Very interesting thought. I wasn't really impressed with the adult kings and queens at the end of the lion, the witch, and the wardrobe. But nevertheless, to me it was no loss to the film.

I am certain that the four original Pevensies should most definitely be brought back.

It's incredible to think that they are all old enough to reprise their roles in HHB and LB. Time really does fly. One of the few silver linings in having to wait so long for another Narnia film! I hope they'll be interested in returning; having them back for a sort of "reunion" would be really special and neat. I'm hopeful that they'll be able to get lots of actors and voice actors to reprise their roles for those final chapters of The Last Battle. That would be a very cool way to end the series.

I think bringing back William, Anna, Skandar and Georgie would be marvellous for both HHB and LB.

But is it possible? There was all that hoo-har about moratoriums which Walden put on the Narnian series, to preserve their own copyrighted productions. Would that affect which actors they could hire for further movies?

SC and MN aren't too bad, especially SC. But LB and HHB do have more than one or two actors who would be affected.

Back when the movie was released, I had always thought it would be cool if they re-filmed that scene in 10 years' time.

That does sound like a cool idea, I think it would be really neat if they did something like that. 10 years, yikes, has it really been that long?

I am really hoping that if HHB and LB does come out, they will bring Will, Anna, Skandar and Georgie to reprise their roles.

There was all that hoo-har about moratoriums which Walden put on the Narnian series, to preserve their own copyrighted productions. Would that affect which actors they could hire for further movies?

I'm thinking it will be possible. I should be very surprise if the actors would be affected by the companies and their copyright issues. At least in never once struck me as a possible issue arising. After all, isn't not really possible to copyright an actor and the right for him to play in certain productions and not in other productions? Or maybe I'm not well informed about how the acting/movie world works in the US

I'm thinking it will be possible. I should be very surprise if the actors would be affected by the companies and their copyright issues. At least in never once struck me as a possible issue arising. After all, isn't not really possible to copyright an actor and the right for him to play in certain productions and not in other productions? Or maybe I'm not well informed about how the acting/movie world works in the US

I'd be just at sea as yourself, since, like you, I am not a resident of US. It isn't really a matter of copyrighting the actors, or preventing, say, Liam Neeson from playing Aslan somewhere else if he want. But the roles the actors play and how they do it is another thing. Walden wanted to stop anyone else use the costuming etc for the work that hasn't been done before. The difficulty is how to do things differently from Walden without ruining the vision.

I'd like to see Tilda Swinson play Jadis in MN as well, but would she be able to do so by the time we get so far? Then Anna Popplewell would be just right to play Susan in HHB, her last real Narnia outing, unless she has some sort of explanatory outing in LB. The main sticking point is Skandar Keanes who hasn't been heard of since the end of VDT. What happened to him, I wonder?

I'm American, but don't ask me how these things work!

Wagga: I've been posting periodic updates in the Skandar Keynes thread here. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2314&p=276827#p276827

Personally, I don't see how LB would work as a movie, and even if it does, I think it would make more sense to leave Anna out, and cut out William and Skandar, too. I'm not saying they should stop being friends of Narnia, but is it completely far-fetched that the boys would have careers, university, or in Peter's case, a family, to prevent them from attending Narnia get-togethers as much as they might like? And they add nothing to the story. The first part of the book is a fantasy-medieval war story centering on the character of Tirian, but with some development of Jill and Eustace. The second part of the book is a poem/metaphysics-lecture that centers, if anything, on Lucy.

I do think that some of the Pevensies should return for HHB, but which ones? Anna is a successful TV actress, but since she only has one long scene in the book, and she's off-page for the rest, I think they should be able to manage bringing her back for just that scene. I would understand if the script-writers cut Lucy out. They easily could, but it would be nice to have Georgie back for a cameo. Skandar and Will are the tricky part. Skandar's entertainment career is on the back burner now, and he might quit altogether. Will would almost certainly be willing to come back. I think they should actually switch the characters' roles, with Edmund off fighting the giants, and with Peter accompanying his sister in an embassage to Tashbaan, rather than finding a new Edmund.

What about MN? Now your first reaction will probably be: "The Pevensies aren't in MN!" But, hold your rotten tomatoes just a moment. I personally think MN would be unworkable without a narrator, because it's so psychological. My ideal intro to MN would be Lucy bringing Eustace and Jill to visit Prof. Kirke, who, expecting them, has invited his old friend Polly. The two elders proceed to narrate the story of MN. The ending of MN has Prof. Kirke regretting that he'll never see Narnia again, and then Jill notices an indescribable change in the atmosphere, and then a flash of light or other visual effect show that a vision has appeared, and then roll credits.

In LB we find out that the vision was Tirian. I think it would make the most sense to film the 5 friends of Narnia reacting to and discussing Tirian's appearance while they're still in production for MN. The rest of LB can be filmed later. And if Jill and Eustace age between films? They can always explain that it took them a year or two to get back to Narnia, rather than a week, as it is in the book.

Lots of useful points there!
One thing about bringing back Pevensies -

In HHB they are older than in LB. The timeline shows us Susan as 26, Edmund as 24 and Lucy as 22. Peter would be 27. These were their oldest ages in Narnia just before returning home in LWW.

In LB they have re-grown up in England but not so far, and now Peter is 22, Edmund 19, Lucy 17. (Eustace and Jill 16 and still at school).
Peter is very likely to be still single and at liberty to meet up with Narnia friends.

Here is a link in the "Resources & Links" section:
http://www.narniaweb.com/resources-links/character-ages/

I used to regard the official Narnia time line as gospel (no, not literally), but a more careful examination of the books has left me inclined to take it with a grain of salt. It conflicts with canon on several points. Since it was published posthumously, we can't ignore the possibility that Lewis didn't write it at all. An equally likely explanation is that he slapped it together some time after he wrote the series, either for personal amusement or to amuse someone else, and it's not to be taken very seriously. The most likely earth-timeline I can derive, based on the books, goes like so:

1927-Peter is born
1928-Susan is born
1930-Edmund is born
Late in the year 1931-Lucy is born
Somewhere between 1934 and 1937-Jill and Eustace are born
1944, July-events of LWW
1945, Sept-events of PC
1946, summer-events of VDT
1946, Oct-events of SC
1948, April-events of LB

But I think we might be veering off topic, since the films are unlikely to stick to timelines because of the way child actors age between films.

There appears to be something you forgot about the Pevensies' ages, as per this timeline. Lucy would have been at most 8 years old in LWW. And it seems that C.S.Lewis, himself, preserved the 9 years old age for starting boarding school, which he endured, himself. Even if you made the children slightly older than that, most of the WW2 evacuations of children were carried out before and because of the 1940 Battle of Britain and the preceding bombing of London. The doodlebugs did come in 1944, but any evacuations had been finished well before that time.

The trouble is with switching roles for HHB for Edmund and Peter is that whilst Peter's HHB role can be safely left to the giants, Edmund has a bigger role in HHB than even Susan. He, accompanied by some Archenlandish & Narnian nobles, finds Shasta in the street, concocts that method of escape with help from Tumnus, and also is the one who really realises the danger to Susan, herself, as well as to the whole group in Tashbaan.

In his second part he rides to Anvard accompanied by Lucy, collecting Shasta along the way. He doesn't actually need to bring Lucy along, I'll agree, and she could be written out in favour of Susan riding to the rescue of Anvard for a second scene in the movie. But I doubt that would work as well after the wimpish way she dithers around in Tashbaan.

The doodlebugs did come in 1944, but any evacuations had been finished well before that time.

Untrue. The V-1 attacks inspired a new wave of evacuations. The very last evacuations out of London in WW2 were in Sept 1944. Also, although 9 was the minimum age for boarding school many students continued attending their neighbourhood primary schools up through age 11, and began boarding school at age 12.

The trouble is with switching roles for HHB for Edmund and Peter is that. . . Edmund has a bigger role in HHB than even Susan.

I'm not sure I understand this objection. I think that Peter/William Moseley would do an excellent job at all of those things that Edmund does in the book. If Skandar Keynes refuses to return for HHB, then I think it would be easier for Edmund to be mentioned in absentia as "off fighting giants" rather than recasting the role of Edmund.

Lucy . . . could be written out in favour of Susan riding to the rescue of Anvard for a second scene in the movie. But I doubt that would work as well after the wimpish way she dithers around in Tashbaan.

I completely agree that Susan replacing Lucy would make no sense. I wasn't suggesting that though. I was thinking that Lucy's role is a footnote to the story rather than a significant component. They could easily cut her out altogether, without replacement, if they wanted to save screen time for more important things. They wouldn't even need to mention her, people would just assume she was back at Cair Paravel with her sister.

Untrue. The V-1 attacks inspired a new wave of evacuations. The very last evacuations out of London in WW2 were in Sept 1944. Also, although 9 was the minimum age for boarding school many students continued attending their neighbourhood primary schools up through age 11, and began boarding school at age 12.

I was unaware of that. I do know they evacuated children at the beginning of the war, from my reading of WW2 history. I also got the impression that some of the previously evacuated children trickled back for one reason or another throughout the duration of the war. I'm also aware of bombing in the rest of UK during the war, in Coventry, Edinburgh etc.

I agree about your UK boarding school procedures, and also that 11 would make a better minimum age than 8 for Lucy in LWW. I was 5 when I started boarding school, so 9 was a realistic age from my point of view.

I'm not sure I understand this objection. I think that Peter/William Moseley would do an excellent job at all of those things that Edmund does in the book. If Skandar Keynes refuses to return for HHB, then I think it would be easier for Edmund to be mentioned in absentia as "off fighting giants" rather than recasting the role of Edmund.

But would Rabadash have tried to keep Peter the High King prisoner and behave quite so disgustingly in Tashbaan? Would even his followers be more polite to Peter than they would be to Edmund? They'd have to have that interview with the Tisroc and his son, whatever you do in the film, because that is the moment when Aravis hears about the proposed invasion. This is a key moment. Now in that interview, I get the impression that Rabadash thinks rather more of Peter than he does of Edmund, and considers him the real ruler of Narnia. It might change the whole complexion of the story to change around Peter and Edmund.

I was thinking that Lucy's role is a footnote to the story rather than a significant component. They could easily cut her out altogether, without replacement, if they wanted to save screen time for more important things. They wouldn't even need to mention her, people would just assume she was back at Cair Paravel with her sister.

Which would be rather wimpish for Lucy to do, to remain at Cair Paravel for no reason, whichever of her brothers rides to Anvard. You'd also have to cut out that bit where Cor describes Lucy as not like her sister Susan who is an ordinary lady.

Perhaps the simplest thing if the siege of Anvard & their collecting Shasta from southern Narnia are mentioned at all, is to have Tumnus or someone else, rather than Lucy, herself. Including a mention she has been supervising the wounded or something to back up Edmund's battle with the Giants plus provide the Anvard relief.

Both my timeline and the official timeline have problems though. In the official timeline the math doesn't work. In my timeline, the math works but the psychology is problematic.

Lucy's behavior in LWW and PC is very babyish, to the the point that it strains credulity to imagine her as a child older than 6. At the same time, in the books the events of LB take place roughly 3 years after PC, by which time Lucy is out of school, making 12 the absolute minimum age she can be in PC.