I do not think Miraz would make any deal with witches, as he feared magical creatures.

Oh, i wasn't implying that Miraz would of put the curse on Narnia (why would he have done that to the country he was ruling at the time?) but rather perhaps that some of the disgruntled Narnians (of the like of the Hag and the Werewolf in Prince Caspian) and/or some of the disgruntled Telmarines, who may of objected to Miraz sending away the Seven Lords and to the general way he was running the country, may have conspired to put some sort of curse on Narnia, should the seven lords never return..... Or something like that at least. Like i said, the whole thing doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to me, so naturally the only explanations i can come up with sound utterly ridiculous, even to myself.

Liked most of what I read, though I'm still a little confused about the swords. Why would Telmarines have special/magical swords? I prefer starkat's theory, that the swords are needed as some sort of validation of Caspian's rule for some still hesitant Telmarines. Or perhaps validation in the eyes of people like the *Calormenes* - perhaps they had some sort of accord with the seven lords for keeping peace with Narnia, and unless Caspian brings them the swords as proof, the Calormenes will invade Narnia. Therefore the quest involves saving Narnia from an unfathomable fate, and brings in tension between Calormen and Narnia that exists in HHB and LB.

A nice theory. Certainly would remove any need for the Telmarine lords to have had any sort of special or magical swords (which we can all agree is ridiculous). Though obviously that's making the assumption that the bit about having to "undo the magic of a new witch" is entirely inaccurate.

The main problem i can forsee with both my theory and your theory though, is that for either of those to work as a story, you will need to the Dawn Treader to make it all the way back to Narnia to have any sort of resolution or climax to the story. If indeed finding the Seven Swords is now to be the critical objective of the voyage, then you couldn't just stick the end result in an epilogue at the end of the movie (i.e. "a few months later, back in Narnia..."), it has to be at the main dramatic climax of the movie.

Therefore for either theory to work, it would mean that by the time they reach the end of the world and find the last swords, they would still only be halfway to completing their objective (i.e. returning the swords to Narnia). I can't see them having the Dawn Treader sail all the way back right to where we started in order to provide the movie with an exciting conclusion to the main plotline, so therefore i would have to assume that the significance of the swords (and possibly the having to "undo the magic of some new witch") will have to be something which is related to the edge of the world, or to someone/something that they may have brought with them....

Perhaps that Bell with engravings of all Seven Lords?! Perhaps thats why it is displayed with such prominence on the deck of the Dawn Treader? Perhaps the Seven Swords interact with the bell in some significant way? Perhaps that also then links in with the "Bell Tower" set. Perhaps the "Bell from Charn" theory is not looking so ridiculous now actually (r.e. the "borrowing from other books" debate) Not that it would necessarily be from Charn, just that the concept of the bell in MN is the general plot element they are stealing from "other books" or whatever Ben Barnes' precise quote was.

Wow. I saw this article earlier this morning, and if I hadn't been tired and in class at the time I would have done a little victory dance on the spot. It is so relieving to hear that they are doing the two most important scenes in the book correctly. I was especially worried about the end scene with Aslan and Lucy and the un-dragoning of Eustace. Had the movie-making fallen into the wrong hands, both could have ended up drastically "hollywood-ized". This article has allowed me to breathe again.

Now, the thing about the seven swords is a bit of a cause for concern. To tell you the truth, I wasn't at all surprised that someone thought there would be another witch. I mean, remember PC? The White Witch was never actually summoned in the book, but they just had to put her into the movie. Oh, well. At least we have two sources that say the whole witch thing is false. I am a little hesitant about the seven swords, though. My guess is that the movie makers wanted something a little more obvious to tie everything together. I know that most Americans (I'm not sure about people from other countries) like movies that are nice and tidy and have everything fit together. They probably added this to help people feel like there was more of a purpose to the movie (don't get me wrong--I still don't like it. I'm just trying to see things from the non-Narnian nut viewpoint). I guess they felt that "finding seven lost Lords for peace of mind" just wasn't enough for the audiences. So "seven enchanted (?) swords that correspond with each of the seven Lords" is supposedly better. Whatever. As long as it's not the major plotline, I think I can swallow it.

Hey, did anyone notice that the article said the writers were going to have Eustace earn his way back from being a dragon by fighting a sea monster?

Keller says she learned that writers originally wanted Eustace, still in dragon form, to fight a sea monster and "earn" his return to human form.

Lady Galadriel, I definitely noticed. And rejoiced that somebody talked some sense into them. That crazy idea totally sounds like a typical "Hollywood epic battle" type of storyline (have you noticed I have a little something against Hollywood? ).

Ah...just saw the time. I've got homework to do and a class to get to...

Just so everyone's clear: Paul Martin is NOT saying there isn't a plot involving swords, he's saying that the quote is incorrect because it includes a witch who isn't in the movie. Basically we have two people saying there is no witch, and one saying there is. All of them seem to agree that there is a plot involving seven swords.

I'll always be a,
NL101

If

Johnson and execs from Fox and Walden did the next best thing, inviting 100 Christian leaders to a "Narnia Summit" held Feb. 16-18 in Los Angeles, where they showed clips from Dawn Treader and went through the entire script.

and if Keller still says about a witch... Let me be optimistic about this and suppose that she misunderstood something here.

See: she heard about the ENTIRE script. Tirian and Paul also heard about it. So I could say Tirian and Paul are not wrong, saying that 'there's no evidence of a new witch' (actually we can believe in what they say), and Keller must have misunderstood about the 'evil magic' thing. She must have supposed that there was a new witch due to the evil magic.

So, let's suppose there's no witch.

And now? Where did that evil magic come from?

Overall I found this to be VERY good news
I do have one minor pet-peeve:

Root added, "The worst element in Prince Caspian was when Lucy sees Aslan for the first time on her return to Narnia. In the book she exclaims, 'Aslan, you're bigger!' Aslan responds, 'I am not. But every year you grow, you will find me bigger.' In the movie, this was seriously compromised to, 'Aslan, you've grown!' Aslan replies, 'Every year you grow, so shall I.' It is a horrible compromise of Lewis and really bad theology."- Christianity Today Article

This was taken out of context, the actual book (american ed.) says:

"Aslan," said Lucy, "You're bigger."
"Than is because you're older, little one," answered he.
"Not because you are?"
"I am not. But every year you grow you will find me bigger."- C.S. Lewis

They skipped an entire line and changed what the book said... while being upset that the film crew did so in PC. When I read the book I thought that that although Aslan said he wasn't older he was still bigger. Adding that line back in it doesn't seem like they destroyed that part, personally I think that they got it just fine.

Okay now for the rest of the article... I loved what I heard. I am now convinced this movie is going to be great. I am glad that they appear to be keeping some very important scenes intact like In fact I'm beyond happy, I'm jumping up and down for joy.

I'm relieved to hear some of our greatest worries are no more, but I'd rather not judge the film before I see it, even if I'm much more confident. No matter how many videos, pictures or news we get from now on, it's the entire finished film that counts.

Ahh, yes Farsight My feelings exactly.

This review made me happy though, I want it to be a good movie

@whoever thought of the Jadis-guarding-the-knife thing: maybe it will be the LOTGK lol. And then they have a big fight at the end So the LOTGK gets revenge by kidnapping Caspian's son. That would be odd.

What about this:

(CT has since learned from Walden that the “new witch” is not in the final version of the film, but was scrapped during script discussions.)

That would be nice.

But it doesn't really matter to me what scenes they leave intact if the whole thing doesn't flow right. =/

I would like to point this out for those that have forgotten it or never saw it in the first place...

Cy: The Lady of the Green Kirtle (the witch from the Silver Chair) won’t be in this film, will she?

Ernie: She will not.

Just because she won't be in the film doesn't mean they won't mention her...

Seriously though, you are probably right.

Here's a quotation from Paul Martin:

That was privileged information, and now it’s out in front of the whole world, especially as it gives away the majority of the plot of the film, very quickly, while also being incorrect.

(Emphasis added)

He goes on to clarify:

Personally, I think it’s a terrific addition, that adds a connective tissue and sense of urgency to the quest, making it less of an arbitrary deal for the Narnians, but I also feel that it should have been saved for the screen... The article is very out of context and incorrect with the plot point. Just so you know, as it was understood by the person being quoted is not correct about a certain plot point of the film… it was a simple case of misunderstanding. There was a lot of material crammed into only a couple of days so that would be easy to do. So don’t be alarmed by the article. I commented on the article itself, to point that out.

(Again, emphasis added)

Is it a safe assumption that the incorrect "plot point" is the witch?

I'm sorry that he thinks that the 7 swords thing was the "majority of the plot of the film." I mean, I wasn't at the event, but I should like to think that the story of the book itself was the "majority of the plot of the film." I hope that everyone who has read the book already knows the "majority of the plot of the film."

I fear that this 7 swords plot may be an even bigger part of the film than just exposition...

Is it a safe assumption that the incorrect "plot point" is the witch?

The original article from ChristianityToday has been edited to include this:

"I was less than enthusiastic about the imposition of an invented quest to recover the seven swords of the seven lords to undo some evil magic of a new witch," she said. "It is a fairly innocuous addition, but as a purist I would have been happier without it." (CT has since learned from Walden that the “new witch” is not in the final version of the film, but was scrapped during script discussions.)

It is quite obvious that there will be NO witch in the film. After all, this came from Walden themselves.

I'll always be a,
NL101

What about this:

(CT has since learned from Walden that the “new witch” is not in the final version of the film, but was scrapped during script discussions.)

YAY! The news was actualized! Yes, no witch!

But I still want to know where that evil magic came from...

I am unfathomably relieved that there is no witch involved.

Now I am bubbling over with curiosity about those swords. Why in the world would they need them to save Narnia? Were they cursed and need to be retrieved for some reason?

I, too, am happy that there will be no witch.

And now that bell on board the Dawn Treader makes more sense, if the swords are such an important part of the plot. Something needs to be done about them on board the ship, so that that part of the plot is resolved before we get to the part where the children and Reepicheep leave.

This section should be the climax of the story - although there could be an epilogue with Caspian's wedding to Ramandu's daughter.

although there could be an epilogue with Caspian's wedding to Ramandu's daughter.

Ooo, I like that idea. Maybe something after the credits, like in LWW.

wait a minute I missed the part about the bells

Hooray! Eustace doesn't earn his undragoning! The two scenes mentioned were probably the scenes I was most worried about. I am very much relieved. I began to be relieved when I first read Tirian's report, and when I read the article Paul McCusker wrote, but now that I know they actually got the point...yes!!

The seven lost swords of seven lost lords..........Saying it aloud has a nice ring to it, but when I try to think of a plot line around finding the swords everything I come up with is cheesy. I am glad that it is confirmed that there is no witch, but a witch in the plotline sounds like it fits with finding seven swords. I really wish this element wasn't added. Caspian sails to find the lords because he wants to, not because he has to.

Here is a possibility in terms of the Witch.

Instead of being a good magician, the person who cursed the Dufflepuds is The Lady of the Green Kirtle (or another witch), and Lucy has to go through her evil lair to find the book to release the spell.

She gets caught by the witch, but before the witch can kill her, Aslan comes to the rescue.

Interesting theory Josh. However, I don't think we need to do anymore speculating because we now know the witch will not appear in the film.

There's still the question of how the 7 swords fit into the whole thing though. What is so special about these swords?