| Quote: Originally Posted by Ender Okay, I gather that you didn't intend for that to sound racist. Be that as it may, I think kids can tell the difference between conflicting groups pretty easily. When I was a kid I could tell the difference between Rebels and Imperials, or between Indian Jones and the Nazis, without their being a racial discrepancy. The bad guys wear scary clothes, are accompanied by scary music, and, most importantly, they try to kill the good guys. Guess I should've have utilized quotations. I think the film was trying to blatantly emphasize the fact that the Telmarines were foreigners. Quote: Originally Posted by Ender Indeed. I'm not about to make a federal case about it, I just noted that it made me mildly uncomfortable. Like I said, they can get away with it now, but the Arab stuff later is going to stir up controversy, especially as it pertains to the Calmoran's religion. Maybe, but how else can they portray the Calormenes than as Lewis's Arabian allusion? Quote: Originally Posted by Ender Well, I think that the bulk of the public is quite capable of understanding the resurrection allegory in THE LION, THE WITCH, AND THE WADRROBE, as well as, for example, Edmund confessing his sins to Aslan. If anyone missed it, it's probably because they just didn't care. Similarly, PRINCE CASPIAN does reflect some of the Christian elements of Lewis' book (Peter being overcome by pride, the Pensieve children losing faith in Aslan, the temptation of the White Witch, etc). Despite any funny wording, I was trying to say basically just that. The public will udnerstand death, resurrection, forgiveness in LWW, but Caspian introduces some deeper, less apparent themes that are not as easily distinguishable; i.e. - like you said: internal struggle, pride, temptation. And if/when they attempt to confront these elements, it becomes oversimplified and annoying. Quote: Originally Posted by Ender What I note, though, is that the marketing of the movie didn't play these elements up. With the last flick there was a huge amount of emphasis put on the Christian source material (every periodical referred to the movie as a "Christian fantasy epic" more than once), and this was because the studio was quite blatantly trying to draw in the PASSION OF THE CHRIST fundamentalist crowd that spurned Harry Potter and the Hobbits. At the time, I found this quite cynical and disengenuous, because it was a pretty bald-faced attempt to bilk cash from people, as opposed to a serious effort to engage Christians in the material (which, it should be remembered, was somewhat controversial in its day; Lewis' use of pagan figures and myths to teach Christian ideals rubbed certain people the wrong way). ...and magic as well. The literary and figurative implements Lewis chose to use were definitely not universally condoned, but that;t what makes Lewis and his Chronicles ingenius and timeless. That he could do that, entirely succesfully, is an incredible testament ot both him and the artistic possibilties of Christianity in culture. And about the marketing, it's whatever, and it's to be expected. Lure in ten or twenty million Christians for film one, then expect them to return with their secular counterparts for round two despite the marketing. |