Metacritic reviews

Several shades darker in tone than the previous edition -- which, to be fair, didn't carry the burden of expectation that a sequel must bear -- the return to Narnia still casts a transporting spell.

Closer to a straight-ahead medieval battle picture than the fantastical, other-worldly journey depicted in "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe," this new entry is a bit darker, more conventional and more crisply made than its 2005 predecessor.

Overall, while not as strong in terms of plotting or character development, Prince Caspian is nevertheless a better cinematic experience than its predecessor, if only because it feels more confident and polished.

An exhilarating fantasy adventure marred only by its length and protracted climactic battle scenes.

Prince Caspian is fairly good fun, and I'm trying to decide whether it was the capable swordplay or Ben Barnes's bedroom eyes that prompted a significant shift in brand loyalty.

They may make for clunky religious parables, but the Narnia books--and so far, the movies based on them--are wonderful as stories about childhood and its loss.

In total effect, Prince Caspian feels a lot more earthbound than "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe."

Junkies for dark humor should prep for going cold turkey, despite the efforts of director Andrew Adamson to spice things up with combat and a rivalry between Caspian and Peter (good on Moseley for showing some backbone) that Lewis never imagined.

Roughly the same as the first in terms of quality and style. It delivers without much visual dynamism, and with a determined emphasis on combat. In the 1951 novel the climactic battle between the good Narnians and the bad Telmarines lasted a few pages. The film version of the same battle feels like "The Longest Day."

Exactly one minute longer than its predecessor, but it's a dragged-out exercise, with no epic scale and no spirit worth talking about.