Interview: Hollywood Jesus with Douglas Gresham

Gresham: Sailing Through Troubled Waters

The third film in The Chronicles of Narnia franchise, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, is about to hit theaters. It's been an interesting ride thus far for this film, and I recently had a chance to chat with Executive Producer Douglas Gresham—who as you may know, also happens to be the stepson of C.S. Lewis—about the interesting journey the Dawn Treader has taken to get to the big screen.

Me: It seems like Dawn Treader is a pivotal film so far as the future of the franchise goes. How do you feel about that? Is there a lot riding on this film so far as what happens next?

DG: Yes, of course, but it's no different from the others. I mean Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe, when we did the first one, we knew that we wouldn't be doing a second one unless we had a success on our hands, and the public were very generous and supported us majestically on that movie. Then we knew with Prince Caspian that we wouldn't be doing a third one unless we had a success on our hands, and of course Prince Caspian did very well at the box office despite some of the things that have been said about it. We took four hundred and twenty, I think, million dollars, which isn't bad; it makes it a blockbuster hit. So of course, whether we make the fourth one depends on how the public supports us with Voyage of the Dawn Treader. So you know, take your friends, take your friends friends, take your enemies too—you're supposed to love them as well, you know—and take everyone and go and see the movie if you want another Narnia film to be made.

Me: It's been an interesting voyage for The Voyage of the Dawn Treader so far as actually getting to the screen, especially with the changing of distribution companies. Do have any thoughts on how that went down and why that change was made?

DG: Yeah, well, you know it's interesting, I think the enemy has finally woken up to what we're doing here and the fact that we're doing some good in the world and trying to stop us because this movie was, in various ways, attacked more than the other two put together. We had all kinds of stuff going on with this movie. We had people who were losing loved ones, we had marriages exploding all over the place, you know all sorts of attacks on people's personal lives were going on while we were shooting and making the movie and so forth. It's been a hard one, it's been a tough one to make for all kinds of reason. Our distributor house dropping out, you know, at the last minute didn't help, of course. But, I have to say there was a queue of other studios sort of waiting to pick up the reins. Whatever it was that stimulated that decision, I think the other studios saw it somewhat as a foolish step to take because they were all ready to jump in. Of course we went with Fox, who I've always wanted to work with, by the way. They're a great company. So that's where we are today, and we got a beautiful and exciting and very moving and humorous movie for everyone to look at.

Me: You know, Dawn Treader is one of my favorite books...

DG: Mmm, mine too.

Me: I know a lot of people prefer The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, but Dawn Treader was always the one that captured my imagination the most. When I heard about what was happening with the budget of this movie, all the wrangling of how much the budget would be so on and so forth, I was thinking that of all the movies, it seemed to me that this was one that would require a lot of big-budget special effects and location shoots. How did that all work out with figuring out the budget and how that would fit with a story that's so expansive as the Dawn Treader goes on its journey?

DG: Well, we had some really good fortune there. We managed to capture probably one of the most experienced directors in the world in Michael Apted. Michael is a guy who knows in his head, he puts a vision in his head of what he wants to see go up on the screen, every single shot, then he shoots it. So we don't have this long extended shooting process which wastes time and money, which happens sometimes. But Michael is extremely experienced and we had a wonderful DP as well, director of photography, in Dante Spinotti, who's an absolutely genius. So putting the team together, I mean Michael had a good team. We have a great team. In Australia we had a terrific setup with crews and so forth, they were wonderful. We managed to build some of the best sets we've ever built; we did it economically. We were blessed in our crew and blessed in our top people on this movie despite all the difficulties we had in other areas and things going wrong and so on. What I think we've wound up with, to be honest with you, is a movie with more dollars actually on the screen then we may have had in Prince Caspian for example. It's a very interesting process the way movies are put together. We've got a very rich movie in terms of visuals: it's a beautiful movie to look at, it's a lovely looking movie. Then again there's a huge amount of action, there's a lot of humor, and an awful lot of interesting stuff going on in this movie. It's exciting, there's lots of action and stuff going on, you know. It's wound up, I think, being on the top level, well of three, it's probably right up there with Lion/Witch. They're all beautiful movies in their own way, but there is something special about this film.

Me: As a fan of the book, I have to ask: how do you go through the process of making sure fans of the book are going to be happy with what they see on screen? And let's face it, that can be tough. The avid fans of the book are never happy.

DG: You have to remember, I am the worst Narnia purist in all the world. If anybody changes a comma in a text I jump up and down and scream and bite the rug, you know. So for me, all the changes we have to make to translate from a verbal, print medium into a visual medium just drive me up a wall, and I fight tooth and nail to get things back to what Jack wrote and so on. I do have to learn, and have had to learn, the importance and the necessity of some changes being made in various way. And some of the changes in this particular movie are there for very good reasons and one just has to accept it. Of course, what we do is we all sit around the table and argue lots. I argue my side they, they argue theirs. Eventually of course we come to compromise; you know, I haven't shot anybody yet, so I think I'm doing all right.

Me: Well, that's good. It's nice to know we have someone like you on the side of the avid fans of the book who want it kept as close to the book as possible because that's the way they love it.

DG: (laughs) I don't always win, remember.

Me: It's still nice to have an advocate helping us out. Well, thank you very much for your time, Mr. Gresham.

DG: Thank you indeed

Interview: Is Voyage C.S. Lewis' Vision?

Is Voyage C.S. Lewis' Vision?

David Roark

C.S. Lewis' stepson, Douglas Gresham, discusses the integrity of the new film.

Douglas Gresham knew C.S. Lewis as more than just a great author and apologist. He knew him as a father. Gresham was adopted and raised by Lewis when his mother, Joy Davidman, married Lewis in 1956. Gresham went on to develop a deep bond with the man he knew as Jack, and their relationship inspired in him a dream to someday make the Chronicles of Narnia books into movies.

Now, more than 40 years later, Gresham is in the throes of making that dream a reality. As the producer of the Narnia franchise, Gresham is working with Walden Media and 20th Century Fox to release the third film, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which comes out today. It's his role to advocate for Lewis' original intent while trying to straddle the inevitable compromise of adapting literature to film.

Some people—critics and audiences alike—have expressed disappointment with the films, questioning whether they have successfully represented Lewis' vision. We talked to Gresham about translating these beloved works for the screen and his thoughts on how faith and art intersect in the works of Lewis.

How did C.S. Lewis’ faith impact his work, specifically the Narnia series?

Well, I think Jack’s faith impacted his work in the sense that it’s quite discernible to those of us who have committed our lives to Christ. The Holy Spirit of God really was the author of the works; Jack was the co-author through which they came, particularly the Narnia Chronicles. He made no secret of the fact that the ideas and the stories themselves just floated through his head, and he recorded them. So, I think it’s pretty obvious when you read the Narnia Chronicles that this man had a very close connection with the Author of all things.

How have you tried to bring the faith that’s so entrenched in the book series into the movies?

What I really concentrate on in the films is to make sure it’s what Jack said in the books that goes into the movies. I try to make sure we stay as close to the original books as is possible. Of course, it’s quite a tough job to adapt a book into a movie. The two mediums are so different from each other. So we have to wind our way through the various pitfalls in adapting. The important thing to me is to keep the messages of Jack incorporated in the films, and I think we’ve succeeded in doing that so far.

So the messages haven’t been compromised?

I don’t think we’ve compromised any of the messages in the movies we’ve so far made or the one we’re making now for that matter. I think, in some ways, the reverse has happened. The essential messages of The Lion, the Witch and the WardrobePrince Caspian have shone through very strongly. Some people, some Christians indeed, have told me they shine through in the movies even more strongly than in the books. and

How does that work with the studio and directors? Do you have disagreements?

All the time—fortunately, the directors I’ve worked with are very open to discussing things at length. We work as a team, and it’s a good team. We do have disagreements, of course. I see things in different ways sometimes, but we always come to some sort of a compromise in the end, which works for both parties. Sometimes, certainly, it’s been hard work. It’s been heartbreaking work at times, where I really felt strongly about something, and I haven’t been able to get my message across. But it’s a team, and I’m blessed to have had some really good teams working with me.

When have you had to make a compromise?

Sometimes we compromise on the detail of how things are actually represented on screen, but I don’t think anything really desperately important has ever been lost. I have to go through the book and decide what is essential to go into the screenplay and what doesn’t matter so much. It’s always, for me, the deep theological meanings Jack wrote that I think are essential. The stuff like language usage in 1940s England as opposed to now, as far I’m concerned, isn’t so vital. But all in all, I think if you’ve seen the first two movies, then you’d probably agree we did a pretty good job at getting Jack’s message across.

So you are satisfied with the first two movies?

Yes, very much so. Everybody is in love with The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe because of the story itself. Prince Caspian was a much more difficult story to adapt to the screen, because, basically, the book is all about the kids who get into Narnia. They meet a dwarf. They rescue a dwarf. They all sit down around a campfire. He tells them a long story about somebody they’ve never met. They go for a walk in the woods, and then there’s a battle. Now, that doesn’t make a good movie. We had to bring other things in and make some action happen and so forth. But I think the essential messages that are in Prince Caspian come forth extremely well in the film. I’m very happy with it.

Is that why Prince Caspian wasn’t as critically successful?

Well, I think the critics liked it well enough, but I think there are a lot of reasons why it didn’t succeed in terms of finances. One of the main ones, of course, is, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe has the greatest story ever told anywhere in the history of man, and Prince Caspian doesn’t. But don’t forget, Prince Caspian was a highly successful movie. It grossed over $400 million in the box office, and that’s a blockbuster. The problem is, of course, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was such a standout film—it’s such a standout book—that you can’t really compare the two.

Does critical reception matter to you?

Not a great deal because I know how critics work; I used to be one. There are critics who make it a point of their work to say something nasty about whatever they’re criticizing, and that’s a shame. We’ve had some great reviews; we’ve had some bad reviews. I don’t really read reviews anymore, as [much as] I can possibly help. What matters to me is what people feel about it, what the audiences feel about it. I’ve had some wonderful emails from audience members all around the world on both of those movies. For example, someone who watched Prince Caspian said: “Thank you so much for making that film. My 17-year-old son saw the movie and suddenly committed his life to Christ.” And that is magnificent.

What would Lewis think about all this?

Jack always had his worries about the thought of anyone filming the Narnia Chronicles because he thought it would have to be done by the old-fashioned cartoon animation, and he never wanted Aslan presented as cartoon character. I can quite understand why. But I think if he looked at the Aslan we’ve put on the screen, he would be absolutely thrilled. And I certainly think he would understand and enjoy the changes we made to Prince Caspian. I sincerely hope so; otherwise, I’ve just wasted the last 15 years of my life.

What do you ultimately want to accomplish through the movies?

I want to accomplish the same thing Jack did when he wrote the books. The idea being that when you read the Narnia Chronicles, you should be able to get to know Aslan very well throughout the seven books. If that happens, as it should happen and does happen, you’ll then know his new name, his different name here in this world as a result of having known him as Aslan in Narnia. That’s also what I want to accomplish with the movies: to know Aslan there, so that you can know him better here.

An extended version of this article appears in the new issue of RELEVANT magazine, which you can subscribe to by clicking here.

Movie Review: Relevant Magazine - Voyage of the Dawn Treader

The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

Andrew Welch

Another disappointing entry in the Chronicles of Narnia film series.

Andrew Adamson had never made a live-action film before he stepped behind the camera to make the first two films in The Chronicles of Narnia, and it showed. The acting was mediocre, the visuals were colorful but flat, and Narnia felt about as big as Central Park. For the third installment in the series, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, there's a new director—Michael Apted, who has a significant number of movies under his belt. But the reasonable expectation that a more experienced artist might be able to redeem a so-so franchise proves unfounded. Almost nothing about this picture is an improvement, except for a sense that Lewis' fantastical land might actually take more than a few days to explore. Otherwise, it's just more of the same.



The movie's flaws aren't just isolated to the acting or the visuals, though. Like its predecessors, it exhibits a mild impatience with its own source material. On the surface, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader prides itself on bringing Lewis' magical story and insightful theology to life for the world to admire. I can't get past the feeling, though, that what we're really watching is a child who desperately wants to steal attention away from his older, more impressive cousin, The Lord of the Rings. The Narnia stories are children’s literature. They are short, packed with meaning and derive much of their beauty from their simplicity. Yet the filmmakers behind the series seem intent on trying to steal Peter Jackson's thunder by adding in more action than necessary and borrowing from other sources to “improve” certain plot points.



Just take a moment to consider the plot of Lewis' book. Lucy and Edmund, the youngest of the Pevensie siblings, have been sent to live out the rest of World War II with their bratty cousin, Eustace Scrubb. They're understandably miserable. Then, in a moment that defies all logic, the children are pulled inside a painting of a ship at sea and find that they've landed smack-dab in the middle of Narnia. There, they find that Caspian, who was upgraded from a prince to a king in their last adventure, is looking for seven lords who went missing back when his evil uncle stole the throne. The heroes travel from island to island, encountering danger, excitement and the missing lords as they go. Eventually they disembark on a distant land where they discover three of the men they're looking for locked in a deep sleep. The only way to break the spell is for the heroes to travel to the end of the world and leave one of their party behind.



The filmmakers get much of this right, but the rest is hopelessly muddled. Instead of just looking for the seven lords, Caspian is tasked with finding their swords, which—for some reason—have magical powers when brought together in one place. On top of that, the heroes have promised to discover the mystery behind an eerie green fog that causes people to disappear. And did I mention they also have to destroy a black, wispy island inhabited by a sea serpent?



I don't know whether we have screenwriter Christopher Markus to thank for these changes or Douglas Gresham, the movie’s producer and Lewis’ stepson, but it's all too much. This is exactly what I’m talking about when I say the Narnia series is acting too grown-up for its own good. Instead of embracing the simple plot of the book they're adapting, they try to make the story feel more complex. But the changes they've made for this big screen production only contribute to its confused sense of itself. The movie doesn’t know what it wants to be or where it wants to go, so it goes nowhere, and it goes there with as much bluster as it can.



There are two notable aspects of the movie that do deserve praise though. One is the addition of Simon Pegg to the cast. He replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep, the swashbuckling mouse. His passion for life and unshakable faith in Aslan perfectly capture the light-hearted yet absolutely serious spirit of Lewis' work, and Pegg makes us feel this using just his voice. Actors Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes and Ben Barnes—as Lucy, Edmund and Caspian, respectively—feel stilted by comparison. Will Poulter is good as Eustace, but it's hard to get over his voice, which makes him sound like James Cagney on helium.



The second thing I admire is that the film includes Aslan's admonition to Lucy to look for him in her own world. “But there I have another name,” he tells her. “You must learn to know me by that name.” If the rest of the movie seems to drown out Lewis with its noise, here he's allowed to shine as brightly as the sun gleaming off the ocean waves. This is pure Lewis, without the extra bells and whistles, and the lines, as voiced by Liam Neeson, have enormous power. If only the rest of the movie came as close to hitting the mark.

Andrew Welch writes about movies for RELEVANT and lives in Texas.

Movie Review: Where's the Dawn in 'The Dawn Treader'?

December 13, 2010

Where's the Dawn in 'The Dawn Treader'?

New Narnia film overlooks one of the book's main themes, falls short on others

by Mark Moring

CT film critic Steven D. Greydanus, writing for The National Catholic Register, clearly articulates a number of the problems with The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, which opened to a weak $24.5 million over the weekend -- a much weaker opening than for The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe ($65.6 million) and for Prince Caspian ($55 million).

Analysts and studio heads will come up with all sorts of theories for the weak opening, but certainly one of the reasons is that the film got all sorts of things wrong, when compared to the book. Greydanus does a nice job in describing the challenges of converting a beloved book to the big screen, that it rarely can be a perfect adaptation, and that some changes are inevitable. That's well enough, but some of the changes are head-scratchers -- starting with the title itself.

The Dawn Treader is supposed to be sailing always east, toward the world's edge, the eternal dawn, toward Aslan's country. But the film completely overlooks that. Greydanus asked two key people about the that -- Walden Media president Micheal Flaherty and co-producer Douglas Gresham. Flaherty understood and acknowledged the validity of Greydanus's point; Gresham blew it off.

"Narnia has an interesting geography: The world is flat," Flaherty said. "And there is something beckoning about the utter east. That would have been a good shot. … That’s an interesting point.” But Gresham, C. S. Lewis's stepson who calls himself the "Narnia police" to make sure the films get the main things right, said, “I don’t think that’s the least bit important, to be honest. That they sail eastward, in Narnia? A flat world, theoretically? I don’t think it is, no.”

Read the rest of Steven's insights here. He voices all of my own concerns about the film, but much more articulately than I ever could.

Visual Review with Spiritual Connections

Movie Review: Hollywood Jesus - Better the Second (and Third) Time

Chronicles of Narnia, The: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010) | Review

Better the Second (and Third) Time

Mark Sommer

"The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." Proverbs 18:17 (NIV)

In my "first impressions" review of The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, I expressed regret that I knew to much about the film before I saw the pre-screening. These past

three weeks have been one of turmoil inside myself as I debated how well I liked the movie. Talking to a couple experts on C S Lewis has helped my thinking. Will Vaus, who wrote The Hidden Story of Narnia, said in my interview with him (a few days before I saw the preview) that he tries "to enjoy each movie for what it is." His thoughts on Douglas Gresham (who he knows personally) and his role as Executive Producer were insightful.

I think a lot of people don't understand the process of movie making, and what it takes to translate a book into a film. Nor can they understand or appreciate what's involved for somebody who is managing a literary estate, and trying to make sure that these movies remain true to the original books. I think Doug Gresham is in a difficult position. I think he has taken a wise position in that he has to sign off on script bef

ore they can go ahead, and he's involved in the whole production process by being a co-producer. But there's a lot of give and take in that process. At a certain point he has to decide, "Am I going to say, 'no,' to this?" and thus not have a movie made at all. Or, "do we come up with a compromise and keep moving ahead?" He wants the movies to be true to the books, but he wants to keep moving ahead with these movies.

I have come to appreciate Gresham's role, and the positive part he plays in the films, more and more over the past few weeks. (For more on this, see Douglas Gresham on Policing Narnia with the provided links, and Yo Snyder's

interview with Gresham: Sailing Through Troubled Waters.)

I also have appreciated the insight of Inside Narnia author Devin Brown. In my interview with him this past week, he commented that "everyone has their favorite part that they wish made it in the movie." For those who are fans of the books, "our first love will always have to be" the books. So it's important to realize that it would be impossible to incorporate everything from the books into the movie. Even the Focus on the Family Radio Theatre version (whose creators were dedicated to making the series "the most faithful rendition" ever) made changes adapting the books.

So, when I went to see the movie again (both in 2-D and 3-D) this weekend, I was determined, as I had told Dr. Brown, to "to sit back and relax and enjoy what's there instead of trying to pick out what's not." What a difference. The second and third looks have me hooked—I am enthralled.

What struck me first about the movie is the attention to detail. Eustace's house was especially well done—from Eustace's room filled with dry, dusty books and jarred or pinned bugs; to Lucy's guest room with the worn-out furniture and the mirror splattered with black dots from age (also a great way to picture Lucy's thoughts about herself). The cinematography is also splendid—from the way shots are set up, to the fabulous use of lighting. And the special effects are even better than in Prince Caspian (although I'm still not crazy about 3-D).

I have heard some critics complain about the acting by the principal players. I wonder if they saw a different movie than I. Skandar Keynes (Edmund) and Ben Barnes (Caspian) were solid, and Georgie Henley has improved dramatically (pun intended; both meanings fit) as she has grown with her part. Newcomer Will Poulter makes an excellent Eustace, often stealing the scenes with his natural "straight man" comedic sense.

I found the script actually to be the best of the series. Yes, there is that irritating (and hokey) bit about the seven swords* and the "green mist," but other than that, the progression shows a great balance between tension and release; the character arcs (especially Lucy and Eustace) are well developed, and the interjected humor is much better than anything in the other two films. People were actually laughing out loud in the theaters I attended. I also enjoyed the developing friendship between Eustace and Reepicheep—something those struggling with their relationship with some obnoxious stinker that has been brought into their life should take to heart.

Most of all, the movie captures the overall spirit of C S Lewis's book. The themes of temptation, courage, and responsibility shine though, even if they do have a bit different nuance than the way Lewis wrote about them. Lewis and Narnia experts will realize that the temptations the characters face are not exactly the same in the movie as in the book. I could write a long article on this (perhaps some day I will), but take, for example, the temptation of Lucy. In the movie, Lucy is tempted to say the beautification spell because she wants to be like Susan. Her It's a Wonderful Life moment is well conceived and should hopefully hit home with many young girls struggling through adolescence. However, the message in the book is a bit different. Lucy does not want to be like Susan, but better than she. The temptation is not about not wanting to be herself, but wanting other people to view her favorably—and as more beautiful than any other woman in the world.

If Walden Media had gone the direction the book takes, the reference to Helen of Troy and "the face that launched a thousand ships" would probably have been lost to most young girls watching the film. I, for one, am glad that they "updated" this particular temptation to something that adolescents will probably be able to relate to better.

At Ramadu's Island, King Caspian tells Lilliandil (the name Douglas Gresham gave to Ramandu's daughter, who is also the Blue Star in the movie) that he hopes to see her again. At the end of the movie, Eustace asks Aslan if he will be coming back to Narnia. Aslan replies that Narnia may have need of him again. Many Narnia fans are hoping that Caspian will see Lilliandil again so that their son Prince Rilian will appear in a next movie—The Silver Chair. Whether Eustace will make it back and appear in a fourth movie depends much on how well Dawn Treader does this first week at the box office. So, please go see it! If you have already seen it and are still deciding how well you like it, give it a second chance; "sit back and relax and enjoy what's there instead of trying to pick out what's not."

It is so easy to become a Eustace, who sarcastically says as he drudges along on Dragon Island something like: "Oh, sure. Follow the imaginary Blue Star to the Island of Raman-doo-doo and place on the table of the talking lion the four steak knives of the seven lords." Eustace doesn't like the plot any more than many heart-broken fans out there. I understand. As we have taken this ride over the past year and a half since filming began (the rumors date back even longer), we have often wondered and fumed over what those filmmakers have been doing to "our book." Well, guess what? They haven't taken it away from us; we can always pick it up and read it whenever we want. So, I have decided to enjoy both the movie and the book for what they are. Both have merit, I believe. The book will always be my first love, but I have decided I can love the movie, too.

*The seven swords may not be in the book, but I think they illustrate a lesson that we can all learn. The spell could not be broken until the seven swords were laid at Aslan's Table. There is a conversation where Caspian talks about Edmund giving up his sword. He had to in order to break the spell. So Caspian gives him Peter's sword—the one Peter had entrusted to Caspian. Devin Brown tells us in Inside The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (p. 218) that Lewis once wrote that when we make first things first, God also gives us the second things. Edmund is willing to give up his sword to accomplish a first thing (overcome evil), and is given his brother's sword instead.

It is also interesting to note that many commentators see Aslan's Table as an allusion to the Eucharist (also known as the Lord's Table). Paul told the Corinthians, in his first letter to them, that because they were abusing the Lord's Table, many had "fallen asleep" (1 Corinthians 11). While "sleep" for Paul was apparently a euphemism for death, Lewis takes the idea and makes it literal.

The fault of the lords who became the sleepers was similar to one of the faults of the Corinthians, who were still quarreling among themselves when Paul wrote another letter to them (2 Corinthians 10:4). We must learn to lay down our swords—to quit our petty arguments—if we are to "break the spell" of evil and participate in the fellowship of that Table.

Movie Review: Christianity Today on VDT

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

This passable adaptation disappointingly lacks the awe and wonder of the book.

Russ Breimeier | posted 12/09/2010 02:09PM

Normally by the third movie of any series—like the Chronicles of Narnia—audiences have a pretty good idea of what to expect. But there's still an air of nervous uncertainty hovering around The Voyage of The Dawn Treader.

Part of it stems from the under-performance of 2008's Prince Caspian at the box office, compared to the runaway success of 2006's The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The movie series has since changed hands from Disney to Fox, and though previous director Andrew Adamson remains onboard as a producer, he has passed the directing reins to an agnostic, Michael Apted (Amazing Grace). With both previous films, fans have nitpicked about whether the movies have remained true to C. S. Lewis's books.

Such are the challenges of big screen adaptations, and the Narnia series is no exception, especially with its Christian themes and nuances. But Voyage would seem a better fit for a movie treatment than the comparably dull and straightforward plot of Caspian. Call this one a step in the right direction, but a mixed bag nonetheless.

Ben Barnes as Caspian, Skandar Keynes as Edmund

Returning to Narnia are the two youngest Pevensie children from the previous movies, Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund (Skandar Keynes). Like the Harry Potter movies, it's a pleasure to see these child actors grow with their characters. They're front and center with cousin Eustace (Will Poulter), an insufferable brat who does nothing but whine and complain both in the real world and in Narnia. He's about to learn some life-changing lessons the hard way. [See our interview with Poulter.]

The trio finds itself at sea with Lucy and Edmund's old friends King Caspian (Ben Barnes) and the warrior-mouse Reepicheep (voiced by Simon Pegg) on the royal ship The Dawn Treader. Their quest: To explore the eastern ocean in search of seven exiled Lords of Narnia and perhaps sail to the end of the world where the homeland of Aslan is said to be found. Along the way they'll encounter many trials and dangers—slave traders, invisible creatures, cursed treasure, a sea monster … and wait, a malevolent green mist?

The storytelling changes from the book come early on, but not all of them are bad. For all its many strengths, Lewis' Voyage is very episodic—perfect for bedtime stories, but lacking the strong narrative needed to bridge a blockbuster adventure. The filmmakers have shuffled the various island adventures around, shortening some while extending others. For example, the Dufflepuds "appear" much sooner and amount to little more than a cameo, while the dragon storyline arrives later and remains for considerably longer—and quite differently—than in the book.

Will Poulter as Eustace, with the brave mouse Reepicheep

And then there's that pesky green mist, which steals its victims away to Dark Island, where our darkest nightmares come to life. I just wish the sequence wasn't so reminiscent of Ghostbusters' Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.

Fans may balk at these changes, but they do help create a better flow on the big screen. The climax is stronger as a result, and many scenes from the book remain intact. It's at least a more interesting movie than Prince Caspian.

But it lacks a sense of the awe and wonder that marked Wardrobe. This time, Lucy and Edmund return to Narnia with some surprise but precious little wonder, and since Eustace hates Narnia on sight, he ends up being a poor entry point for us. It all feels more on autopilot after two movies.

Lucy (Georgie Henley) has a talk with Aslan

The bigger problem is the script, which relies on predictable dialogue and fantasy contrivances. The Dufflepuds played to mystery and laughs for at least two chapters in the book. Here they're barely a footnote (no pun intended) worth mentioning. Worse, their master Coriakin has zero charisma, existing only to deliver some clunky exposition about defeating the evil mist by finding the seven swords of the seven Lords and laying them at the table of Aslan. Why? To set a goal for the movie, I guess.

The same could be said of the scene at Aslan's table, where Caspian finds a new romantic interest in the form of a living star. It's all discussed and revealed with the interest of a third-rate fairy-tale. Not that Lewis' original story delved much deeper, but the Voyage movie often barrels along as if it has no time for character development or more intelligent plotting. The focus is primarily on the big swashbuckling climax at Dark Island, as if it can't arrive there quick enough. If only filmmakers had taken 15 minutes more to better explore the sights, wonders, and characters of Narnia, we might have a better movie.

It's still certainly watchable with its "what happens next?" quest. The effects are good, though I'd add that the 3-D version adds nothing to the film. It's entertaining enough for its target audience, even if grown-up kids (like me) cry foul over the details.

Eustace, as a dragon, is comforted by Reep

The Christian ideas are more prominent in this film, playing up the theme of overcoming temptation—Lucy's subplot concerning self-esteem is greatly amplified and generally effective. Eustace's beloved scene of redemption—his "undragoning," as Narnia fans often call it—has been considerably shortened, but it might not have played as well on the big screen as it did in the book. There's something to be said for the altered plot allowing Eustace more time to come to a place of repentance before his restoration, and there are nods to the book in a later exchange in the movie. But the moment of his transformation whisks by so quickly, it's almost a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene. It makes for a cool special effect, but lacks the gravity and meaning made so clear by Lewis's pen. But Aslan remains a strong Christ figure, particularly in the closing scenes when he mentions "his other name" in our world.

These themes seemed to resonate with the primarily Christian audience I viewed it with; a post-screening discussion confirmed that. But there are bound to be disgruntled fans, and both perspectives have a point. The film is merely okay at best, and that's disappointing. With such strong source material and the future of the franchise uncertain, this fairly good Voyage should have been much better.

For more articles and resources about this movie, see our Voyage of the Dawn Treader special section.

Interview with Ben Barnes - King Caspian

Interview: Christianity Today with Will Poulter

And He Almost Deserved It

London's Will Poulter was born to play Eustace Scrubb, the bratty young boy in 'Voyage of the Dawn Treader,' opening this week.

Mark Moring | posted 12/07/2010 03:37AM

Will Poulter is the best thing about The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, the third in the Chronicles of Narnia films, opening worldwide this week.

With his wild eyebrows, exaggerated expressions, and grating tone of voice, Poulter is brilliant in the role of a character described in the book's opening sentence like this: "There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it."

Poulter as Eustace, with Reepicheep the mouse

There was another boy called William Jack Poulter, and he pretty much deserves to play the role—and not just because his middle name is the same as Narnia author C. S. Lewis's nickname. Poulter had already proven himself adept at playing a brat, as Lee Carter in the 2008 cult classic Son of Rambow. (Meanwhile, Lewis scholar Devin Brown has written about the similarities between Eustace and his own creator.)

We recently chatted with Poulter, 17, about Dawn Treader and his memorable character, a boy who undergoes quite a transformation. Due to his selfishness, snobbery, and greed, Eustace literally turns into a dragon (in the book and the film), only to later regret the way he's been acting. When he tries to peel off his dragon skin, he finds that he can't do it alone. Only Aslan the Great Lion—a Christ figure—can tear off his dragon skin and restore him to being a normal, albeit quite changed, boy again. (In the book, the scene is depicted beautifully and movingly, divine redemption quite evident; in the film, unfortunately, the scene gets short shrift.)

When did you first read the Narnia books?

My mom read The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe to me when I was about seven, and I've read them all since then. These books are kind of like a rite of passage for young children, kind of ingrained in so many people's childhood, especially in Britain. I've read them again recently for character research and to understand the role a bit better.

And I think a lot of people love the fact that they've been converted into films. When I saw the first film [LWW in 2005, when he was 12], I loved it. But at that time, if you told me that I was going to be in this film, I would have thought you were crazy.

So when you read Dawn Treader as a boy, you meet this kid named Eustace and you're thinking …

What a jerk.

And now here you are playing that jerk.

Absolutely! Yeah, I know, pretty crazy. That's everyone's reaction to Eustace the first time they meet him. He is exactly that, a complete jerk, a real brat, but he was really fun to play. But after a while, I just kind of felt bad playing that side of his character. I liked playing the other side to him after he transformed back into a human, because I felt so bad about being such a nasty guy on set the whole time.

Did that come naturally to you, being nasty?

Oh, I hope not! I hope I'm not too much like him.

If I were to ask your mother …

I hope she'd say no. I try my hardest not to be anything like him!

Poulter in 'Son of Rambow'

You also played a brat in Son of Rambow as well. Are you getting a reputation?

I hope not! In my next role [a British indie film set in London], I'm playing a slightly different character, almost a paradox to this one. But yeah, I need to try and get away from that brat role, or people are going to think I'm a natural brat.

You said it was fun to play both sides of Eustace. Was that a good test of your acting range?

It depends whether I've done it well. But it was cool playing two sides of him, and seeing his transformation—developing from his nasty character to this relatively nice character at the end. I hope I have shown two very different assets of his personality.

When Eustace turns into a dragon in the story, what does that represent?

I think it's symbolic of the fact that he falls into temptation, and that he hasn't really had the strength to battle that. And transforming back into a human at the hands of Aslan is Eustace being redeemed for what he's done. That's quite a significant feature in the book which obviously relates to some of the other themes in the book.

Eustace in his dragon phase, with Reep

Did you understand that when you first read it as younger kid?

I don't think I did quite understand it as much. I think the greatest thing that hit me then was the fact that Narnia was kind of a parallel universe, a magical world that you could escape into. It was actually the escapism that made the greatest impression on me. But now, looking at it from a more analytical perspective, I do recognize those themes more and more.

Why can't Eustace tear off his own skin? Why does he need Aslan to do that?

I think it's because he can't be the one responsible for redeeming himself. It needs to be done by a superior being. When we look to be redeemed and forgiven for what we've done, we can't do that to ourselves. We really do have to look to others for that, and I think that's what happens with Eustace and Aslan.

How would you describe Eustace after the un-dragoning, when he becomes a boy again?

I think he's feeling guilty. In the book, he offers an apology to Edmund for the way he was. In the film, he apologizes to Caspian and Lucy as well. It's certainly a feeling of guilt, but it's a sense of reformation. He is so very sorry for what he's done, and he's a lot more sensitive to the needs of others. I think that's something that Reepicheep helps to bring out of him.

Poulter met the Queen (shaking hands with Skandar Keynes, who plays Edmund) at the London premiere

He also becomes more brave.

Yes, absolutely. And that's something he learns from Reepicheep, who is a very brave, valiant character. Prior to that, Eustace was a sort of coward, so it's nice to see that he demonstrated some more brave behavior.

Would you have rather played a more noble character like High King Peter or Prince Caspian? Or was this just the right role for you?

I've been very lucky to be involved to any degree, because it is such a prestigious project and they are such fantastic folks. So I don't feel like I can be choosy! I did feel a little guilty and upset about being such a horrible character the whole time. But I really enjoyed it too. I felt grateful to be able to play two sides to him as well—playing the more noble part after he'd been transformed.

For more articles and resources about this movie, see our Voyage of the Dawn Treader special section.

Interview: Christianity Today with Doug Gresham

The Narnia Policeman

Douglas Gresham, C. S. Lewis's stepson and co-producer of the Narnia movies, is the keeper of his stepfather's flame.

Mark Moring | posted 12/03/2010 12:24AM

When 2005's The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe—the first film in the Chronicles of Narnia series—was being filmed in Prague, the American ambassador to the Czech Republic visited the set. Producer Mark Johnson introduced the man to co-producer Douglas Gresham, the stepson of C. S. Lewis who had the task of ensuring filmmakers got everything right. He was essentially his stepfather's eyes and ears on the project.

Gresham says he fights for the 'moral messages' in the films

When the diplomat asked Johnson about Gresham's role, Johnson quipped, "Oh, he's to blame." They all had a good laugh, but Gresham knew it was absolutely true: "That just about sums it up," he says today. When Narnia fans complain about how the films—Prince Caspian released in 2008, and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader hits theaters on at midnight on December 9—have strayed from the books, Gresham is their first target.

We spoke with him recently about playing that role.

Some fans think you've allowed the filmmakers to stray too far from the books.

Well, I do my very best. I don't always win my battles, and I fight a lot of them. Some I win, some I lose, some I compromise. It's not an easy job. I'm not always diplomatic; sometimes I'm pretty blunt. Sometimes I get up people's noses and make a real nuisance of myself. But there are things I will insist on.

Like what?

It's often to do with the theological or moral messages. I'm not saying that Hollywood people want to take them out, but often they just don't see it or understand the significance. Jack [Lewis] was very conscious of the fact that in the twentieth century, Western societies had decided in their infinite stupidity to dispense with the great nineteenth century values that were so important—personal responsibility, commitment, courage, chivalry, courtesy. The Narnian Chronicles teach such things, so I fight for those fairly hard.

What have you fought for on Dawn Treader?

I'm not going to tell you, because that wouldn't be fair to the people who fought with me! But I will say this: Dawn Treader is all about what happens when you commit your life to Christ and how the Devil gets at you. It's about temptation and what you do about it.

Eustace (as dragon) and Reepicheep

There were early rumors that Eustace, after he becomes a dragon, would fight with the sea serpent.

That's not in the book.

Some folks were attracted by the idea that the dragon—Eustace—would earn his redemption by having a huge fight with the sea serpent. But I don't think that earning one's redemption is possible. It's a free gift from Jesus. So that scene is not in the movie. That was a nonnegotiable point for me. [Since this interview, CT has seen the film, and would contest Gresham's assertion that the dragon Eustace doesn't have a "huge fight with the sea serpent." Looked pretty huge from our seat.]

Filmmakers look at making a movie entirely from a filmmaker's viewpoint. I have to be both filmmaker and Narnia watchdog, and balance the two. It's not easy; it's a lot of pressure. People rely on me to do everything I can as a Narnian purist to keep these movies accurate—and to keep them Narnian. And when I make mistakes, they let me know about it. It's me who copes with the flack, but that's what I'm here for.

What's been the biggest complaint about the films?

There are people who don't believe anything should be in the movie that's not actually in the book—including set design, scripting, anything you can think of. This is on the same level, to a certain extent, as people who say you shouldn't go to McDonald's because there are no hamburgers in the Bible. People take it to extremes.

Can you give an example?

There was a rumor [before Prince Caspian released] that Caspian was going to have a huge romance with Susan. We rejected that idea early on, but it really got people worried on the Narnia fan sites. Somebody finally asked me, "What's happening here?" I said, "Look, there are important things to worry about, like global warming. I suggest you pay more attention to them than whether there's going to be a romance between Caspian and Susan." I knew there wasn't going to be a romance, but I wasn't going to say so.

Well, they did make eyes at each other, and they kissed at the end …

Look. You've got a beautiful woman and a handsome guy in an adventure together. Let's face it: They are going to make eyes at each other. And of course they kiss goodbye in the last scene, because here's this woman that Caspian's become attached to and he's never going to see her again. End of story. I don't regard that as a romance. I agree that it shouldn't have been in the movie; I think it was nonsense. But it wasn't something I was going to dig my heels in and scream and bite the carpet about.

Because it wasn't one of the bigger themes, or a theology issue?

Exactly. It did annoy a lot of Narnian purists that these two teenagers should actually be the least bit attracted to each other. I think the purists were just as out of line as the people who put that scene in, which I think was unnecessary and rather silly.

You're being diplomatic in calling them "Narnia purists." Others have called them the Narnia police.

Well, I'm the Narnia policeman.

Some are concerned that a professing agnostic, Michael Apted, directed Dawn Treader.

Gresham and director Michael Apted on the set

Why would one be concerned? When Tony Hopkins played C. S. Lewis in Shadowlands, he had just played Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs. He said, "Playing C. S. Lewis did not make me want to become a Christian anymore than playing Hannibal Lecter made me want to become a cannibal." So why shouldn't an agnostic direct this? The temptation for a Christian director would be to put his own Christian beliefs to the forefront. An agnostic is probably a good choice in that he doesn't really believe that there is a God, but he doesn't really have an antagonistic agenda either. If the man was a rabid atheist, we might have more problems.

What are your hopes for people who see Dawn Treader?

I would like them to walk out of the theater delighted with the movie they've seen, and with a deeper understanding of temptation and how to deal with it.

For more articles and resources about this movie, see our Voyage of the Dawn Treader special section.