The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader (1989) Well this was one of the hardest parts of the book series for me to read and even as a motion picture it was kind of slow. I think all the children did a better job performing in this movie than in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. The animated effects were of greater quality in this installment of the miniseries as well. Again the filmmakers were very true to the story penned by Lewis and deserved commendation for that. Again my kids enjoyed the story but since it was painfully slow and at times the film didn't hold their attention quite the same as The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.
21 Reviews
Superior To LWW, But Not As Good Silver Chair
CalvinValjean24 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This is the second of my three-part review of the entire BBC Narnia serial. The second BBC miniseries combines two books, and come off feeling like two separate movies rather than a whole. So I will review each separately:
PRINCE CASPIAN Most everyone I know agrees the Capsian segment has problems, primarily because the entire book is crammed into less than an hour. Whereas the other entries are all very slow-paced, PC is the opposite. By changing the structure of the book, the entire first 20 minutes are dedicated to Caspian, who is hardly developed. 5 minutes in and he's already on the run for his life. Next the movie switches over to the Pevensies who're thrown into Narnia, but they get very little to do before its time for a battle. So in conclusion, NO CHARACTER really gets developed very well, and by the end of the 50 minutes, we've met about 10 new characters whom we hardly know. I think a non-book reader would have hardly understood the story.
On the positive side: Caspian and Miraz both act very well in their limited screen time. Trumpkin also gets a few funny lines. And the badger Trufflehunter is done A LOT better than the Beavers from LWW.
WEAKEST MOMENT: The ABSOLUTELY MOST laughably bad scene in ALL of the Narnia BBC serials occurs in Prince Caspian when Dr. Cornelius reveals that he's part dwarf to Caspian. Despite the fact that Cornelius is blatantly a dwarf from the moment he first appears, and is even the same height as Caspian, apparently no one in the castle seems to notice this. Great guards you've got there, Miraz. So how does he reveal that he is part dwarf? By taking off his hood! Caspian's eyes widen and go: "You're a...!" Wow, I never knew that seeing someone's bald head would reveal that he is a dwarf. I realize the series had a small budget, but it's not asking much to reveal that he'd been standing on clogs or was doing something else that made him seem taller, rather than revealing his bald head, which is the most irrelevant thing!
THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER
The remaining two hours of the miniseries are an adaptation of Dawn Treader, and in doing so suddenly the entire miniseries improves tremendously, mostly because the story of VDT focuses less on battles and visual f/x and more on adventure, scenery, and discovery. The acting again is great. Eustace is great, and so is Caspian, played by Samuel West as a confident and articulate young king, sort of a Prince Valiant type. Stealing the show is Warwick Davis as Reepicheep. Yes, his costume is ridiculous, but you come to accept it after a time. And at a well-plotted two hours, this is the only time where the pacing is actually perfect!
WEAKEST MOMENT: There is still one laughably bad scene in VDT, and it's when Eustace first discovers that he is a dragon. The problem is that they try to film it EXACTLY as its written in the book. He wakes up, hears dragon noises, and assumes there is one beside him, then sees his reflection in the lake and realizes he has become a dragon. Great on paper, looks stupid filmed. The camera shakes around as it is his POV, then looks into the lake, and sees what's supposed to be his reflection, but is obviously a fake image of a dragon superimposed on the shot of the river! Oy vey! Together these two adaptations make an amusing miniseries, but the final entry would prove to be the best.
PRINCE CASPIAN Most everyone I know agrees the Capsian segment has problems, primarily because the entire book is crammed into less than an hour. Whereas the other entries are all very slow-paced, PC is the opposite. By changing the structure of the book, the entire first 20 minutes are dedicated to Caspian, who is hardly developed. 5 minutes in and he's already on the run for his life. Next the movie switches over to the Pevensies who're thrown into Narnia, but they get very little to do before its time for a battle. So in conclusion, NO CHARACTER really gets developed very well, and by the end of the 50 minutes, we've met about 10 new characters whom we hardly know. I think a non-book reader would have hardly understood the story.
On the positive side: Caspian and Miraz both act very well in their limited screen time. Trumpkin also gets a few funny lines. And the badger Trufflehunter is done A LOT better than the Beavers from LWW.
WEAKEST MOMENT: The ABSOLUTELY MOST laughably bad scene in ALL of the Narnia BBC serials occurs in Prince Caspian when Dr. Cornelius reveals that he's part dwarf to Caspian. Despite the fact that Cornelius is blatantly a dwarf from the moment he first appears, and is even the same height as Caspian, apparently no one in the castle seems to notice this. Great guards you've got there, Miraz. So how does he reveal that he is part dwarf? By taking off his hood! Caspian's eyes widen and go: "You're a...!" Wow, I never knew that seeing someone's bald head would reveal that he is a dwarf. I realize the series had a small budget, but it's not asking much to reveal that he'd been standing on clogs or was doing something else that made him seem taller, rather than revealing his bald head, which is the most irrelevant thing!
THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER
The remaining two hours of the miniseries are an adaptation of Dawn Treader, and in doing so suddenly the entire miniseries improves tremendously, mostly because the story of VDT focuses less on battles and visual f/x and more on adventure, scenery, and discovery. The acting again is great. Eustace is great, and so is Caspian, played by Samuel West as a confident and articulate young king, sort of a Prince Valiant type. Stealing the show is Warwick Davis as Reepicheep. Yes, his costume is ridiculous, but you come to accept it after a time. And at a well-plotted two hours, this is the only time where the pacing is actually perfect!
WEAKEST MOMENT: There is still one laughably bad scene in VDT, and it's when Eustace first discovers that he is a dragon. The problem is that they try to film it EXACTLY as its written in the book. He wakes up, hears dragon noises, and assumes there is one beside him, then sees his reflection in the lake and realizes he has become a dragon. Great on paper, looks stupid filmed. The camera shakes around as it is his POV, then looks into the lake, and sees what's supposed to be his reflection, but is obviously a fake image of a dragon superimposed on the shot of the river! Oy vey! Together these two adaptations make an amusing miniseries, but the final entry would prove to be the best.
fast paced adventure
janeyswanson28 May 2020
THis wonderful fantasy film is most memorable. I am writing a book and including some of that experience. When I am set on the title I will come back and let you know. I loved this BBC movie because it captures the essence of Narnia, both on the water and in the dance sequences.
a step forwards
ricky_says_hi24 January 2009
OK i'll review the two stories separately since they're both, well, separate
PRINCE CASPIAN:
well, the last BBC version was slow moving and drawn out so this one came across as really rushed and crammed. of course Prince Caspian is the weakest of the four books i've read and it doesn't look like much here.
the acting is very divided. the children are all a little older and more comfortable here. Peter's voice has finally broke so it helps improve how his lines sound anyway. Lucy and Susan are both better in this. Edmund's voice is a little weird and hard to take. now the kid playing Caspian is just...omfg. i can see why Disney went with an older actor for their Caspian since this kid is so bad. and there is no extra E in dwarfs, mate. i didn't realise Barbara Kellerman was back in this but it looks like she's calmed down a bit, playing the hag and actually coming across as creepy. its interesting that Trufflehunter was played by a woman, i liked that idea and 'Big Mick' as Trumpkin was good too. i hated Warwick Davis as Reepicheep simply because you cant think of him as a mouse, he stays a midget in a bad mouse costume. the actors playing Nikabrick and Miraz were decent.
the effects are meh. yet again they use hand drawn animation mingled in with live action but its not used as much here so it works.
the setting is very dull looking. i always thought of Narnia as being exotic but we just have a lot of plain English countrysides here. i do like the claustrophobic element of Aslan's How.
the fight between Miraz and Peter is just bad. no suspense and too quick. they are also missing the other huge battles that happened at the end of the book. and no river god either. when i first saw the end i was surprised how it set up the next one.
in short Prince Caspian comes bottom in the ranking of the BBC versions of the Chronicles of Narnia
VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER:
need i say "wow!"? this is excellent, best of all of them. it was the best book and they put tonnes of effort into this and it shows
the acting is great. Lucy has improved well and Edmund is decent. the boy playing Eustace does a good job too and the older Caspian knocks the younger one out of the water completely. too bad we have annoying life size Reepicheep again. the acting is terrible when Edmund and Caspian fight on the Deathwater island. i love this exchange: Edmund: "it's all quite plain. he came here on a hot day, took off his clothes, dived in--" Lucy: "Don't!" (her delivery is excellent)
the design for the ship is lovely and very detailed. each of the different places they visit look unique and interesting. another thing that makes this version great is that they only have one brief scene of cartoon animation.
the effects are strange. i was surprised they actually made a sea serpent and dragon to use. they didn't look real but they look better than the puppet Aslan. the scene in the dark island was excellently done.
one of the main reasons i think this worked is because Voyage of the Dawn Treader is a very episodic book and so works as a TV series. i was disappointed that they left out the bit with the mermaids though
PRINCE CASPIAN:
well, the last BBC version was slow moving and drawn out so this one came across as really rushed and crammed. of course Prince Caspian is the weakest of the four books i've read and it doesn't look like much here.
the acting is very divided. the children are all a little older and more comfortable here. Peter's voice has finally broke so it helps improve how his lines sound anyway. Lucy and Susan are both better in this. Edmund's voice is a little weird and hard to take. now the kid playing Caspian is just...omfg. i can see why Disney went with an older actor for their Caspian since this kid is so bad. and there is no extra E in dwarfs, mate. i didn't realise Barbara Kellerman was back in this but it looks like she's calmed down a bit, playing the hag and actually coming across as creepy. its interesting that Trufflehunter was played by a woman, i liked that idea and 'Big Mick' as Trumpkin was good too. i hated Warwick Davis as Reepicheep simply because you cant think of him as a mouse, he stays a midget in a bad mouse costume. the actors playing Nikabrick and Miraz were decent.
the effects are meh. yet again they use hand drawn animation mingled in with live action but its not used as much here so it works.
the setting is very dull looking. i always thought of Narnia as being exotic but we just have a lot of plain English countrysides here. i do like the claustrophobic element of Aslan's How.
the fight between Miraz and Peter is just bad. no suspense and too quick. they are also missing the other huge battles that happened at the end of the book. and no river god either. when i first saw the end i was surprised how it set up the next one.
in short Prince Caspian comes bottom in the ranking of the BBC versions of the Chronicles of Narnia
VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER:
need i say "wow!"? this is excellent, best of all of them. it was the best book and they put tonnes of effort into this and it shows
the acting is great. Lucy has improved well and Edmund is decent. the boy playing Eustace does a good job too and the older Caspian knocks the younger one out of the water completely. too bad we have annoying life size Reepicheep again. the acting is terrible when Edmund and Caspian fight on the Deathwater island. i love this exchange: Edmund: "it's all quite plain. he came here on a hot day, took off his clothes, dived in--" Lucy: "Don't!" (her delivery is excellent)
the design for the ship is lovely and very detailed. each of the different places they visit look unique and interesting. another thing that makes this version great is that they only have one brief scene of cartoon animation.
the effects are strange. i was surprised they actually made a sea serpent and dragon to use. they didn't look real but they look better than the puppet Aslan. the scene in the dark island was excellently done.
one of the main reasons i think this worked is because Voyage of the Dawn Treader is a very episodic book and so works as a TV series. i was disappointed that they left out the bit with the mermaids though
Uneven but well worth seeing
TheLittleSongbird19 May 2010
I will start off by saying I love The Chronicles of Narnia books. They have fascinating characters, interesting stories and the enchanting world we know as Narnia. Now I grew up with these BBC adaptations, while I am more familiar with The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, there are many good things as well about Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I do agree it is an uneven adaptation, with Prince Caspian being inferior to Voyage of the Treader, but there is a lot to like.
There are certainly improvements over The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. One is that while Susan is given little to do, Edmund's voice takes a while to get used to and Lucy has a tendency to whine, the children's acting is vastly improved. Two, the special effects while nothing special are an improvement as well, some looked dated in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but some here looked nicely done. Both though do respect their respective stories, while Prince Caspian is too short and rushed, the details are there.
I also loved the sets and costumes here, Narnia here is almost ethereal, and out of all the costumes I loved Reepicheep's and the Magician's most of all. The music is great as well, the main theme is something I have known since forever and I am surprised at how it doesn't strike me as boring over 12 years later since first hearing it, and I loved the beautiful, haunting and elegiac quality in Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I thoroughly enjoyed the acting, even Barbara Kellerman as the Witch. Warwick Davis is really likable and refreshing as Reepicheep who has the best lines I think,a nice contrast to David Thwaites's obnoxious Eustace, and Geoffrey Baldon and John Hallam are great in their respective roles as well. In Prince Caspian, I still love Aslan, such a great character, beautifully designed and impressively voiced by Ronald Pickup. My favourite scene in Prince Caspian has to be the one in the cave with the hag and the werewolf, that is classic.
However, the adaptation is too short, so some scenes felt skimmed over, depriving them of their power. Especially in Prince Caspian, which felt very rushed as well, the duel between Peter and Miraz was a disappointment almost being completely devoid of suspense. On a plus side, I liked Jean Marc Perrett's spirited portrayal of Prince Caspian but Samuel West is even better as a more valiant King Caspian. Robert Lang is adequately menacing as Miraz as well. Voyage of the Dawn Treader though I feel is much better paced and more carefully written.
Overall, uneven but it is well worth seeing. 7/10 Bethany Cox
There are certainly improvements over The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. One is that while Susan is given little to do, Edmund's voice takes a while to get used to and Lucy has a tendency to whine, the children's acting is vastly improved. Two, the special effects while nothing special are an improvement as well, some looked dated in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, but some here looked nicely done. Both though do respect their respective stories, while Prince Caspian is too short and rushed, the details are there.
I also loved the sets and costumes here, Narnia here is almost ethereal, and out of all the costumes I loved Reepicheep's and the Magician's most of all. The music is great as well, the main theme is something I have known since forever and I am surprised at how it doesn't strike me as boring over 12 years later since first hearing it, and I loved the beautiful, haunting and elegiac quality in Voyage of the Dawn Treader. I thoroughly enjoyed the acting, even Barbara Kellerman as the Witch. Warwick Davis is really likable and refreshing as Reepicheep who has the best lines I think,a nice contrast to David Thwaites's obnoxious Eustace, and Geoffrey Baldon and John Hallam are great in their respective roles as well. In Prince Caspian, I still love Aslan, such a great character, beautifully designed and impressively voiced by Ronald Pickup. My favourite scene in Prince Caspian has to be the one in the cave with the hag and the werewolf, that is classic.
However, the adaptation is too short, so some scenes felt skimmed over, depriving them of their power. Especially in Prince Caspian, which felt very rushed as well, the duel between Peter and Miraz was a disappointment almost being completely devoid of suspense. On a plus side, I liked Jean Marc Perrett's spirited portrayal of Prince Caspian but Samuel West is even better as a more valiant King Caspian. Robert Lang is adequately menacing as Miraz as well. Voyage of the Dawn Treader though I feel is much better paced and more carefully written.
Overall, uneven but it is well worth seeing. 7/10 Bethany Cox
A tale of two tales; "Will no-one silence this mouse!?"
HenryHextonEsq24 June 2001
"Prince Caspian" and "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" should be reviewed separately, as they are patently separate installments of the Narnia saga.
"Prince Caspian"
A rather expositionary chapter in the series of seven stories, tying in the "Lion, The Witch..." with later chapters, by phasing out Peter and Susan and introducing Caspian. The production, viewed twelve years after I saw it as a child, is rather disappointing, with no sense of spectacle or proportion at all conveyed. Particularly, the locations used for Narnia are distinctly unimpressive, dour and unsuitable; not beautiful enough at all. The budget for this story was clearly kept to minimum to save for the following comparative epic. What we get is a fairly drab English wood in glum weather conditions. The acting is far from compelling here, with the good but misguided dwarf whose name evades me at present particularly unimpressive, and the badger unimposing. The voices are often inappropriately jokey and lightweight - the dwarves and the badger set. Of course, Aslan is well voiced indeed, by Ronald Pickup, but is rendered immobile by the impracticalities of the B.B.C. producing a talking, walking lion... Miraz, is as Caspian effectively says at one point ("The witch is an evil a thousand times worse than Miraz!") composed of small-fry villainy. The duel between Peter and Miraz is laughably free of any suspense and power. One thing that stands out is that Susan has virtually nothing to do or say at all in this two-part story, and seems tangibly redundant. The main memorable scene, though, is a classic of sorts. It involves "a hag and a werewolf" getting up to some devillry trapped in a cave with Caspian and others. The acting by Barbara Kellerman as the witch is completely OTT and simple words are dragged out to accommodate innumerable syllables; "Who-oo-oo e-e-e-ev-err-r her-er-r-eard o-of a-a wi-i-i-tch that re-e-ea-eally di-iiieeed...!" lunacy! Could have done with being underplayed, and it would have been more successfully scary, although as a child I was scared by this scene, although it was the sombre, weird-looking werewolf creature who disturbed most I suspect. Overall, this story is frankly inconsequential, and just useful for that scene and its exposition, setting things up for the next tale. While far from the best book, it could have been done better than it is here; a very mediocre production.
Rating:- ** 1/2/*****
"The Voyage of the Dawn Treader"
Where to start? This four-parter is immensely superior in every way to "Prince Caspian". The then-still-flourishing B.B.C. children's drama department shrewdly and inventively dramatized a marvellous book, the fifth in the Narnia series, "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", which ties in the Narnia ethos with a strong impression of Homer's epic narrative poem, "The Odyssey". Each of the islands visited on King Caspian's ambitious voyage is well conveyed, and unique, helped by wise choices of sublime locations, plain good writing and music. The Lone Islands, controlled ineptly by the wonderfully named "Governor Gumpas", and filmed around Sicily I think, are well created; unlike "Prince Caspian" a sense of scale and culture is created, by some use of extras and a wide filming of areas of the island, including vinyards etc. The other islands, including the almost haunting "Goldwater Island", the Dragon one, the Magician one, filmed nicely at a Welsh country house and grounds, and the last one with the dining table, are all well conveyed. Importantly, the actors generally make the most of their parts all the way through this story. Samuel West, as Caspian, portrays him with the right combination of precocious arrogance, gravitas and good humour. Particularly good is John Hallam, playing the role of Capt. Drinian with a wonderful world-weary diction, steady wisdom and charm. He is a completely convincing character, unlike any in "Prince Caspian". Shame that Hallam seems to have had relatively few substantial film roles, as he really is a fine presence in this production. The great C.S. Lewis character, the noble, swashbuckling dreamer, the mouse Reepicheep (wonderfully named!), is wonderfully costumed and acted and voiced by Warwick Davies. His yearnings to see what is past "The end of the world" and Aslan's country, are compellingly conveyed, in verse ("...Where the waves grow sweet/Doubt not, Reepicheep/You'll find all you seek, there, in the utter East"...) and in Davies' likeable portrayal. His temper is short with the obnoxious Eustace constantly moaning on, and their confrontations are often downright hilarious. Eustace's obnoxious, spoiled English schoolboy characterisitics are well played by a child actor also physically perfect for the part. Even his transition towards becoming a well-behaving young chap is well conveyed. Lucy and Edmund aren't as interesting in this story as Eustace, but are reasonably worked into the plot. Lucy, though, is a little wearing in her habit of whining, I would have to say. Other members of the ship's crew are jovially played, as well as Preston Lockwood's magician and the fine Geoffrey Bayldon's star Ramandu, who has a splendid lyrical speech in the last episode when he describes his life. The quality of the incidental music should be noted, especially its hymnal, elegiac quality in the last installment of this four-part tale. The only downsides to this sublime production are the cliffhangers - which are often too similar to each other, usually involving a sea monster, and fail to match a good "Dr Who" surprise cliffhanger - and, the voices of the "Duffers" on the Magician's island are too jokey and distinctly colloquial. Overall, a wonderful sense of adventure and atmospheric mystique is created in this production, which adapts an intoxicating book full of sublime mystery as well as anyone could have expected. The gap in quality between this and "Prince Caspian" is tangible, but the whole series seems worthwhile. "The Voyage of the Dawntreader" is as good a nostalgic, escapist series as the generally well-written and underrated (by the B.B.C. notably) "Dr Who" (any fan of this should check out the Narnia adaptations and vice versa), and a tangible reminder of just how good the B.B.C. once was at making TV drama of all kinds...
Rating:- *****/*****
"Prince Caspian"
A rather expositionary chapter in the series of seven stories, tying in the "Lion, The Witch..." with later chapters, by phasing out Peter and Susan and introducing Caspian. The production, viewed twelve years after I saw it as a child, is rather disappointing, with no sense of spectacle or proportion at all conveyed. Particularly, the locations used for Narnia are distinctly unimpressive, dour and unsuitable; not beautiful enough at all. The budget for this story was clearly kept to minimum to save for the following comparative epic. What we get is a fairly drab English wood in glum weather conditions. The acting is far from compelling here, with the good but misguided dwarf whose name evades me at present particularly unimpressive, and the badger unimposing. The voices are often inappropriately jokey and lightweight - the dwarves and the badger set. Of course, Aslan is well voiced indeed, by Ronald Pickup, but is rendered immobile by the impracticalities of the B.B.C. producing a talking, walking lion... Miraz, is as Caspian effectively says at one point ("The witch is an evil a thousand times worse than Miraz!") composed of small-fry villainy. The duel between Peter and Miraz is laughably free of any suspense and power. One thing that stands out is that Susan has virtually nothing to do or say at all in this two-part story, and seems tangibly redundant. The main memorable scene, though, is a classic of sorts. It involves "a hag and a werewolf" getting up to some devillry trapped in a cave with Caspian and others. The acting by Barbara Kellerman as the witch is completely OTT and simple words are dragged out to accommodate innumerable syllables; "Who-oo-oo e-e-e-ev-err-r her-er-r-eard o-of a-a wi-i-i-tch that re-e-ea-eally di-iiieeed...!" lunacy! Could have done with being underplayed, and it would have been more successfully scary, although as a child I was scared by this scene, although it was the sombre, weird-looking werewolf creature who disturbed most I suspect. Overall, this story is frankly inconsequential, and just useful for that scene and its exposition, setting things up for the next tale. While far from the best book, it could have been done better than it is here; a very mediocre production.
Rating:- ** 1/2/*****
"The Voyage of the Dawn Treader"
Where to start? This four-parter is immensely superior in every way to "Prince Caspian". The then-still-flourishing B.B.C. children's drama department shrewdly and inventively dramatized a marvellous book, the fifth in the Narnia series, "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", which ties in the Narnia ethos with a strong impression of Homer's epic narrative poem, "The Odyssey". Each of the islands visited on King Caspian's ambitious voyage is well conveyed, and unique, helped by wise choices of sublime locations, plain good writing and music. The Lone Islands, controlled ineptly by the wonderfully named "Governor Gumpas", and filmed around Sicily I think, are well created; unlike "Prince Caspian" a sense of scale and culture is created, by some use of extras and a wide filming of areas of the island, including vinyards etc. The other islands, including the almost haunting "Goldwater Island", the Dragon one, the Magician one, filmed nicely at a Welsh country house and grounds, and the last one with the dining table, are all well conveyed. Importantly, the actors generally make the most of their parts all the way through this story. Samuel West, as Caspian, portrays him with the right combination of precocious arrogance, gravitas and good humour. Particularly good is John Hallam, playing the role of Capt. Drinian with a wonderful world-weary diction, steady wisdom and charm. He is a completely convincing character, unlike any in "Prince Caspian". Shame that Hallam seems to have had relatively few substantial film roles, as he really is a fine presence in this production. The great C.S. Lewis character, the noble, swashbuckling dreamer, the mouse Reepicheep (wonderfully named!), is wonderfully costumed and acted and voiced by Warwick Davies. His yearnings to see what is past "The end of the world" and Aslan's country, are compellingly conveyed, in verse ("...Where the waves grow sweet/Doubt not, Reepicheep/You'll find all you seek, there, in the utter East"...) and in Davies' likeable portrayal. His temper is short with the obnoxious Eustace constantly moaning on, and their confrontations are often downright hilarious. Eustace's obnoxious, spoiled English schoolboy characterisitics are well played by a child actor also physically perfect for the part. Even his transition towards becoming a well-behaving young chap is well conveyed. Lucy and Edmund aren't as interesting in this story as Eustace, but are reasonably worked into the plot. Lucy, though, is a little wearing in her habit of whining, I would have to say. Other members of the ship's crew are jovially played, as well as Preston Lockwood's magician and the fine Geoffrey Bayldon's star Ramandu, who has a splendid lyrical speech in the last episode when he describes his life. The quality of the incidental music should be noted, especially its hymnal, elegiac quality in the last installment of this four-part tale. The only downsides to this sublime production are the cliffhangers - which are often too similar to each other, usually involving a sea monster, and fail to match a good "Dr Who" surprise cliffhanger - and, the voices of the "Duffers" on the Magician's island are too jokey and distinctly colloquial. Overall, a wonderful sense of adventure and atmospheric mystique is created in this production, which adapts an intoxicating book full of sublime mystery as well as anyone could have expected. The gap in quality between this and "Prince Caspian" is tangible, but the whole series seems worthwhile. "The Voyage of the Dawntreader" is as good a nostalgic, escapist series as the generally well-written and underrated (by the B.B.C. notably) "Dr Who" (any fan of this should check out the Narnia adaptations and vice versa), and a tangible reminder of just how good the B.B.C. once was at making TV drama of all kinds...
Rating:- *****/*****
Very faithful adaptation, beautifully acted.
Liza-1911 December 2000
I grew up with this movie, and it still means a lot to me. The books are wonderful, and this miniseries followed them all very closely. Prince Caspian and Voyage of the Dawn Treader were never my favorite books in the series, but these are certainly worth watching. The entire production is very loyal, and the actors are all wonderful.
Although, I cannot help smiling when I watch a ridiculously young Samuel West walk around in tights as King Caspian - that guy was Leonard in Howards End??? Well, he's a great actor, I guess! I love these movies, and whether you have read the books or not, it is a wonderful story that the kids will love.
Although, I cannot help smiling when I watch a ridiculously young Samuel West walk around in tights as King Caspian - that guy was Leonard in Howards End??? Well, he's a great actor, I guess! I love these movies, and whether you have read the books or not, it is a wonderful story that the kids will love.
There story is great, but I wish it had had a larger budget. 10/10
LT-1025 March 2000
The Chronicles of Narnia are, without doubt, some of the best books ever written. Turning the books into live-action movies would be very hard to do because there is a number of special effects that would be hard to do, and all of the animals talk. Today thanks to CGI and big budgets we would probably be able to make Narnia on film. 11 years ago, with a small budget it would have been very hard to do. Sometimes it looks great, but sometimes it is really hard to belive what you are seeing. The actors do really well. They were really comited to the movie. Alex Kirby's direction is also great. The movie sticks well with the books, good thing it did or a lot of people would be mad! Also the locations are EXCELLENT. So what I'm saying is this movie is really good, if you don't compare it to todays standards. 10/10
Very well done.
Sparrow_in_flight18 July 2003
Personally, I prefer the adaptations of Prince Caspian and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader over The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and The Silver Chair. the two books were always my favorite of the series, so I grew up watching these two the most. They're a very good adaptation of the books, staying very true to the storylines and events. I only wish they'd done all 7 of the books.
These movies get better and better as they go.
clck200127 July 2007
Truly, these two were much better than The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, which I thought was dull. Why does Caspian look so different in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader than he did in Prince Caspian? The book says it was only three years between the two events in Narnian time. In the movie, it looks like he has aged three times that much. I was picturing him to look mostly the same, a little more world-weary perhaps, though. I thought that the boy that played Caspian in Prince Caspian overdid it. On the other hand, I thought the guy that played him in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader was quite good. But, alas, the action will always be the same- mediocre. The stunts were acceptable, but certainly nothing better than that. I do not like how Aslan just breathes on people or things to make them be fixed, such as Reepicheep's tail. The reason for this is because in the books, when Aslan fixes something, it just happens. Besides, when Aslan does that breathing rubbish, it looked like he was yawning. If he does have to do the breathing, at least make it look good. I would never have guessed that Reepicheep was Warwick Davis. I'm sure the cast regretted their decision to be in this movie when they found out they would have to have a mouse as a castmate, even if it was Warwick Davis. But again, the filmmakers did the best they could with their tight budget. Besides, it was '89, and not everybody can do it as good as Star Wars can!
An Excellent Adaption Of 2 Of C.S. Lewis's best books.
nick-6518 December 1998
Let me think...
staisil230 July 2003
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as a film was much easier to follow and understand than Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader. The books are even easier to understand if I put it that way. I did understand the basic elements of the movie, though, and I also thought Samuel West (Prince Caspian) was pretty attractive, so, I said "What, the hell, I might as well.) 7.8 out of 10.
A must see for True Narnia fans
caspian197817 October 2000
The sequels to the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian and the Voyage of the Dawn Treader is a wonderful movie. Like most sequels, the audience is on a different level with the films characters.
Like the characters, the audience members know as much as they do. They too have been to Narnia before. Another film follows this tilted the Silver Chair. As far as I know, the three other books to the chronicles of Narnia have not yet been made into a film yet. Keep your fingers crossed.
Like the characters, the audience members know as much as they do. They too have been to Narnia before. Another film follows this tilted the Silver Chair. As far as I know, the three other books to the chronicles of Narnia have not yet been made into a film yet. Keep your fingers crossed.
At least Dawn Treader is okay
ron-36826 December 2006
The BBC adaptation of Prince Caspian is a shambles. CS Lewis' brilliant original story is barely intact. The direction is amateurish. The fight and battle scenes are worse than laughable. The special effects are awful - even by the standards of 1989. The animal costumes are ridiculous. Jean Marc Perret, who plays the prince, is particularly bad, and the rest of the acting is poor. The lion Aslan is supposed to be fearsome, but just looks like a big plush toy, and has a voice that would lure you to sleep. If you have not read the book, you will have no idea what happens at the climax of this mess of a movie.
Obviously, Prince Caspian was intended for a young audience, but today's children are too sophisticated for this production. The novel, while a children's story, is quite readable for adults. A decent adaptation would be watchable for adults too.
The DVD release also includes The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which is a much better film. (Okay, it's not a film - it was videotaped.) Dawn Treader is about two hours, Prince Caspian is half that.
Obviously, Prince Caspian was intended for a young audience, but today's children are too sophisticated for this production. The novel, while a children's story, is quite readable for adults. A decent adaptation would be watchable for adults too.
The DVD release also includes The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which is a much better film. (Okay, it's not a film - it was videotaped.) Dawn Treader is about two hours, Prince Caspian is half that.
The second BBC series of Lewis's Narnia
Dr_Coulardeau19 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This collection gives us the complete set of the BCC adaptations of the Narnia novels by C.S. Lewis in three miniseries of six episodes each, plus some extras. The first is "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" (1988) about the city Wardrobe in the country Spare Room. The second (1989) brings together "Prince Caspian" (two episodes) and "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" (four episodes). The third concerns "The Silver Chair" (1990).
The first adaptation sets the tone and the main characters. The tone is that of the novel and it is done for children. It sounds slightly naïve at times because the storyteller is no longer constantly present and is not C.S. Lewis at all when there is a voice over. The regular "we" or "this world" or even the "lions of Trafalgar Square", meaning the real world, addressing the children's audience from an external adult point of view, reminding us of the fact that this is all a story, disappear and I think it is a loss.
The second adaptation makes two full novels into one story with a shift from the first one to the second that is at least abrupt and the packing up of the two in six episodes makes psychological details and descriptive details scanty. The story becomes a story line more than a fully developed story. The dragon though is a good nice creation, and that was necessary since it was an essential element and it had to fly properly, which is not the case with other flying animals, particularly Aslan. They are mostly simple and stiff. It keeps the story of the Dawn Treader the way it is in the novel and the end is the real end including the final pilgrimage of the mouse Reepicheep and the return of the children. It is a lot more respectful of the spirit of the story than the ending of the recent long feature that can be seen in cinemas.
The last adaptation gives details and the witch is a marvel though her becoming a serpent and being killed is less impressive since no green blood is shed and only Prince Rilian takes part in that execution. Eustace and Puddleglum taking part is nice but in the novel. The escape from the underground city does not try to explain the even deeper world of fire and incandescence into which all the gnomic slaves of the witch jump back happily. I miss the big celebration outside the hole from which they extract themselves, with fauns, dryads, satyrs and dwarfs all dancing together. But well at least they keep the details of King Caspian X's death and his resurrection in Aslan's country though they soften the harsh commentary of C.S. Lewis on the English school system and the incompetence of school principals and inspectors, or MPs.
But these adaptations are interesting nevertheless. They insist on the fact these stories are not heroic fantasy but only children's literature. That is important because then the values that are presented in the films are pedagogical and not only entertaining. It is also important because it avoids, like the books, any subject that is not childlike or child-friendly. No love is wasted on anyone and even friendship is rather kept lily pure. No kissing, please, we're British.
Ut also defends the basic humanistic values of the books in fair contrast with the the world at the time or the literature of Lewis's time. A fair and clear condemnation of slavery and the exploitation of animals. But since the novel "The Boy and His Horse" is not there the rejection of political totalitarianism is absent. The allusion to the usurping uncle in Prince Caspian is by far not enough. Lewis's books are deeply committed to a democratic system. The films are far from being as clear as that. Calormenes are absent for example.
The films are also a lot less clear than the books that only people having some human blood can rule Narnia, including the White Witch of the first film who is a descendant of Adam, mixed with other bloods, including jinn blood from the sexual partner Adam had to procreate that line of descent. The absence of "The Boy and His Horse" also deprives us of the description of the four initial human kings and queens of Narnia, including Queen Suzan who is definitely not served very fairly.
But for me the main absence is in fact "The Last Battle" because it reveals two essential things in these seven novels: the idea that all worlds have a beginning and an end, including Narnia, that this end can only come from both inner strife, invasion and political manipulation of the masses that are shown as basically easy to manipulate into divisions or obeying absurd commands. The masses make history but only when some individuals and foreign forces join their efforts to conquer the minds and imagination of these masses.
This last novel was Lewis's testament and he showed in it that he did not really believe in democracy, i.e. the power of the people, for the people and by the people, because he did not trust any politicians but preferred an aristocratic monarchy in which kings and queens are of a different sort from the people and the masses. The main difference between Calormenes and Narnians is that The Calormene "master" (who is a Calormene by genetic birth) governs Calormenes as slaves, with a very narrow aristocracy, and the Narnian "king (genetically different from all Narnians by at least some human genes) grants them freedom and diversity.
To avoid in anyway the bleak atmosphere of "The Lord of the Rings" or "The Time Machine" they produced a brave new world that lacked most of its pith and marrow. The series are interesting but only as entertainment for children and they lose the pedagogical dimension the books constantly keep.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
The first adaptation sets the tone and the main characters. The tone is that of the novel and it is done for children. It sounds slightly naïve at times because the storyteller is no longer constantly present and is not C.S. Lewis at all when there is a voice over. The regular "we" or "this world" or even the "lions of Trafalgar Square", meaning the real world, addressing the children's audience from an external adult point of view, reminding us of the fact that this is all a story, disappear and I think it is a loss.
The second adaptation makes two full novels into one story with a shift from the first one to the second that is at least abrupt and the packing up of the two in six episodes makes psychological details and descriptive details scanty. The story becomes a story line more than a fully developed story. The dragon though is a good nice creation, and that was necessary since it was an essential element and it had to fly properly, which is not the case with other flying animals, particularly Aslan. They are mostly simple and stiff. It keeps the story of the Dawn Treader the way it is in the novel and the end is the real end including the final pilgrimage of the mouse Reepicheep and the return of the children. It is a lot more respectful of the spirit of the story than the ending of the recent long feature that can be seen in cinemas.
The last adaptation gives details and the witch is a marvel though her becoming a serpent and being killed is less impressive since no green blood is shed and only Prince Rilian takes part in that execution. Eustace and Puddleglum taking part is nice but in the novel. The escape from the underground city does not try to explain the even deeper world of fire and incandescence into which all the gnomic slaves of the witch jump back happily. I miss the big celebration outside the hole from which they extract themselves, with fauns, dryads, satyrs and dwarfs all dancing together. But well at least they keep the details of King Caspian X's death and his resurrection in Aslan's country though they soften the harsh commentary of C.S. Lewis on the English school system and the incompetence of school principals and inspectors, or MPs.
But these adaptations are interesting nevertheless. They insist on the fact these stories are not heroic fantasy but only children's literature. That is important because then the values that are presented in the films are pedagogical and not only entertaining. It is also important because it avoids, like the books, any subject that is not childlike or child-friendly. No love is wasted on anyone and even friendship is rather kept lily pure. No kissing, please, we're British.
Ut also defends the basic humanistic values of the books in fair contrast with the the world at the time or the literature of Lewis's time. A fair and clear condemnation of slavery and the exploitation of animals. But since the novel "The Boy and His Horse" is not there the rejection of political totalitarianism is absent. The allusion to the usurping uncle in Prince Caspian is by far not enough. Lewis's books are deeply committed to a democratic system. The films are far from being as clear as that. Calormenes are absent for example.
The films are also a lot less clear than the books that only people having some human blood can rule Narnia, including the White Witch of the first film who is a descendant of Adam, mixed with other bloods, including jinn blood from the sexual partner Adam had to procreate that line of descent. The absence of "The Boy and His Horse" also deprives us of the description of the four initial human kings and queens of Narnia, including Queen Suzan who is definitely not served very fairly.
But for me the main absence is in fact "The Last Battle" because it reveals two essential things in these seven novels: the idea that all worlds have a beginning and an end, including Narnia, that this end can only come from both inner strife, invasion and political manipulation of the masses that are shown as basically easy to manipulate into divisions or obeying absurd commands. The masses make history but only when some individuals and foreign forces join their efforts to conquer the minds and imagination of these masses.
This last novel was Lewis's testament and he showed in it that he did not really believe in democracy, i.e. the power of the people, for the people and by the people, because he did not trust any politicians but preferred an aristocratic monarchy in which kings and queens are of a different sort from the people and the masses. The main difference between Calormenes and Narnians is that The Calormene "master" (who is a Calormene by genetic birth) governs Calormenes as slaves, with a very narrow aristocracy, and the Narnian "king (genetically different from all Narnians by at least some human genes) grants them freedom and diversity.
To avoid in anyway the bleak atmosphere of "The Lord of the Rings" or "The Time Machine" they produced a brave new world that lacked most of its pith and marrow. The series are interesting but only as entertainment for children and they lose the pedagogical dimension the books constantly keep.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
Prince Caspian- Very Good. Dawn Treader-Addictive, Remarkable, Excellent.
LT-1012 January 2003
Entries two and three of the series were shoved together to make them more marketable, but harder to review. Prince Caspian is the first part. It is a straightforward quickie about the fight to return Narnia to its rightful owners. My only problem is that it left out some of the book, which is rare with this series.
Acting- 1.5/2
Locations- 2/2
Script- 1/2
Visuals- 1.5/2
General- 1.5/2
Total--->7.5/10
Now part 2, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. This is the series greatest success. It is also one of my favorite movies I've seen. It is a splended trip from island to island, it is completely effective. Often frightening, and always exciting. I can't give this one enough praise, I love it. Thank you BBC and all involved!
No need to go through the list ----> 10/10
TOTAL for these two films---> 8.75/10
Acting- 1.5/2
Locations- 2/2
Script- 1/2
Visuals- 1.5/2
General- 1.5/2
Total--->7.5/10
Now part 2, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. This is the series greatest success. It is also one of my favorite movies I've seen. It is a splended trip from island to island, it is completely effective. Often frightening, and always exciting. I can't give this one enough praise, I love it. Thank you BBC and all involved!
No need to go through the list ----> 10/10
TOTAL for these two films---> 8.75/10
Horrid
Sarcyse18 May 2008
The more I watched it... The more I hated it... Somehow this feelin'... Just grows and grows..." Okay first off you know how when you watch a old British drama and you can tell it has been stage filmed? Well there have been good stage filmed productions but I happen to despise that photography.
So it was not a good sign when it started out with our fat, acting impaired, line stuttering, I mean daring trio, where shown standing in front of the painting of the dawn treaded waving their arms about and saying, "Oh it's pulling us in! It's pulling us in!" Forget about the explanatory bit before this scene, which is in the book of course. No we'll just go right to the BCC stage pool, I mean open sea, where the children splutter and yell before Caspian and his men pull them in.
There is one pearl among the swine of crappie television here. Eustace is as Annoying in the show as he was in the books. But then again, being annoying isn't so hard is it? :D
Now I know that money does not always make a good film. A film might have millions of dollars behind it but my behind could have directed a better film. But you think the BCC could have scrapped together a few more coppers or given Oliver a few less bowls of soup and made Reepeecheep and the dragon a bit more work. A bit more meaning, given the dragon realistic proportions and gotten the Muppet guys to do Reepeecheep instead of stuffing the town midget into a mouse suit. }:
I couldn't stand to watch any farther then when Caspian's men come down in plastic armor to battle Eustace. But it would have been fun to see Aslan rip Eustace out of the dragon flesh. :D
So it was not a good sign when it started out with our fat, acting impaired, line stuttering, I mean daring trio, where shown standing in front of the painting of the dawn treaded waving their arms about and saying, "Oh it's pulling us in! It's pulling us in!" Forget about the explanatory bit before this scene, which is in the book of course. No we'll just go right to the BCC stage pool, I mean open sea, where the children splutter and yell before Caspian and his men pull them in.
There is one pearl among the swine of crappie television here. Eustace is as Annoying in the show as he was in the books. But then again, being annoying isn't so hard is it? :D
Now I know that money does not always make a good film. A film might have millions of dollars behind it but my behind could have directed a better film. But you think the BCC could have scrapped together a few more coppers or given Oliver a few less bowls of soup and made Reepeecheep and the dragon a bit more work. A bit more meaning, given the dragon realistic proportions and gotten the Muppet guys to do Reepeecheep instead of stuffing the town midget into a mouse suit. }:
I couldn't stand to watch any farther then when Caspian's men come down in plastic armor to battle Eustace. But it would have been fun to see Aslan rip Eustace out of the dragon flesh. :D
A travesty
laijra7 March 2021
I think the show would look dumb on TV if they aired it today
bigasslover415 July 2005
I remember this show along with a few other live action Narnia tales. They had many other better shows back then during "kids time" on PBS. "3-2-1 contact", "wonder works", they also had a poetry show where they would tell stories while drawing pictures to them. (I can't remember the name to that one.) I think all of the narnia shows filtered out as one of the dumbest shows aired on PBS back in that time. I think I was 7 or 8 years old back when these shows aired. When watching these shows back then, I never cared or noticed the the bad film quality, it all looked real to me. Some of the scenes and the creatures in these shows scared the "smack" out of me. From the "apple II computer" special effects, to the bad make-up, it all looked real. I recently found (and thought I should restore to DVDR), some old PBS recordings on VHS. I saw old coming attraction ads of these shows for PBS, I think it was the one for "lion, which, and the wardrobe". The show was fake, I couldn't believe I was afraid of them. Other than the Narnias, PBS had a lot of good kid shows back then. Now i'ts nothing but cartoons. Maaaaan, I think thats dumb.
Misfiring adaptation
Leofwine_draca1 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This NARNIA series was one I absolutely loved as a kid, but being fair it hasn't really aged well in subsequent years; certainly not as well as contemporaneous stuff like THE BORROWERS and FIVE CHILDREN AND IT that CBBC made around the time and which are still definitive even today. THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE was quite fun but this six-part adaptation of the next two books just feels rushed and lightweight. The kids have much less to do than before other than just look on and the special effects are primitive to say the least. On the plus side, the Scilly Isle locations are lovely and there's some fun larger-than-life acting from Warwick Davis and Geoffrey Bayldon, but overall this is a bit of a misfire. For once the Hollywood versions were better...
Too short to be truly excellent
Alasdair_Wilkins8 August 2002
What is the problem with this movie?? Not the acting, which is fantastic. Not the special effects, which are quite good. Not the general feel, which manages to truly capture the spirit of Lewis's books. No, the one problem with this fairly (if not entirely, but I am a nitpicker when it comes to faithfulness) close adaptation of Lewis's classic is its length. Prince Caspian is give hardly anytime at all to unfold, and seems more of a prologue to Dawn Treader than anything else. Dawn Treader is perhaps the best adapted of the four books, as it was easily the hardest and yet done exceedingly well. However, this is unbalanced by the shortness of Prince Caspian, which is nothing if not unmemorable. For anyone who has read the books, I think most would agree that the book Prince Caspian IS a weaker entry, but still, it needed more time than this. The whole thing is rushed with so little development that people who aren't familiar with the books won't know what is going on. So, here are my ratings: Prince Caspian: 2 out of 4 stars Dawn Treader: 4 out of 4 stars Combined: 2.5 out of 4 stars
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
