Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

fillebusen This movie sucks because Peter and Susan is not in it.I really hate my life now and I have no will to live anymore. I now have suicidal thoughts and I now cut myself and cry myself to sleep. I don't recommend this movie but the first and second is really good and if you haven't seen them yet then i don't know why you are on this page. If you want mental illness you should watch this movie.

elizabethnightingalesmith I didn't much care for the last Narnia movie, since Peter and Susan were to leave Narnia for good and for their younger siblings to 'learn' more about themselves.Honestly when I was a kid, I loved these movies, and now as I've become more in tune with my opinion I notice LOADS of flaws.One; The camera is constantly moving, which DOES give for a more action, moving and free movie. But compared to the first movie, this in comparison looks like a B class movie, there's careless mistakes, like the moving of the camera when the scene calls for a 'calm' or 'still' shot. Seriously, it looks like something that a teenager would make in the sense they don't know about anything about filming.Two; The acting was okay, it seemed forced almost in the beginning. I didn't quite believe the 'Oh i'm not pretty' cliché, fair enough, Susan is a lot prettier than Lucy, and the 'hair behind the ear' put me off Lucy all together. But seriously? Lucy's character had always been brave, naive and strong but all that had been stripped away the last movie because it had been her brothers and sister protecting her, what is she doing now? all we have is the silly teenage predicament of 'am I beautiful'.three; the graphics, and the special effects wasn't that good either. I mean if anybody watches this movie and notices the flaws in the ship, the green magic, and other 'scenic' shots. it does seem a bit fake.Further more, i'd watch this with my kids someday if they really really really liked the first movie and second movie, and it was something to shut them up so.

LoveIsAStateOfMind 1. My first feature film in 3D. Honestly don't know what the fuss is about. The 10% of the time that the 3D-ness was actually used, it was pretty cool but most of the time, it's just an excuse to charge more for the ticket. I mean the adverts that came before used more of the whole 3D effect.2. Lucy's obsession with wanting to look like Susan was a bit weird. Lucy actually ~becoming~ Susan was even weirder. Still, it meant that we had Anna Popplewell on screen. (Has anyone read the book more recently than me and can tell me how close the film followed the book and what was changed? Was this entire storyline completely invented?) 3. The picture Lucy had of Susan and Peter in the photo frame in her room was one of my favourite behind-the-scenes photos 4. Cousin Eustace was really annoying for the first half of the film but then *spoiler* happened and he was less annoying.5. Caspian/Edmund vying for power .... total throw back to Caspian/Peter having the same fight. Edmund has a serious inferiority complex. He was much less annoying in this film though.6. Tilda Swinton always freaks me out.7. Reepicheep and Aslan ..... SO FREAKING CUTE. Yes, I know that they are animated characters but I want to hug them.8. Most importantly, WHAT THE FLIPPING HELL HAPPENED TO CASPIAN'S DODGY European ACCENT?!?!?!?!? He's back to being British all of a sudden! Did they watch Prince Caspian through and realise how awful it was that they just decided to scrap it?! HAVE THEY HEARD OF CONTINUITY???!?!?!?!?! Is there an interview out there where this question is brought up? Please say there is! (ETA: Found it ....... they just realised that CS Lewis was a quintessentially English writer which is why the Telmarines became British instead of some flavour of Spanish all of a sudden?!?!?!).Anyone else feel like this film was Pirates Of The Caribbean meets The Hobbit meets Harry Potter (especially that scene in the Magician's House) with a tiny bit of Narnia thrown in for good measure? Lol. It was good, though. The CG work was amazing.

Fluke_Skywalker Nearly 40 minutes shorter than the previous two films, but feeling much longer, 'Dawn Treader' lacks anything resembling a story, compelling drama or interesting and relatable characters. There's no villain, save for "the villain within", but that aspect is handled so poorly that it often feels like watching someone play a video game using an invincibility cheat code. Speaking of video games, the special f/x look cheap and obvious, and the once lush production values also take a nosedive. The action is also dull and poorly shot/staged, with director Michael Apted (taking over for Andrew Adamson as the franchise moved from Disney to 20th Century Fox) clearly seeming out of his element and over his head.On the positive side, I guess, is that a very young Will Poulter makes for an extremely annoying Eustace, which I guess is the whole point. His character journey is handled quite poorly, especially compared to Edmund's in the first film, but it's the only one we get, so... And though your mileage may vary depending on your beliefs, 'Dawn Treader' doesn't skirt the allegorical aspects nearly as much as certainly 'Prince Caspian' did. Particularly at the end.There's really very little, if anything, to recommend here. It's dull and poorly made, connecting up with the previous two films like a Lincoln Log to a Lego.