The Peters of Narnia: BBC and Walden

[LadyEm]

Peter Pevensie:

Sir Peter Wolfsbane, High King of Narnia, Emperor of the Lone Islands, King Peter the Magnificent, etc.

BBC:
Richard Dempsey:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b306/EmilyofDreams/BBCPete2.jpg


Walden:
William Mosely:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b306/EmilyofDreams/WaldenPete.jpg


I thought it might be nice to have a bit of a comparison of the other kids, now that we have a nice long discussion for Ed.

I have to say, I am partial to the BBC Peter, because he was the first Peter I saw, and I admit as a kid I had a bit of a crush on the Richard Dempsey Peter. As you can see I have him up as my Picture for a reason.

I also really liked William Moseley's portrayal of Peter as well. I have to say they really did chose the right one for Peter's role for our latest movie.

But they did bring out very different aspects of Peter Pevensie's character. What were the good things? What were the bad things?

As with Ed, the Peter's look very different as well. Instead of blonde hair, the BBC Peter has dark hair. I know some people when first seeing the old pictures found the hair a little confusion when identifying who was who :)

And...P.S...I know we all love William, but please let's discuss the acting and not how much we love him ok?

[LadyEm]

Another two photos I couldn't post in the last one:

William:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b306/EmilyofDreams/WaldenPete2.jpg

Richard:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b306/EmilyofDreams/2ffa2420.jpg

[furcoats]

Well, I liked Richard Dempsey MUCH better than any other of the BBC children. But something was missing. I'd have to say that it was that he was too short I had a hard time believing that he was the hero. I really like the fact that Will was so tall and looked like a boy going from boyhood to manhood instead of a really short boy who acted like he was old.

[LadyEm]

I totally agree with you. I very much liked Richard's acting, but he wasn't tall enough. Actually, I think it's that Edmund was too tall - they were all the same age, except for Lucy who was a year older than the others! With Walden we've got the staggarred height which is nice. Being taller also makes William Peter have that sense of authority over him...which if it wasn't for the way Richard People held himself, you wouldn't have had that because Ed is such a strong character.

[furcoats]

I totally agree with you. I very much liked Richard's acting, but he wasn't tall enough. Actually, I think it's that Edmund was too tall - they were all the same age, except for Lucy who was a year older than the others! With Walden we've got the staggarred height which is nice. Being taller also makes William Peter have that sense of authority over him...which if it wasn't for the way Richard People held himself, you wouldn't have had that because Ed is such a strong character.

Yeah, totally. Like wasn't Susan the tallest and the all the rest were about the same? Or am I confused? But yeah, I really like the height difference in the walden one.

[Samwise Gamgee]

I sort of liked Richard a little bit but Will put a lot more tords bringing the Charater of Peter Pevense to life than Richard did. When watching Disney's Narnia, it felt like Will became Peter and really lived him, now looking a back at BBC when they were done it seemed like a tramendus Computer brake through. Now and days the new Narnia is like a tramendes Computer thing. Now Richard did do a good job as Peter but I think that Will did a lot better.

But I noticed that the Shileds of both of BBC Narnia and Walden's Narnia are all most the same Templets that went on the shield base.

[Rosalind]

I haven't seen all of the BBC one for a while, but I think Richard was a bit too young and boy-ish then, so I agree it was a bit hard to picture him as "King Peter the Magnificent, High King of Narnia" and "A deep-chested man..." but I suppose he can't really help that. ;)

[Tsukiko]

i suppose ppl are going to say 'Will' since he's cuter/hotter/ or whatever fangirly says.

YAY FOR BBC PETER!

is all i have 2 say

[Samwise Gamgee]

I picked Will because he has better acting skills than Richard[just my own opion] I am fourteen so I don't think that stuff.

[Janino_Narniafan]

i suppose ppl are going to say 'Will' since he's cuter/hotter/ or whatever fangirly says.

YAY FOR BBC PETER!

is all i have 2 say

no i dont think that. i think William did a good job. It did seem that he really became the character and it seems that the Walden Pevensies became more of a Family then BBC

[Tsukiko]

I am entitled to my OWN opinions.....

[LadyEm]

no i dont think that. i think William did a good job. It did seem that he really became the character and it seems that the Walden Pevensies became more of a Family then BBC

I agree. There are times in which BBC Pevensie family, seem like a very disjointed family. Su doesn't seem very attached, and Lucy doesn't seem to fit in.

The Walden Pevensies most definitely fit together very nicely as a family.

HOwever, individually, I did like Peter, because he had a certain bearing of a King, even despite is stature. He was consistently the wise beyond his years destined for being a King Peter.

However, he didn't have the same progression in character as Walden Peter does - you can see him developing into the High King throughout the movie.

[Susan91]

Will did better acting and he looked more like the hero. and in BBC Edmund was taller than him and that just looked weird. it's much better the way Walden did it.

[Darth Sparhawk]

Dempsey is OK, but William is the true Peter.

[Into the Wardrobe]

I grew up watching the BBC version and have both movies now...and love both. However as for the Peter's. Well, I have to say as far as the book goes that the Character portrayed in the BBC version was closer to the book. But, that isn't William or Richard's fault. It's the way the script was written.

In the Walden movie the kids were of different ages and William certainly looked more the part for Peter. He was much more suited to a battle scene and he was outfitted with much better costume designs. Andrew did bring out a progression for the character of Peter going from boyhood to manhood...but for me the progression was a bit on the slow side in some ways...either that or he had the Character of Peter lacking certain convictions. In the Walden movie Peter seemed much weaker to me in the sense that he wanted to get Ed and go home instead of take responsibility for what his family (Lucy) had been involved in and do what it would take to save Tumnus. I can see why they took the route they did and it's ok...but I think in the book and the BBC movie that Peter is stronger in conviction and it makes him more kingly. In the Walden movie Peter is led along through it. There's not a lot of "take charge" in him...and even when he does speak he isn't listened to (Orius and the rhino going after the witch when he said 'stop'). I agree that the Walden group looked like more of a family though.

The BBC movies on the whole followed the books really well most of the time. That is what will always make them stand out for me. Even with pathetic special effects they were true to the storyline. Richard may have been smaller and less agressive in battle, but the personal strength that he portrayed was a lot stronger. Again, I think it's more due to the scripts that the boys were handed and not due to their personal performances.

I think that both Richard and Will did great jobs with the scripts that they were handed. Will looks the part more, but Richard had the script better suited to the book. I'll always love the BBC version because it tells the story more like the book. I like the Walden one because it makes Narnia feel more real with the special effects. Both are good.

[Deep_Magic]

It is hard for me to choose which Peter was more convincing as Richard and Will showed us very different sides of Peter's character.
In the Walden movie we were able to experience Peter's journey from boyhood to manhood and see Peter's character grow although I didn't quite believe that he became 'High King' as he never really had the authority that Richard did in the BBC movie. Richard really did bring Peter to life from the book, although this is probably because the BBC script was much closer to the book but again I was just more convinced by Richard's acting that he really was Peter and that he would be able to take total control of Narnia when Aslan was not there. Just my opinion, but both were very good and were the best choices for the movies that they were in. :)

[Copperfox]

Interesting trivia on young Mr. Dempsey:

There was a series of British TV adaptations of the Sherlock Holmes stories, featuring Jeremy Brett as Holmes. As usually happens with Sherlock Holmes movies, these films tended to make the stories darker and more sensational than Doyle actually wrote them. In one, titled "The Last Vampire," none other than Mr. Dempsey, looking if anything _younger_ than when he played Peter Pevensie, portrayed a mentally ill youth fascinated with vampirism.


Joseph Ravitts, author of "Writing Club" fanfic "Southward the Tigers"

[Aslan son of the Emperor]

Dempsey is pretty good but I think William did a better job over all