The Narnia books aren't very good to begin with, but I felt that the first two movies didn't just do a good job of capturing them, but easily surpassed them in entertainment value.  The same cannot be said of the third film which is a very disappointing conversion of the best book in the series, and a pretty mediocre movie overall.  That said, I would recommend it as a good movie for children since the screenplay goes out of its way to beat you over the head with values and morals (true to the books, but a little too obvious for a film).  Verdict: Skip it in theaters, but rent it if you're babysitting and need something to show the kiddies.

Horse poop. Not going to bother reading the rest of a review that opens like that.

Yeah... definitely not feeling that. The first movie was ok. It had lots of unrealized potential which is something I can appreciate (Quantum of Solace anyone?). But Prince Caspian was pretty much a snooze-fest. Granted, that wasn't the best book either, but the film was still a big disappointment.

I'm concerned about Dawn Treader, but I find it really hard to believe that it's worse off than Caspian. I guess I'll just have to check it out and keep my fingers crossed...

I beg to differ.  The NARNIA books are some of my favorite fantasy books of all time, and I personally loved THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE (2005).  If anything, I felt it recaptured the essence of Lewis' book to a tee and beyond.  The children were perfectly cast, the animals were spot-on, and the script had a solid balance between staying true to the material and adding in only when necessary.  It's the best of the three movies IMO.

I mostly liked PRINCE CASPIAN, but the book was obviously much more challenging to adapt.  The Telmarines' Spanish accents didn't bother me that much, but the castle raid scene was a bit too long.  I liked it overall, but it was obvious that they took liberties and omitted parts from the novel in places.

As for THE VOYAGE OF THE DAWN TREADER, I seriously don't understand what critics are thinking when they say that this movie is unbearable.  I consider myself a very good judge of what is good moviemaking and what isn't (The LORD OF THE RINGS and HARRY POTTER and the classic STAR WARS trilogy are always top grail quality, although the prequels to the latter are pretty iffy -- ROTS not so much, though) but I personally enjoyed every minute of VODT.  Yes, it doesn't follow the book 100%.  But unlike CASPIAN, I felt it captured the general ideas that the book introduced, and while I was a bit unsure about the green mist/seven swords subplot at first, I ended up approving of it.  I don't think it's a perfect movie by any means; there are times when the film feels rushed (an extra 30 minutes wouldn't have hurt) and there was one scene I really liked from the book that sadly didn't make it into the picture, but on the whole I really liked the film a lot.  I'd say it's somewhere between the two.

Not that I don't like the BBC TV versions or the Radio dramas; they're all great entertainments -- Lewis' tales are imperishable either way, but as far as visceral experience is concerned, the Walden Media movies definitely win out.  True, they may seem LOTR-ish in places, but Lewis and Tolkien are two different fantasy storytellers, and neither is better or worse than the other.  I like both equally.

The only Narnia book I read was The Magician's Nephew, which didn't entice me at all to continue on.  (I read later that it's probably not the best place to start.)

The first movie had its charms in the talking critters and to some extent the child cast.  It established the world of Narnia nicely and the final battle worked well as a more weighty finale.

The second movie lost that charm completely - it felt like it was all battles and adolescent prattling.  (Incidentally the scores follow suit.  I like the first one quite a bit but the second is an exercise in tedium.)

The trailer for the third movie was mediocre, which is generally a sign that the movie will be somewhat worse.  Definitely a rental, and if the critics are trashing it that only reinforces the decision.

I love the Narnia books, they are a true classic in both children's literature and fantasy literature. I thought the third film was entertaining, albeit not outstanding in any way. I honestly thought it was no less entertaining than the first two Harry Potter films (I only watched the first two). I'm sure the movie would make more sense to someone who read the book, and if you have not, then yes the movie can be confusing, and frankly the BBC production is MUCH MUCH better (despite the lack of funds and limited special effects)!

Play-it-by-numbers and safe and stale and a cast that shines despite a mediocre director, then?  Back-handed compliment if I've ever heard one.