What are they thinking?!

So I heard through the grapevine that Andrew Lloyd Webber is writing a sequel to the Phantom of the Opera. I didn't believe it at first, but then I did some research (I love google =D). Here's what I finally came up with.


Called "Phantom: Love Never Dies", the upcoming musical is loosely based off the novel "The Phantom of Manhattan" by Frederick Forsyth. Webber hopes to release it late 2009 with simultaneous openings in London, New York, and Asia. As far as I could figure, the plot was basically thus (And, for the record, made me want to gag):

After losing Christine, the phantom flees to Coney Island, and starts his own little show business. Still mourning the lost of Christine, etc, etc.
Meanwhile, Christine has become a very famous opera singer, but Raoul has expended the family fortune, through some means or other. Thus, Christine is obliged to except a high paying gig in New York (Coney Island, to be specific). When she goes to meet her new boss, who should it be but - flash of light, crash of cords - the phantom!! Ahem. So Christine has a child and the proverbial "they" in the show are trying to figure out who the father is; Phantom or Raoul.

Ugh.

I believe I heard Katherine Jenkins is starring as Christine. Phantom is either going to be played by Gerard Butler (who was the phantom in the 2004 film adaption) or Hugh Jackman, the star of Baz Luhrmann's film Australia, who has appeared on stage in Sunset Boulevard, Oklahoma! and The Boy from Oz, for which he won Best Actor in a musical Tony Award. "They" know who will be playing phantom, but they aren't saying. *scowl*

So I'm wondering whether to laugh or to cry at the thought. What are they thinking?

Prince Caspian... Part two!

Hm, I suppose it's about time to post this, as it's been a bit since part one came out... so here it is!


Prince Caspian: A movie Review; Part Two


*BEWARE of spoilers*

Something I really enjoyed about the movie was the character of Edmund; I was grinning every time he came onto the screen! They made him funny in a way that kept him real! I was glad that they showed him more "grown up" than the last movie. He was a definitely pro on the list of pros and con's in the movie!

And now, one of the larger conflicts I had with the movie (and one that I know most of you have been waiting for me to mention): the Susan/ Caspian situation. It is said by many that it was more natural to have it than not to; and I agree, for the most part. They are close in age; she's a pretty girl; he's a good lookin' guy; they're both teens, and whatever else. It was cute-ish in the beginning, but I don't believe that it needed to amount to the kiss. It was quite unnecessary if you ask me. A warm hug would have been quite enough, in my opinion, to convey ant feeling they had.

Though, do note that I think it was fine & in character to have Susan flirting with Caspian; I just don't think it needed to be mutual. Because, before you start arguing, this ruins a concept that I very much enjoy in "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader,": The once-in-a-life-time, true-as-can-be, no-doubt-about-it, love-at-first-sight between Ramandu's daughter & Caspian. This is one of my favorite parts of the whole book.

To be fair, it can be looked at this way: Susan and Caspian didn't kiss. Susan kissed Caspian. Then, Caspian pushed her away slightly and hugged her. But still, I don't believe that it was necessary to Narnia. (I mean they hardly even talked in the book

Wow, this is much longer than I intended. Anyway, onto another subject; the biggest of all, in my mind: Aslan. I believe they down-played much of his... I don't know the word for it, but it's what makes him Aslan. For instance, when Lucy asks Aslan what would have happened if she had done otherwise than she did, in the movie, Aslan says something along the very-similar-lines of, "No, child, we are never told that," *(Which, I noted, is often how adults talk to younger children, as in "Let's go get our jammies on!" when you just mean that it's time to get into there PJ's ). Instead of implying that he did know what would have happened, and it wasn't her place to know. In the book, it's much more like, "What would have happened child? No, no one is ever told that." He's not saying that he doesn't know (because he does); just that he's not going to tell her. And overall, as I said, he just wasn't as majestic and all-knowing as he should have been. It seemed to me that he just didn't have as big a part as he should have had... I'm just rambling now, please excuse me.

Overall, the whole theme of forgiveness and redemption was downplayed, if you think about it. If I start going on about this I'm afraid that I shall go on in paragraphs again, so I shan't say more on this subject, but leave you to ponder thus.

And so I shall close. As a movie, nothing more, it was fine. As Narnia, however, it leaves a lot to be desired.

*Side note* And I must say that I'm very glad that Andrew Adamson will not be directing "Voyage of the Dawn Treader"!!! Michael Apted will be directing this one. I've seen one of his films (Amazing Grace; a must watch!!!!!) and I am quite satisfied with his work. =D Though I was upset that, in addition to a new director, a new composer is being added to the crew! I'm sure he'll do fine, but I really like Harry Gregson-Williams' work. Except, in PC, it was rather repetitive of the first movie; there wasn't much "new" stuff. Here I go again... I'll leave you in peace to not listen to my ramblings!

*Another side-note* There was much else in the movie I didn't care for, and much else that I liked. But I am sparing you! (For now... I may post another review later when I've calmed down...)

*And a Drumroll Please* ...Prince Caspian!!

Alright, here it is. I know that (those of you who know me) you've been wondering where it is. So now, I present to you:


Drum-roll Please...


Prince Caspian: A movie review.


First of all, I would like you all to note that I am probably one of the biggest self-proclaimed Narnia-Nerds that you'll ever meet. That said, there's two ways to look at the show: One is as just a movie, the other is in comparison to the book. I will try to be as fair to both sides as I can.


Where to begin.... When we went to the show for the first time (we went to the midnight opening!!), I was so busy saying things like, "Ugh, that's wrong." " THAT'S wrong." " What is up with that??!!" " Ex-cuuuuuuuuuuu-se me??" " What happened to this?" But when I watched it a second time, I was able to enjoy it more as a movie, but sadly, not necessarily as Narnia.

*SPOILER**SPOILERS**SPOILERS!!!*

One of the problems I had with the movie was how quickly it moved in some scenes, and dragged on in others. For instance, the setting up of the plot was about ten minutes total, from where the movie went straight into battle scenes, arguments, and whatever else. The night raid & the closing battle seemed to drag on for much longer than I deemed necessary.

Another thing (there's so many! I'll have to be brief. Maybe I'll split this into two parts...) The portrayal of Peter. I was rather upset by the way they changed his character. Actually, to be fair, they didn't actually change his character, they simply, caricatured certain faults. (He's rather a Gary Stu in the book...). To be blunt, they made him arrogant. Basically, "I'm right, I'm king, you're wrong, you're prince." That's how I interpreted what was going on between Caspian & Peter. The latter was trying to be king again, when it wasn't his time. Quite frankly, I was wondering what happened to, "We didn't come to take your place, you know, but to put you into it." (Prince Caspian, Chapter 12, pg 184) I suppose they did thus to make Peter more "real", and they could add some heated arguments throughout the movie


And dear Reepicheep. I was ecstatic that they made him similar in appearance as to his character in the book, but oh dear: What did they do to his character?? His personality?? All out the window for sarcasm. I loved the way Reep was always for honor and defending his people. I don't know, maybe it was his pride I found interesting. But he has always been my favorite talking animal of Narnia. (Come on girls, we know that if Reepicheep were a man in our world, we'd all want to marry him.) But in the movie they just made him darned sarcastic all the time!! It was funny the first time, but then...

As this is already longer than I had planned,I will continue in part two of this review.