MovieChat Forums > The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (1988) Discussion > Has Been Completely Undone By the New Ve...

Has Been Completely Undone By the New Version

posted 17 years ago by CalvinValjean
25 replies | jump to latest

Just to establish some personal credibility, I grew up with this miniseries and owned it. I think it's fair to say I've seen it about 25 times. I've only seen the new version twice. That said, the new one really does put this old one to shame.

Pretty much the only superior thing about this version is that, like most BBC adaptations, it is an extremely direct adaptation, putting just about every single scene and line of dialogue from the book onto the screen. How else could such a short book be stretched to a 3 hour film?

But aside from that, the new version is superior in every single way: obviously with visual fx, but also acting, music, pacing, production design. It isn't just a matter of budget; both films start with the children saying goodbye to their mom in a train station. Look how much more emotion is put into the exact same scene in the new version.

There really is no reason at all to ever see this version again except for nostalgia.

[–] ColeMercury 17 years ago

Agreed.

[–] jkeggans 17 years ago

Well of course its put to shame, millions of dollars were spend on the new one, blah blah blah...the old one is for sentinmental value, I still enjoy both. Remember the first one was MADE FOR TV. Not theaters.

[–] CalvinValjean 17 years ago

Yes, but many projects made for TV still have more emotion in them than this series does. Ever see Roots, Band of Brothers, or Jesus of Nazareth?

[–] orange_peas 17 years ago

I think you'll find that Roots, Band of Brothers and Jesus of Nazareth were all higher budget American TV productions. They had the backing of companies like HBO, which specialises in making extended TV films/mini-series. I mean, Band of Brothers had the backing of Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg, of course it was going to have a big budget and look stunning.

Unlike Narnia, which had a low BBC budget. (there's just not the same amount of money available for British productions) Plus it was made in the late 1980s when the British film and television industries were in a very poor state, there was hardly any money in them at all.

Might have a whiskey and a bath...
~Monaghfan~

[–] Raz_25 17 years ago

The Anne of Green Gables mini series was not American I don't think. Canadian right? I'm not sure, I just know that I LOVED Anne of Green Gables, and it did not have the fancy special effects. Just great acting, beautiful scenery, and a lovely adaption of the stories.

I think it's a great example of a lower budget series done extremely well.

[–] PeteRose 17 years ago

Yeah Anne was Canadian and excellent.

"I thought it was sad at first, but now, I like it..."

[–] PeteRose 17 years ago

I'd take this version any day of the week. The new one may have poured buckets of money into hideous CGI, but they completely ignored most of the story elements that made the BBC version awesome.

"I thought it was sad at first, but now, I like it..."

[–] PeteRose (2893) 6 years ago

Hey me from 11 years ago, I'm still rocking that username. I also totally agree with 19 year old me, this absolutely towers high above Disney's crapfest.

[–] MIchiganJFrogg (-35) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Das_Filme_Nerd 17 years ago

the only way that the old version has been undone by the new is that the new one has tarnished the good name of narnia. its not supposed to be all epic and whatnot. long live the bbc narnia.

All hail the teachings of the great Jess Christ.

[–] ColeMercury 17 years ago

Yes, Narnia is about fighting cartoon demons! Like, literally cartoons!

[–] simbob4000 17 years ago

I loved watching this when I was little, I remember how they used to show them on the Disney Channel quite a lot. This is what I was thinking about when I saw the new one...and the new one just doesn't live up to this in any way.

Simonpieter On The Geo-Political Climate Of The World Today: We live in a new world with a global day

[–] pethoc 17 years ago

I can't say I agree much with MeatballsMarlowe's opinion. Indeed, I agree the new movie "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe" does outdo the BBC version in some respects (particularly in graphics & the costuming department...and to an extent the acting is better), the BBC one certainly shouldn't be put away so easily for one main reason - it's more faithful to the book than the recent movie, and for this reason (which is a very significant reason) I would not agree with MeatballsMarlowe's comment that "there really is no reason at all to ever see this version again except nostalgia."

It would seem to me that MM perhaps hasn't read the book and I would strongly encourage him/her to do so.

[–] DoctorStrangelove 16 years ago

I dunno... I saw this awful version long before the new film came out, and long after reading the books (multiple times).

Yikes. I say, this one undid itself.

The Astronaut Farmer - 6/10

Spamalopes!

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] floydthebarber 16 years ago

Hear hear, brownish.

[–] corazonbandido55 16 years ago

I have to agree that the 2005 "Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe" has severely put the 1988 BBC LWW in its place. It has prevailed on many perspectives. The most obvious difference is the amount of money invested into it. But also I personally feel that the acting and casting was more properly executed in the 2005 LWW. With the BBC Narnia series Lucy was too old, and Peter too young. Lucy/Susan and Edmund/Peter seemed to be the same age, despite their supposed age difference. The White Witch also appeared to overact, which destroyed the mood of the movie and makes you realize you are watching someone acting, rather than watching an evil witch. Aslan's downfall actually wasnt his puppet style body, but his voice. It was too slow, soft and mumbly; not at all majestic or grand sounding as you would expect from a noble lion-god.

Its saving grace is its almost direct transition from the book; it is very exact, which would matter if one was a die hard purist. I dont think its totally a good thing since some parts that were written just dont flow well on screen. 2005 LWW gravitates a bit from the book, but its not much and its a change for the better.

[–] ricky_says_hi 15 years ago

the new Disney version does the opposite of what makes book-made movies less enjoyable. it adds extra stuff in instead of cutting stuff out

whose *beep* jizz is it!!!??

[–] Oddark123 10 years ago

Lol "couldn't translate to screen" is just the baby crutch film makers hide behind. Just man up and admit they wanted to change it, don't act like they couldn't just do it as is, of course they could.

However though while i'll agree the 2005 changes work, i hardly can't agree it was for the better. This is more opinion talking but as i posted elsewhere, going into that movie, i had two scenes i WANTED a chance to see done in bigger budget, and one got changed and the other got shortened. And that still leaves me very much disappointed in there changes.

Gamefaqs has a far worse population than IMDB

[–] mmka1 11 years ago

"Has Been Completely Undone By the New Version"

I am sure that you are nice person, but frankly, I find that statement needlessly judgmental and short sighted. BOTH versions are enjoyable and neither takes anything away from the other.

Marko

[–] LadyMiraculous 11 years ago

I TOTALLY agree with you Calvin. The 2005 version was the best!

Let the storm rage on, the cold never bothered me anyway...
[Formerly CosmosX9]

[–] ghost_hat 10 years ago

The newer version may be better as a big budget movie but loses most of the feel of the book series, which the old BBC versions manage to carry well. Some things about the new version are very good, but it just doesn't feel like Narnia. It feels like a Lord Of the Rings knock off.
To each their own, I'll watch the old BBC one over and over.
At least they didn't completely muck up the story like they did with Dawn Treader...

[–] dexx-26415 7 years ago

I like them both but BBC is pretty charming while the new one follows Lotr style too much

[–] pferreira86 7 years ago

The Disney films are a disaster compared to the BBC versions.