Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

jmmustchin The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian is a good sequel to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and a good adaption of the novel Prince Caspian, and overall a VERY good movie. I love it! The film has better action and is more intense than the first one. The special effects in this movie are also higher and better. The acting is splendid, as usual. And the plot of the movie is quite good. While it is rather different from the book, it is quite good in its own right. I personally think this sequel is probably AT LEAST as good as the original - perhaps better! The only reason I gave this one a slightly lower rating is because I think the scene with the hag and werewolf should have been done better, but otherwise this film is a firm winner!

connorveenstra If that sounds like an exaggeration, be rest assured that it isn't. Despite the overwhelming amount of negativity aimed towards this film by fans of the book and the original film, Prince Caspian is a worthy sequel to the first film and even an improvement on its source material.For a sequel perspective this does everything right. It raises the stakes, which gives the film a much darker edge, but in a mature way. The themes are also more mature, touching on aspects of faith, doubt, pride and revenge, which are all maturely explored without being too intense for children. The character arcs for everybody involved are excellent, unlike the first movie where they were introduced and then just kind of dropped. The acting is much better this time around and the set and costume design continue to be on point.In terms of adaptation, even though it doesn't exactly stay true to the source material, I think it improves on it. All of the Pevense children, Prince Caspian and the rest of the cast are given definable personalities, as opposed to the book characters which were just self- inserts for children. The film has a surprising amount of interesting world building jumping off from the book, with the original Kings and Queens and even Aslan falling into myth and legend in this new Narnia.I'm really sticking up for this one because I think it gets too much flack in general. With its mature themes, excellent battle scenes, flawless set design and fascinating world building, this is up there with the best of what Lord of the Rings or even Game of Thrones have to offer. Give it a chance.

zkonedog The first Narnia movie was filled with adventure and magic. This sequel (much like its novel counterpart) cannot match that level of energy or excitement, instead resulting in just a so-so film effort.For a basic plot summary, "Prince Caspian" sees the Pevensie siblings Peter (William Moseley), Edmund (Skandar Keynes), Susan (Anna Popplewell), & Lucy (Georgia Henley) once more called back into the kingdom of Narnia. This time, they arrive at a beach surrounded by ancient ruins. After a bit of searching, and some help from dwarf Trumpkin (Peter Dinklage), they discover that they are all actually in the same place they used to live...Cair Paravel. Only many hundreds of years have passed and Narnia is now ruled by the Telmarines, more specifically King Miraz (Sergio Castellitto). The Telmarines want nothing to do with the "old ways" of enchanted Narnia, and instead rule like a traditional kingdom, where trees/animals/beasts are "dumb" again. The only hope? Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes), a Telmarine himself who just happens to have an intimate understanding of (and appreciation for) those "old ways" and wants to see them restored once again.For a long time, I viewed this movie as a complete and utter disaster. "Prince Caspian" completely turned a friend of mine (who loved "Lion/Witch/Wardrobe") off from the entire series...he didn't even watch "Dawn Treader". After recently reading the novel, however, I came to realize that this movie is only as good/bad as that source material, which is middling at best. Prince Caspian is not nearly as compelling of a tale as LWW, and no amount of movie magic can make up for that.One thing I truly did like about this movie is that it takes a few chances going off the story material. For example, showing the White Witch again (which did not happen in the novel whatsoever). I was surprised when I saw this film was almost two and a half hours long (I think I might have cut it down severely to quicken the pace), but the "added" material from the book actually composes some of the most interesting stuff of the film.Overall, then, "Prince Caspian" is just an average film based on a similarly average book. Try as it might, it cannot escape that limitation.

YourFamilyExpert While I enjoyed the first film's story more (it was so clearly an allegory for The Atonement, The Resurrection, the Battle of Armageddon, and the Millennium), this one is better made, better written, and better acted. Plus, it has a healthy share of Christian symbolism itself, some rocking battle sequences (how this is only PG baffles me; the intensity of the action has PG-13 written all over it), and some of the best effects I've ever seen (the badger, in particular, is photo-real).The idea that the kids actually grew up in Narnia, then returned to their world while retaining all their knowledge and maturity intrigued me (and it makes their battle skills more believable). All that said, I still didn't find myself nearly as emotionally invested or involved in this as I was with The Lord of the Rings, the standard with which it will always, perhaps unfairly, be compared. Why Narnian humans now have Italian accents is beyond me, and some of the jokes fall flat, but all in all it was very good; better than the first in terms of storytelling, character, and filmmaking. ***1/2 (out of five).