![]() |
"Aslan is on the move." |
In 1950, C.S. Lewis's classic novel The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe was published. Since then Lewis's book, a child's fantasy reimagining of the story of Jesus Christ, has inspired three film adaptations. Of these three films, the 1979 Children's Television Workshop made-for-T.V. cartoon production is my favorite and also my choice for comparative analysis.
The cartoon version of the film is not very well animated. It is not so much that the film's animation is bad, rather it is simply just not close to anything that could be called “visually impressive”. However, the mediocre animation quality does not stop the greatness of the story as well as it's intensely imagined characters form completely capturing your attention. Lewis wrote The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe in a way that vividly described the characters as well as the geography of it's setting, the country of Narnia. Though the animation is not-so-great, the vividness of Lewis's world and its characters are clearly imagined on screen in 1979 film. This transference of richness can be clearly seen through the character of the reluctantly treacherous fawn, Mr. Tumnus. Upon meeting the human Lucy, Thumnas is shown speaking hushed-tone asides to himself while at the same time moving with humorous and inviting body language. Mr. Thumnus's deceitful nature is displayed to the viewer immediately through the differences in his verbal and body language. Though Lewis did not necessarily write Thumnus's introduction in this way, the film's added context feeds into greatening the books intended disposition for the Thumnus character. Though most of the cartoon adaptation flows quite closely to and in aid of the book's plot points, there are a few instances in the cartoon in which the slight drift from the Lewis original is not necessary best. For example, the scene in the 10th chapter where the children are given gifts (weapons to fight the forces of evil) by the one and only Father Christmas. In the cartoon Father Christmas never appears. His presence is mentioned, just as in the book, by the old dogfox to the White Which. In the cartoon the children still receive their gifts, but they are given to them by Alsan rather than Father Christmas. This alteration changes the entire essence of Narnia. In the book, Lewis uses Father Christmas to create a bridge between the realities of the human Earth and Narnia. "I've come at last," said he [Father Christmas]. "She has kept me out for a long time, but I have got in at last. Aslan is on the move. The Witch's magic is weakening." This bridge, created by Lewis, lost by the cartoon, is not necessary for support of the story's main points, but it helps the observer create a more vivid understanding of Narnia and its relationship to our world, thus bringing Narnia and its creatures further to life.
The cartoon adaptation of The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is a good adaptation. Though it leaves out parts of the story that are crucial to the greater understanding of the books genius, it is an adaptation that keeps true to most of the stories plot points and does so in a smartly expressive way.
Tim, an interesting, unexpected choice here. The 1979 TV movie adaptation of Lion (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079474/) tends to get completely forgotten in the wake of the glossy, big-budget adaptations coming out now. There may be some ways in which the cartoon simplicity of the 1979 adaptation does a better job of capturing Lewis' storybook simplicity, as opposed to the overwrought hyper-realism of the current films, with their Lord of the Rings envy and protracted battle scenes.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know more about why it is that you prefer the 1979 version? You don't really state your reasons, though you do offer an intriguing example of how the 1979 version neglects something important in the book, namely, Father Christmas.
(If it's Aslan who gives the children their presents in this version, isn't that rather like Christ giving Christmas presents? Odd, no?)
Did you know that this 1979 version was directed by the man who directed the early Peanuts cartoons, Bill Melendez?
In sum, an interesting choice and a promising comparison, though I'd like to hear about your reasoning.