Absinthe & Cookies (a bit bitter, a bit sweet)

Well, it is definitely worth seeing, and except for one or two dramatisations, it is exceedingly like the book.

One point of departure is the beginning, where several minutes are devoted to the Blitz, which is not presented in the book, but it makes sense, and, I think sets up the story nicely.

If you've seen the BBC version, you'll notice that several of the parts of the film are similar shot for shot, but the CG animals are soooo much better than the silly animal costumes in the BBC version that it's ok.

The theme of Aslan as Christ is also carried through quite nicely IMO, as it is clear that the sacrifice of the innocent one redeems the sinner.

I re-read the book not long before seeing the film, and I don't recall being upset at anything while watching it.

Hope that helps.

Overall, it was quite faithful to the spirit of the books and the overall story line. A few exceptions: The movie showed the children and the beavers escaping the beavers' home through a secret tunnel barely ahead of the white witch's wolves, whereas in the book they got out well ahead of the wolves. Also, there's a scene with Edmund in the white witch's dungeon and Tumnus in the next cell. I don't remember the book having a perilous river crossing on melting ice. And at least once during the climactic battle, Peter told Edmund to take the girls back to England to protect them. I don't think that was in the book.

All of these things were added to the movie for dramatic effect, and to my way of thinking, did not take enough of a departure from the book to really bother me. And I have read the books at least a dozen times or more, so if anybody were to be a purist about them, it would be me.

The movie was very well done. Go see it. At least that's my $.02 worth.

Yes, he should go. Very loyal to the books, small changes. The animals were excellent, the kids are fairly good. So says the person who called you while still in the theater parking lot to exclaim how good it was! :)

He should see it, but, though well done, it's definitely a kids' movie.

We certainly have had a spate of motherless kids, odd custodial relative movies lately--Lemoney Snickett, 5 Children and It, Second Hand Lions (well, that wasn't SO recently), Narnia...seems to me I'm forgetting a few...

The movie was fairly faithful to the book. Even the beginning, with the blitz, was necessary to set the story up for modern readers. (The book was originally published in 1950 and no Brit would have any problem remembering why kids were being farmed out.)

The movie does skip one pertinent quote (stone table scene) and one rebuke (when Lucy gets in trouble for not helping others while Edmund is not quite recovered).

However, the movie is a remarkably faithful portrayal of the book.

The book was written for children, one child anyway, so it was always intended for a children's audience, but with adult level allegories. I don't know if those are as obvious in the movie as in the book or if they are more obvious in the books (plural). It seemed a bit less allegorical in the movie, anyway.

It's a good movie of a great book.