final days forum

Welcome back 'Indiana,' but 'Prince Caspian' wins my heart

'"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," with its five-day opening expected to possibly hit $151 million according to Variety, has knocked "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" from first place at the box office. And that's too bad. "Prince Caspian" is a better movie and was worth me seeing it twice.

Truly. With every munch of buttered popcorn and Junior Mints, "Prince Caspian" captivated me. The movie bears an earnestness to depict a story with flesh-and-blood characters. Director Andrew Adamson and co-producer Doug Gresham, the stepson of C.S. Lewis, author of the Narnia series, took risks by altering Lewis' beloved story. But Adamson and Gresham made a strong film based on Lewis' story, as bloggers Carissa Smith of Christ and Pop Culture and John Mark Reynolds of The Scriptorium Daily have commented. 

The new "Indiana Jones" movie, however, is like welcoming home a favorite, world-traveling uncle who never lacks a yarn to tell. But this time, 'uncle's story possesses a been-there, done-that feel. We indulge him because we feel nostalgic and, well, he's part of the family. But really, the freshest part of "Indiana Jones" is the reinstatement of Karen Allen's character, Marion Ravenwood. Allen always belonged in the series because she deftly spars with Indiana, played by Harrison Ford. Allen's character puts hair on Indy's chest. Unfortunately, the new film limits their delightful repartee and Marion and Indiana surrender too soon.

But "Prince Caspian," though at times it mimics Peter Jackson's treatment of "The Lord of the Rings," the film bears more unexpected and satisfying turns. Where "Indiana Jones" settles into the comfortable folds of car chases, evil looters, and an artifact that mesmerizes and terrorizes, I'm still musing about aspects of "Prince Caspian." For example, why didn't Aslan show up more? Then I remember the grim lion statue first glimpsed in the Peneski's children's world -- cold, seemingly disengaged, but actually deeply embedded in their lives. The Aslan of Adamson and Gresham's movie makes me think of God's sometimes subtle, but always effective ways. Like the Pevensie children, I often run ahead of Him, only to fall back desperately into His arms.

"Prince Caspian" has had a tepid showing at the box office, but the film still makes me ponder theology in the movies -- days after I've seen it. This weekend's box office winner, "Indiana Jones," just makes me smile.

Andrew Adamson link courtesy of www.imdb.com

Doug Gresham link courtesy of www.christianitytoday.com

Karen Allen and Harrison Ford links courtesy of www.msn.com

C.S. Lewis link courtesy of the www.cslewisinstitute.org

Spider-Man, Hollywood and the devil

Spidey is getting divorced and making a deal with the devil? Gawker Media's cool new blog, io9 (self-proclaimed as "strung out on science fiction"), reports that Marvel Comics has released Amazing Spider-Man #545, which tells the tale of Spider-Man making a pact with a demon to save his Aunt May's life by ending his marriage to Mary Jane.

Many fans are outraged; they should be.

Marvel, and far too many Hollywood studios, seem wedded to the idea of self-implosion as the way to wrap-up a story franchise, revive ratings or lure fresh audiences. They convert beloved storylines into estoric non-wonders that reveal more about the struggles of the writers than the intricacies of the story itself. And that's devilish, indeed.

Case in point: I watched Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End during the Christmas holiday. I had regretted not seeing the film this summer because I enjoyed the first two installments of the pirate adventure. But the latest film featured an incoherent supernatural mush about life, death and life again that certainly wasn't Christian theology, but I don't think Blackbeard would have believed it, either... Savvy?

The film violated its own story conventions, the guideposts a reader needs to enter the "story universe" the writer creates. When story conventions are broken, they leave the audience wondering what happened to the characters and the story they once knew. As Robert McKee writes in his fantastic book, Story, "the audience knows these conventions and expects to see them fulfilled."

I also felt betrayed when Alias self-destructed. The fabulous television series concluded with a head-scratching existential ending that defied the general clarity of the previous episodes. Did the writers write themselves into a corner they could not escape? If so, the fans, not the writers, suffered the most. 

When admired stories possess a center based on convictions, violating the story's conventions is particularly vexing. An excerpted comment by NefariousNewt on the io9 blog about Spider-Man says it well:

Stan Lee's original vision is being erased and Marvel is becoming one of those mega-corporations that does what it wants and no longer cares what the die-hard fan thinks. I think this might spell the end. Spider Man has always been my favorite superhero, because he was just like me: wanting to do right, juggling the needs of his personal life and the career he has chosen, and putting himself before others day after day, all the while living on the edge of poverty, the truly anti-heroic hero. Now, I'm ashamed...