Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures | Release Date: May 16, 2008
6.5
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 247 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
138
Mixed:
77
Negative:
32
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
grandpajoe6191Oct 2, 2011
"Prince Caspian" is simply a decent movie. It's fun like "The Chronicles of Narnia", but as every sequel does, it lacks the originality and every other components compared to the prequel film.
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
6
HyperSDec 22, 2008
As with most sequels this film suffers from a lack of originality that made the first intriguing. Sure we get to see familiar characters, but all the curiosity is gone as we know the formula already. 4 kid heroes, a few fight sequences, a As with most sequels this film suffers from a lack of originality that made the first intriguing. Sure we get to see familiar characters, but all the curiosity is gone as we know the formula already. 4 kid heroes, a few fight sequences, a few dwarfs and minotaurs, the end. No new real unique story or mystery here... no new character development, which a series like Harry Potter manages to recreate with each of its movies. I think this 2nd film was most suffering from a good villain. There really wasn't one... just a guy who made me constantly picture Cortez of Spain conquering the Aztecs every time I saw him on screen [maybe I got kind of bored]. The special effects are fine... and there was really no faults in the story... just nothing exciting [and the movie was too long]. A solid 6. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
GoldenEye16Aug 22, 2010
Better than the first but still not great. It was better because the action was better and there was more story to follow. Also, What was up with that bear? Seemed really dumb and out of place.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
ArielY.Jul 2, 2008
Okay overall, but that stupid cheesy song they play in the end scene ruins it all.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TSMay 18, 2008
Eddie Izzard's Reepicheep steals the show, although Anna Popplewell's pouty lips do rate mention. Otherwise this is awkwardly, clumsily filmed. To be fair the novel doesn't lend itself easily to filming and Adamson hasn't Eddie Izzard's Reepicheep steals the show, although Anna Popplewell's pouty lips do rate mention. Otherwise this is awkwardly, clumsily filmed. To be fair the novel doesn't lend itself easily to filming and Adamson hasn't come up with any kind of solution. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BryanH.May 29, 2008
The Chronicles of Borednia.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
CaptainS.Jun 1, 2008
Not a bad movie, per say. Just not as good as the 1st one. Still a good movie to entertain my 5 year old daughter and keep her father entertained as well. Seemed like it took forever for the movie to get anywhere (too much time explaining Not a bad movie, per say. Just not as good as the 1st one. Still a good movie to entertain my 5 year old daughter and keep her father entertained as well. Seemed like it took forever for the movie to get anywhere (too much time explaining what had happened to the Pevensie children). And what's the deal with all the Telemarine's being Spanish? After awhile, everyone in the theater was sounding like a background actor in "Zorro". I hope the next one is a little better done. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DanaMJun 9, 2008
First off I enjoyed the first Narnia movie quite a bit. I was hoping that the second movie would be a repeat performance. Unfortunately it didn't come close in enjoyment for me and my wife. When she looks at me during the movie I know First off I enjoyed the first Narnia movie quite a bit. I was hoping that the second movie would be a repeat performance. Unfortunately it didn't come close in enjoyment for me and my wife. When she looks at me during the movie I know its getting tedious. Needless to say she looked my way alot. I would say this movie was slow and plodding. The bridge building scene was straight out of Ceasar marching against the Germanic tribes way back when. And the battle scene was a dead theft from Lord of the Rings, with walking tress fighting the bad guys. Sorry, this one was a stinker, with little to offer. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
WillC.Jul 18, 2008
Great visuals and a decent set of action scenes. My main upset is that the "The Lon, WItch and the Wardrobe" followed the book in great detail. This took a drastic cuts and side bars. Susan and Peter had crossed personalities that did not Great visuals and a decent set of action scenes. My main upset is that the "The Lon, WItch and the Wardrobe" followed the book in great detail. This took a drastic cuts and side bars. Susan and Peter had crossed personalities that did not follow the previous release nor the book. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BenJul 4, 2008
Convoluted. Spends no time explaining why anything is happening, assumes the audience has read the book and knows why things are happening (Or in some cases, what should have been happening.)
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BillC.Jul 6, 2008
Maybe it was too long a stretch between this film and the first one? I found it hard to follow and understand.The dialoge was muddled half the time as well. It seemed like the special effects were either poorly done, or just not as polished Maybe it was too long a stretch between this film and the first one? I found it hard to follow and understand.The dialoge was muddled half the time as well. It seemed like the special effects were either poorly done, or just not as polished as the first film. In short , I was never able to get into this Narnia story as I was the first time. I came prepared for something the film never delivered. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JayH.Nov 29, 2008
Visually it is very impressive, the special effects are awesome, the cinematography exquisite, good costumes and art direction. But it is curiously nit very involving and it did outstay it's welcome at 149 minutes.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JohnyBMay 19, 2008
I never saw the 1st one so a couple things in the movie didn't make sense. *Spoilers* *You Have Been Warned* The entire journey that the kids go through is boiled down to a random horse ride out into the woods to find a lion who is I never saw the 1st one so a couple things in the movie didn't make sense. *Spoilers* *You Have Been Warned* The entire journey that the kids go through is boiled down to a random horse ride out into the woods to find a lion who is basically as powerful as god him self... For that reason alone this movie gets low points. Thanks for wasting my time.. btw though the graphics are super good and the action is decent so its not a total waste of time :P Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
PatrickD.May 19, 2008
I thought the movie was okay. it was very korny, but kid movies are suppossed to be korny. the thing that makes me hate the movie is the insane amount of obvious religious allusions. i dont remember the books that well since I read them when I thought the movie was okay. it was very korny, but kid movies are suppossed to be korny. the thing that makes me hate the movie is the insane amount of obvious religious allusions. i dont remember the books that well since I read them when Ii was in fourth grade. they should have seriously downplayed the religious stuff. lotr was also religious and i didnt feel like a bible was being hurtled at my face while watching that movie. lol the trees walked in this movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DanB.May 28, 2008
I just saw this movie last night. My recommendation is to wait for the dvd rental and save your theatre bucks for something with better acting and plot. That's right, the acting is outright horrible in this film. At moments when someone I just saw this movie last night. My recommendation is to wait for the dvd rental and save your theatre bucks for something with better acting and plot. That's right, the acting is outright horrible in this film. At moments when someone should look serious, they have a slight grin on their face. I am also not sold whatsoever on Peter's new gained confidence and authoritative position. I guarantee that with no acting experience, I could have made the character Peter, more convincing. Where are producer's getting their acting stock from these days? Yes, I'd like to get down Susan's pants...but that doesn't detract from her wishy washy acting performance. Prince Caspian? What a joke...talk about not having a clue how to convince the audience that he is serious about his position. The long drawn out political mismash b/w the King and his pawns is painfully boring to watch. Also, you can forget decent cgi battle sequences; they are not that exciting. To summarize, although I thoroughly enjoyed the first of the series, I refuse to follow up on any more Narianpuke that comes out in the future. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
SsheebaT.Jun 15, 2008
It was okay compared to the lion, the witch and the wardrobe but for someone seeing it for the first time, it was good. great special effects although too much detail on the battle. overall-good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
CamilleJun 17, 2008
Visually, a beautiful movie. But unfortunately for diehard fans of the books, only about half of the movie is faithful to the novel. I understand the need to deviate a little from the original stories, but this movie is so different from the Visually, a beautiful movie. But unfortunately for diehard fans of the books, only about half of the movie is faithful to the novel. I understand the need to deviate a little from the original stories, but this movie is so different from the book that I had a hard time remaining present in the movie. The thing that bothered me the most, however (besides the kiss at the end of the film; what a shameless embarrassment), were little things, true to the book and dear to the stories, that could have been thrown in without disrupting the flow of this revised version of Caspian. Those who didn't read the books will enjoy this (if they can keep up with the constantly fluctuating pace of the movie), but if you did read them, rent it, so you can turn it off without wasting the $10 on the price of the ticket and complain out loud (which you will) without being hushed by your fellow audience. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
BR.Jun 9, 2008
i was truly disappointed by this movie. The first half was pretty good, in that it was a little more serious than the first, and yet it also had several funnier moments than the first as well. It really could have become something great, but i was truly disappointed by this movie. The first half was pretty good, in that it was a little more serious than the first, and yet it also had several funnier moments than the first as well. It really could have become something great, but then in the second half, the director seemed to have taken a bad cue from Lord of The Rings and turned the entire movie into an action flick. Now, don't get me wrong, I LOVE LOTR, but this movie seemed to try to imitate it in that the entire last hour of this film was just one big battle after another, all strung together by meaningless and not thought out bits of dialog. It even seemed that they were trying to extend the movie just for time's sake, because there was even a 15 minute long scene that, though I won't spoil it, was not in the book, was utterly pointless (it showed nothing about the characters you didn't already know), and it just didn't fit the Narnia vibe at all. Overall, for every plot hole in the movie, the characters (especially Aslam) gave some nonsensical speech which, when thought about, had no rational at all, and just didn't make sense. Overall, I was thoroughly disappointed by this all-too-long movie's second half, and I thought it was a far fall from the, though not perfect, much better first film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
BradS.Jul 11, 2008
Good movie, better than the first. Plenty of action in the movie. Good amount of different creatures. Enough of a difference in the plot from the first movie to make it enjoyable. The trouble is there is zero character introductions and the Good movie, better than the first. Plenty of action in the movie. Good amount of different creatures. Enough of a difference in the plot from the first movie to make it enjoyable. The trouble is there is zero character introductions and the amount of explaining of the plot is pretty little as well. If you've seen the first movie, but haven't read the book you'll be a little lost. If you haven't seen the first movie and haven't read the book you'll be completely lost. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
TiernanS.May 15, 2008
Prior to actual screening, the trailer impressed on me that Prince Caspian borrows heavily or perhaps 'rips off' from The Lord of the Rings films, masterpieces of film technique to be sure. Not surprising, but very underwhelming. Prior to actual screening, the trailer impressed on me that Prince Caspian borrows heavily or perhaps 'rips off' from The Lord of the Rings films, masterpieces of film technique to be sure. Not surprising, but very underwhelming. Swooping vistas and flying creatures, aerial wideshots of warriors and matted battles..ect. Unfortunately, I'm not really all that enthused. What is up with the summer blockbuster trailers this year? Most of them have simply failed to impress. It's like every attempt was made to pack every CGI artifice contained in the film into a two minute capsule with no attempt to preview an actual comprehensible plot. It's not hard to achieve without dropping any spoilers. This has been going on for far too long. CGI is no longer novel, and selling hype based wholly on digital spectacle and such is all a bit numbing and ordinary now. These trailers should be convincing me that there's a film to be found somewhere in the mishmash of noisy action. Come on! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
toddMay 17, 2008
Boring and soooooo predictable. I could have forshadowed every scene. A real let down.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DerekF.May 17, 2008
Ploddingly slow and poorly acted and directed. Based upon most major newspaper reviews, I have concluded that the reviewers are paid by the production companies for favorable reviews. Dry dialogue, dryly delivered. Edited to be about 40 Ploddingly slow and poorly acted and directed. Based upon most major newspaper reviews, I have concluded that the reviewers are paid by the production companies for favorable reviews. Dry dialogue, dryly delivered. Edited to be about 40 minutes longer than necessary. CGI effects are well done, but not enough to sustain 2 and a half hours of such a tedious story. This is not what a good movie is by any measurement. I love a good family movie, fantasy, classic retelling, adventure, or even simple action movie. This movie embodies none of the above. This is commerce emulating art. I usually am not moved to comment on movies I see in the theater (which is often), but I had to make an exception for this one. Me and my 7 year old son were bored nearly to sleep. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SteveMay 24, 2008
There were things added to this movie that weren't in the book, some good, some not. Caspian's "Hamlet" issues--good. Expansion on Glozelle's and Sopespian's characters--good. Attack on Miraz' castle--not so good. There were things added to this movie that weren't in the book, some good, some not. Caspian's "Hamlet" issues--good. Expansion on Glozelle's and Sopespian's characters--good. Attack on Miraz' castle--not so good. Susan and Caspian undressing each other visually throughout the movie and locking lips at the end--CS Lewis is spinning in his grave!!! A more faithful adaptation from the book would have been more appropriate, is what I think. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DevonC.May 29, 2008
Anyway, it was an okay family/fantasy film. Not groundbreaking whatsoever, but forgettable.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
jimmytancrediMay 29, 2011
Til now is the worser of the saga, Prince Caspian it's a interessant character that lead the chapter very well, left aside, the monotonous side of the first one though. Besides that the movie keep the grace level at technique questions andTil now is the worser of the saga, Prince Caspian it's a interessant character that lead the chapter very well, left aside, the monotonous side of the first one though. Besides that the movie keep the grace level at technique questions and work very well as family movie. It might not have all the magic of the first, but at question of special effects it's much better, the characters are less understanding and the battles are epic. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
HalfwelshmanJan 2, 2012
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe wasn't in the same league as The Lord of the Rings Trilogy in terms of fantasy filmmaking, but it still had a lot going for it. Unfortunately, the sam cannot be said for PrinceThe Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe wasn't in the same league as The Lord of the Rings Trilogy in terms of fantasy filmmaking, but it still had a lot going for it. Unfortunately, the sam cannot be said for Prince Caspian. It's not a terrible film, but there are some glaring problems with it. First and foremost, the story isn't anywhere near as engaging as that of its predecessor, and this isn't entirely the fault of the filmmakers - the same is true of the books, but what is inexcusable is a distinct lack of purpose in the way in which the story is told. In The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, we knew what our heroes were trying to do, and what challenges they had to overcome - defeat the White Witch, bring summer and peace eternal back to Narnia. In Prince Caspian, it's all a lot muddier - something about foreign invaders and a Prince who's usurped by his uncle, then the Pevensie siblings return and have to restore balance...or something along those lines. The action scenes are all still extremely well executed - particularly Peter's duel with Miraz, but even these scenes lack the epic scale and excitement of the final battle in the first film. Concerning the returning cast, Georgie Henley still acts everyone else off the screen as Lucy Pevensie (though Peter Dinklage comes close to matching her as the grouchy, but soft-hearted Dwarf Trumpkin - and he had to make his performance stand out under heavy prosthetics) and Anna Popplewell's Susan Pevensie remains engaging. Even Skandar Keynes' Edmund Pevensie impresses this time round - he has grown as a character and as an actor. Unfortunately, William Moseley is just as wooden as in the last film, and rather than empathise with Peter Pevensie, the eldest, and de-facto leader of the siblings, most of the time you just want to give this bossy, overconfident and immature young man a bit of a slap. Joining Moseley in the race for most-wooden cast member is newcomer Ben Barnes, who appears to be cast as Prince Caspian simply because he looks vaguely Mediterranean. If we turn to the Telmarines, the nation of invaders who serve as this film's villains, they're a mixed bag. Most prominently, Sergio Castellitto plays King Miraz, the primary antagonist - he's not a bad actor, but a mixture of an inconsistent accent and some chronic under-development of his character lessen the impact of his performance. Compared to Tilda Swinton's captivating performance as the White Witch (who thankfully makes a brief appearance here) the Telmarines look like pantomime villains. What the film does get right is that the magical world of Narnia still looks great. The talking animals are probably even more convincing than in the last film, and have some great British vocal talent behind them (Liam Neeson as Aslan, Eddie Izzard as Reepicheep, Ken Stott as a badger). So what you have in Prince Caspian is artistic competence in abundance, and the odd standout scene and character performance. What you are lacking is depth, consistency and excitement. The Narnia series has reached a crossroads - will it ever rise to the heights of the first film, or even higher, or continue to degrade and become instantly forgettable? Will the other books even be made into films? Only time will tell. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
AlienSpaceBatsApr 9, 2013
More often than not, I was bored of what I was seeing. Do I have to see another tedious battle with senseless fantasy violence? The only moments I felt the film work was with Lucy's connection to Narnia, else the whole thing felt like it wasMore often than not, I was bored of what I was seeing. Do I have to see another tedious battle with senseless fantasy violence? The only moments I felt the film work was with Lucy's connection to Narnia, else the whole thing felt like it was trying too hard to be The Lord of the Rings. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
avatar16Dec 21, 2011
Le premier film m'avait laissé sur ma faim, de part les spectateurs ciblés (les enfants) qui ont rendu l'ensemble naïf et "gnangnan", même jusqu'à la bataille finale,Le premier film m'avait laissé sur ma faim, de part les spectateurs ciblés (les enfants) qui ont rendu l'ensemble naïf et "gnangnan", même jusqu'à la bataille finale, gâchant au passage le seul atout du film : les effets numériques. Je n'étais donc pas pressé de poursuivre la saga, mais il fallait bien qu'un jour je mis remette. Avec Le Prince Caspian, j'ai été dans un sens surpris. En autre par une certaine maturité acquise et un sens du spectacle beaucoup plus abordable et plaisant (scènes de batailles). Ce second opus garde le côté niais du premier film, il faut bien l'avouer, mais il arrive à braver le jeu de quelques acteurs et les dialogues, grâce à plus de punch, plus d'effets numériques plutôt bons et plus de maturité. De quoi assurer le divertissement au minimum! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
HMWMar 8, 2012
This movie was way too long! Almost 3 hours! I love Narnia but this movie was not true to the book and sorry to say boring. I was so looking forward to it, but I was disappointed.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
OfficialMar 8, 2014
The visuals are great, it's darker than the first, but the first one was better. It just does not seem as magical as the first one, and not as enjoyable.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
JmsbppJul 4, 2013
No se muestra como una buena secuela del éxito de la primera parte de la saga, pero aun así mantiene el encanto e imaginación que trae en general el Film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
CineAutoctonoDec 18, 2015
The sequel to the Chronicles of Narnia , was almost as exciting as the first, because the fantasy world of Narnia has been in our memory from book to film adaptation .
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
aadityamudharApr 19, 2016
As with most sequels this film suffers from a lack of originality that made the first intriguing. Sure we get to see familiar characters, but all the curiosity is gone as we know the formula already. 4 kid heroes, a few fight sequences, a fewAs with most sequels this film suffers from a lack of originality that made the first intriguing. Sure we get to see familiar characters, but all the curiosity is gone as we know the formula already. 4 kid heroes, a few fight sequences, a few dwarfs and minotaurs, the end. No new real unique story or mystery here... no new character development, which a series like Harry Potter manages to recreate with each of its movies. I think this 2nd film was most suffering from a good villain. There really wasn't one... just a guy who made me constantly picture Cortez of Spain conquering the Aztecs every time I saw him on screen [maybe I got kind of bored]. The special effects are fine... and there was really no faults in the story... just nothing exciting [and the movie was too long]. A solid 6. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews