Possessing neither the personality of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" trilogy nor the intense mythological immersion of "The Lord of the Rings," "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" nonetheless continues to offer a moderately entertaining fantasy realm, and certainly one better suited for younger children.

Not having read the C. S. Lewis books (nor managing to complete a J.R.R. Tolkien tale), I can't comment on the wild enthusiasm of the literary appeal crossover- that same mad exuberance that made the "Harry Potter" films so incredibly successful. Even so, I found both the Potter series and the Hobbits able to stand nicely on their own cinematic feet- without that oft-lamented wail: "Not as good as the book!"

To be brutally honest, "The Chronicle of Narnia" series ("Prince Caspian" is the second) is probably the least enjoyable of the above-mentioned realms, and also the least intense. On the other hand, "Narnia" is better than many other recent fantasy offerings: "The Golden Compass," "Stardust," "Bridge to Terabithia," "Lady in the Water" and a dozen or so that have come and gone with little fanfare.

Parents continue to push "Narnia" to tykes because the series is basically a morality play, lacking the suggestive debauchery of "Pirates" and the sorcery of "Rings" and "Potter," which, for various reasons, some find offensive and potentially harmful to children.

Many believe that Irish writer Lewis, a staunch Christian, has infused many elements of the New Testament into the "Narnia" series- some even relating the persona of the noble lion Aslan to that of Christ.

Yet even for non-Christian fans, which one assumes are many, since the original, "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe," has grossed $750 million worldwide, Aslan and company exhort virtue, honor and decency- not bad qualities for kids of any creed.

And so the good news: For younger children and preteens especially, "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" is an excellent adventure. The violence- while frequent- is tame by today's standards, the carnage mostly implied, the bloodletting minimal. The mythological inhabitants, including talking animals, gnomes, dwarfs, centaurs and satyrs, are generally very wellrendered (CGI or otherwise) and not too frightening for smaller kids.

"Prince Caspian" continues the tale of the Pevensie children's incredible journey. If you haven't seen the original, I don't suggest starting here, as the film is, to some degree, a continuation of the first. In "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe," Peter, Susan, Edmund and Lucy are magically transported to a fantasy world locked inside an armoire. In "Prince Caspian" they return to Narnia 500 years later (in Narnian time). The adventures are new, but they are remembered and revered in the realm, which has promised their eventual return.

"Prince Caspian" is much better than the original film- it's a deeper, richer tale. Buoyed by the phenomenal success of the original, the special effects are significantly improved, close to flawless. Much of the mythical landscape, shot in New Zealand and Central Europe, is enchanting. Director Andrew Adamson takes great pains to be sure that we fall in love with the concept of Narnia, despite the many villains that roam the land.

The biggest flaw, for me, is that the principle characters continue to be underwhelming in their roles. While Johnny Depp and crew wholeheartedly inhabit their realm, and Elijah Wood and crew inhabit theirs, the "Narnia" youngsters seem more like gawky kids in costume. I never completely embraced their reality.

Another bummer is the absence of the Ice Queen. While Tilda Swinton makes a brief appearance here, her daunting presence in the original film was a highlight.

But kids won't notice such things. Nor will the "Narnia" faithful, who will be enchanted with the improved effects, the richer story line- and with newcomer Ben Barnes as Prince Caspian, who calls on the Pevensie children to save not only his throne, but the entire realm of Narnia.