challenge the "consensus of truth" then any deviation from the truth is unwarranted, uneccessary and therefore futile.
AGW comes to mind for me.
It was a good movie. I've
May 21, 2008 - 11:42 ET by Lord ElicaniIt was a good movie.
I've resigned myself to the fact that Hollywood will erase all religious aspects of the writings of the Inklings. Not just Lewis, but Tolkien as well. Though nowhere near as allegorical as Lewis's work, there was a lot of religious stuff left out of the movie treatment to Lord of the Rings.
Murrow turning over in his grave
Murrow turning over in his grave
Ed Murrow had a child and the damn thing went wild
- Lindsey Buckingham
Indeed. I, unfortunately,
May 21, 2008 - 17:40 ET by AJIndeed. I, unfortunately, did not get into the books about Lord of the Rings untill AFTER I saw the first film so it was hard for me to discern the religious stuff in the movies and books. I remember having conversations with friends about the religious parallelism in Rings.
Tolkien, as you said, was not nearly as pointed with allegory as Lewis was. I have seen some of Tolkien's letters to his son (and other people) and the idea of allegory out-right pissed him off. He was-- at least in the case of the Lord of the Rings universe-- more concerned about telling a dang good story. And that's what he did.
Though he was a bit of a tree hugger-- litterally.
Tales of Narnia
May 21, 2008 - 11:51 ET by doug1950is a Christian allegory from beginning to end but one would have to first know Scripture to see and understand that in its entirety. The film (and book) are literally full of nuances and truths in Scripture. These things are Spiritual and the "natural man" can not know them nor understand them. Yes, it makes a great story but not because of the Hollywood's efforts (it was a great story before the film existed) but because of the story content and who the story is about. It is a powerful message of faith, hope and redemption. If it were simply a story that children could be attracted to because of cinematographic efforts then why did the Golden Compass do so poorly while Narnia blasted the box office records? It is a story about a risen Savior and so much, much more. Simply reading the Scripture will not make it easier to understand, one must know the One about whom the Scripture is written.
Compass is dead...
May 21, 2008 - 12:34 ET by ArcherBAm I the only one who sees the irony in this? "The Golden Compass" is a movie about killing God. In real life, God killed "The Golden Compass". Reminds me a Nietzsche quote:
"God is dead" --Nietzsche
"Nietzsche is dead" --God
"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara
In the end, "Compass" was
May 21, 2008 - 13:22 ET by balboaIn the end, "Compass" was still a movie about trying to overcome an evil person. That the author of the books was making an allegory about destroying religion is not something people are going to pick up on in the movie. They'll see Good v. Evil. So I don't think the allegory in that one matters much, except in the press reaction.
Looking forward to seeing the new Narnia film
May 21, 2008 - 12:36 ET by lotrI loved the first Narnia film, and found it quite edifying. I thought it was quite faithful to the book, and the Christian allegory was not diluted in the least. As with any good allegory, one can enjoy the story on the surface at face value (as Balboa suggests above). However, while one need not be Christian to enjoy Narnia (or The Lord of the Rings, for that matter), it is precisely the Christian undertone/message that makes these stories so attractive, whether the reader/viewer is conscious of it or not.
I voted for McCain yesterday...
May 21, 2008 - 13:04 ET by WildBillI know it's off topic, but it seemed like such a good place to ask for forgivness.
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged." -Abraham Lincoln
Two thoughts
May 21, 2008 - 13:28 ET by KC MulvilleWhy is that a problem? As one old Jesuit told me, "When Our Father becomes only My Father, you're not my brother anymore."
Hasn't it been commonplace
May 21, 2008 - 13:36 ET by balboaHasn't it been commonplace forever that you avoid religion and politics in social situations?
Especially politics
May 21, 2008 - 13:49 ET by lotrEspecially politics -- something I find Lefties in particular have difficulty at.
Not exactly forever
May 21, 2008 - 14:09 ET by KC MulvilleNot forever, and not universally. Certainly the founding fathers spoke freely about religion, even in private conversations. Most every speech from Abe Lincoln was filled with several God references. Besides, unless you believed your religion really was strictly private, why would you be bashful talking about it?
People talk about politics all the time. Some cable networks are based on the need to talk about politics. What's ironic is that the people who talk most about politics are often the most offended by talking about religion.
I guess since the advent of
May 21, 2008 - 14:11 ET by balboaI guess since the advent of the martini. :-)
I would conjecture (lol)
May 21, 2008 - 17:48 ET by AJI would conjecture (lol) that people don't like talking about religion because many people don't feel they can argue with religion. I mean, how many times have you (if you're a person of faith) ever gotten into an gritty debate with an atheist and made the debate last a while? Most of the time, people are so blinded to faith that they are too ashamed to debate or simply don't want to. As a result, mentioning faith in public is... wrong, culturally. Frankly, I think that is bad. I mean, yes, my faith is ultimately private but at the same time, God commands Christians to debate about faith and ask questions (but always return to Him).
go watch Narnia!
May 21, 2008 - 22:19 ET by candanceIt's a very good movie and worth the money to see it. Hubby and I almost never go to the movies anymore but we saw this last weekend and we both really liked it.
Could Care Less For Either Movie, It's Speed Racer For Me...
May 22, 2008 - 00:15 ET by The7SticksI'm not really interested in kids movies that have religious or anti-religious elements. I'm interested in ones that are like Saturday morning cartoons, like "Speed Racer." Don't listen to all the krocks who gave bad reviews to it because they don't have the eye for anime that viewers need in order to enjoy it. The story and character interaction is a lot more complex than you would think, ablight it having somewhat of a liberal bias. The action and bullet time sequences should be able to bury that quandary. Heck, seeing John Goodman doing his Matrix thing is enough to just see it. Plus it has a few instances of fan-service, if you know what my anime terminology is refering to.