Yes, we already had a film that didn't pander to us. That was VDT and look how it turned out. Seriously, if that was their attempt to pander to the Narnia fandom, then clearly they never bothered to even browse a Narnia fansite. It was not the Narnia fans complaining about the "darkness" of PC, it was the whiny moral police types who think an implied beheading will scar their delicate darlings for life.

I don't want to see a movie pandering to me. I want to see a good movie. I want to see the hired creative artists tell me a story the best way THEY KNOW HOW. To an extent, in reference to filmmaking, there is a visible line between good and bad and mediocre. Know that line. Understand it.

Moral of the story: Don't worry about book popularity. Don't worry about tone. Don't worry about Narnia fans (the group is so small, you needn't pander to us). Just you worry about making a good film and selling it in a way that makes the brand look enticing and exciting again. Then, if it doesn't make money, you can still say, "Well, guys, we gave it our best shot and these times are not the right times for Narnia movies."

Amen, King! I said something similar in my response to the "PC: 3 years later" thread, because I think PC is the best of the three Walden films. I want the franchise (Walden/Fox) to make a film that has artistic and moral excellence, instead of worrying about the box office or pleasing all the Narnia fans. And with VDT, I don't think they tried very hard in the latter department.

In my latest Yahoo! blog post, "Narnia 4: The Magician's Nephew or the Silver Chair?" I discussed the Flaherty interview. After posting NW's transcript, I basically argued that Walden wants to do MN next because of money, it being closest to LWW in book sales. I think if SC were nearer LWW in book sales, they’d want to do it next instead. The non-monetary reasons Flaherty gave for Walden wanting to do MN just feel like excuses to me! They want the magic back – LWW box office magic. This is why they pushed “the magic is back” in their promotion of Dawn Treader (trailers, etc).

You could almost say the same of the Pevensies. It's like Walden doesn't want to let these characters go. This was the pull in their promotion of Dawn Treader. It's also the possible pull for MN. "How do we connect this film to the Pevensies - to LWW and the other two movies?" Guess what SC lacks? Pevensies. Once again, Walden wants the magic back – LWW box office magic.

Walden is starting to seem mercenary to me. It’s like they’ve hijacked the franchise for money. The problem isn’t Disney or Fox, or even the Lewis Estate, but Walden.

Walden is starting to seem mercenary to me. It’s like they’ve hijacked the franchise for money.

I do not begrudge Walden for focusing primarily on money, if that is indeed their focus. After all, they are a business, a movie-making business, and they are the company with the most to lose (ie. going bankrupt).

Having said that, like any good business, if you want to make your product succeed, you need to make the best product you can so it sells to the public. They need to figure out from the moviegoers why LWW was so successful and why PC and VDT were not... and I just don't feel like the production as a whole is doing that. If they really believe "well the public was just too busy to see VDT" or "well VDT is the second worse selling book" then there's not much hope for improvement on the future movies.

It was not the Narnia fans complaining about the "darkness" of PC, it was the whiny moral police types who think an implied beheading will scar their delicate darlings for life.

Well put and I couldn't agree more. If more viewers actually knew the material in the book, as Flaherty mentioned in the interview, they would have realized that the filmmakers pulled back on some of the violence that is described by Lewis. And I'm fed up with those who try to lump this series into the "Christian" film genre as if they would be suitable for a fluffy Sunday school lesson. If they have no tolerance for violence, Narnia is not for them. And on second thought, they better not touch the Bible either.

There is bound to be bickering and disagreements among the companies and that's understandable. A lot of money is at stake. But when Hollywood is too overly concerned with maximizing profits, the quality of the product drops and that is what's plaguing the Narnia series. The feel of VDT and in its marketing was very self-conscious with ensuring profit and I think many viewers and critics picked up on that desperation. If Walden intends to continue, whichever book they choose, they need to try to get out of survival mode, have more confidence with their series and uphold the original charm and power of these stories.

In all honesty I don't think the films should of started out with Disney to begin with. I think if Walden got with Warner Bros, Tristar, New line Cinema or Touchstone then no matter how dark the movies would of gotten people would still go to see them.

For Pirates of the Carribbean Dead Man's Chest was the highest grossing film because the first movie was a huge success (like LWW) and got good word from everyone so that was why people saw it and because of the actors, but they were a lot who where disappointed of how much darker it got, even though the movie was successful grossing over a billion dollars the thrid movie went a little bit over $305,000,000. Who knows how much the fourth film will make but if a movie is Disney people are going to look at it as childish. This is just my opinion by the way.

Word of the mouth was that PC was going to be very dark so parents didn't want to let their children see a dark Disney film.

This is why franchises like LOTR and Harry Potter does better in box office grossings because of the production companies producing these films.

Edit: And when Fox finally got their hands on the VDT they made the film appear very childish. I still love the film but it needs to go back to the tone that LWW was and a little mixture of PC's tone as well to have people be more interested.

And I'm fed up with those who try to lump this series into the "Christian" film genre as if they would be suitable for a fluffy Sunday school lesson.

Well put Skilletdude! I agree with you, yes it has some Christian undertones, but it is not the Bible- first and foremost it is a fantasy story. And they happen to be stories with a serious side... but noone seems to get that. I wish someone would write an opinion article on this just so I could link to it on FB and dispell some of the "fuzzy misconceptions." Gee maybe I should write it and post it in the notes or something

@DJP actually Touchstone is a part of Disney... I was suprised when some articles listed Hidalgo as a Disney film, so I did some research and it's like a subdepartment/buissness type thing. They usually do the less kid freindly films rather than giving them the Disney label- PotC being the obvious exception. But this is off topic again, isn't it

@DJP actually Touchstone is a part of Disney...

Lol I know but touchstone is more mature then Disney, even though most of it is family a lot of themes are more mature with Touchstone.

Ah I see yeah... you're right about that, if it mean that we'd get a SC that was as good as Hidalgo, I'd be all for them doing it over Fox/Disney or Walden... after all Walden's the reason why they can't go PG-13 which will be hard with both SC and LB, not impossible, but hard- at least for LB

By the way why did people complain so much about PC. I was watching Tron: Legacy the other day, and it had about the same level of violence and the same tone. More importantly it had the same rating. I'm starting to think it may be more related to people's idea of Narnia being the "fuzzy kids series" (which its not) rather than about the stereotypical Disney film. I mean I didn't hear any complaints once Tron 2 was out. Suprise on here when we first heard the rating, but that was all. That's one of the few points I do agree with Flaherty on, people seem to have piture perfect images of these books, but they do get pretty serious. The whole everyone being busy at Christmas thing though- um I don't think so at least it didn't affect LWW which had the same type of schedual. That being said the BO was slow during last winter, but there was more than one problem with VDT's BO, and it wasn't all in bad timing.

I didn't know that anyone wanted to see the WW again. I thought that most people were sick of seeing her in every movie. Why would they want to make MN right now when so many people are sick of seeing her?

Because for once the WW rightfully belongs in MN. This book explains the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. It explains as well the Lantern in Lantern Waste, the reason why the Professor was so understanding in LWW to Lucy and also is a prerequisite to understanding why the Professor, himself, would be 1. Tutoring Peter for university entry 2. Owning that particular wardrobe and 3. Be included in the ensuing Seven Friends of Narnia. Furthermore, this is the only other place besides LB where we see Polly Plummer, before she, too, becomes another of the Seven Friends of Narnia.

This is unlike SC where the White Witch has no business to be and where, unless Walden is as shonky is claimed, someone else really must be cast as LOTGK. I'd really despair if Walden went down the BBC route and recast Tilda Swinton as LOTGK.

Having said that, like any good business, if you want to make your product succeed, you need to make the best product you can so it sells to the public. They need to figure out from the moviegoers why LWW was so successful and why PC and VDT were not... and I just don't feel like the production as a whole is doing that. If they really believe "well the public was just too busy to see VDT" or "well VDT is the second worse selling book" then there's not much hope for improvement on the future movies.

LWW was successful because it was done right. Disney is good at classics that are recognised classics. It pitched it to the right audience, that is to say, those in the same age group as the Pevensie children themselves. The film was released at the right time, which was December 26th in Australia, the prime box office release time there. It also commanded the kind of clout that Harry Potter and LOTR enjoyed.

Maybe that 11 to 15 year old age bracket is the right age to pitch all the Narnia movies. Pitch it above that age group and parents complain about the darkness, and pitch it at too simplistic a level, then that age group will be the ones who won't want to see it, however bad their reading age is.

Whether or not PC should have been released at a different time, VDT got the release time it wanted, but mishandled it badly. To market a film you have to remember to market it the same way as any other product, that is to say attending to the four 'P's of Product, Placement, Price and Promotion.

There might have been some sort of boycott in place locally against all things Narnian, judging by the dearth of merchandise outside of the theatre, the total lack of pre-release tickets, the abrupt scheduling of the opening night, the lack of a pre-screening, few if any posters, and the general lack of recognition by staff, not only in the cinema, itself. I got the impression that Fox was more interested in marketing Gulliver's Travels, giving it the 26th December spot it should have given to VDT for maximum results. Also, I'm not sure that the 3D effects helped much, when the latest Harry Potter offering did so well in the box office without 3D.

Tron: legacy was much better marketed and it showed, right up to when both movies were released on DVD. Banners around for Tron and none whatever for VDT. Even though the bloke who reviewed Tron: legacy was just as nasty about it as he had been the previous week about VDT. Ironic, isn't it, that for all the kudos showered on Tron: legacy, in the end, the film didn't do as well as VDT did worldwide.

Well put and I couldn't agree more. If more viewers actually knew the material in the book, as Flaherty mentioned in the interview, they would have realized that the filmmakers pulled back on some of the violence that is described by Lewis. And I'm fed up with those who try to lump this series into the "Christian" film genre as if they would be suitable for a fluffy Sunday school lesson. If they have no tolerance for violence, Narnia is not for them. And on second thought, they better not touch the Bible either

.

That is a very good point. If the points in SC are too dark for general consumption, then it would be hopeless to do HHB or LB either.

It’s like they’ve hijacked the franchise for money.

I think the problem has more to do with risk-taking.

It's easy to say "all movies exist to make money!" That's basically true, and yet I think most of the good ones begin with a creative spark somewhere (as RedLetterMedia put it). Someone getting an idea and saying "hmm...that would be interesting." ...

That's how The Lord of the Rings began for Peter Jackson. Whereas most others were saying LotR couldn't be done, Peter Jackson got an idea. He was inspired. He saw how you could make a great movie out of LotR. And he acted on the inspiration even though it meant taking some of the biggest risks in the history of cinema. New Line Cinema believed in his vision enough to film thee giant movies at once. The LotR films were successful because no one had ever seen anything like them before.

Before filming on LotR began, a fan asked PJ what excited him about the project. He said: "It gives me a chance to break new ground in the movies. Every film genre has been done well over the last 100 years, but not this type of fantasy story. If we get it right, it will be the first time. No film maker could ask for a greater challenge than that." It's hard to put into words how much more ambitious that is then what Walden seeks to do.

I really don't think the Narnia films began with a creative spark. They began with some business executives saying "LotR is a hit. The market wants fantasy!" From the beginning, the franchise was just licking up the crumbs of the LotR and HP franchises. Consequently, what we have seen so far is unique, special books being crammed into formulas.
Now, Andrew Adamson came along, and I think he was genuinely passionate and excited about the story, and that really helped a lot. He's also a pretty talented filmmaker in general. But at the end of the day, there's just no escaping the fact that the foundation of the franchise was to make some easy money off the success of LotR and HP. This is the factor that prevents the series from ever being truly great.

If PJ had tried to sell his LotR script to Walden, they would have said "Let's do just one film first and see how it goes." Then they would've asked him to cut that film down to two hours, simplify the story, cut down the violence and darkness, and add more humor. They would have wanted to make a safer movie.

Both of these courses of action would be risky: 1) Making SC next. 2) Making MN as a character-driven drama. So what will Walden do? ... Something safer: Make an action-packed fast-paced dumbed down MN film where the White Witch is basically the star.

Unfortunatly, even if the Magician's Nephew (or Silver Chair) is made perfectly, I think the film's are destined to flop or underperform.

Let's face it, the Narnia franchise has lost most of it's hype and the general public just doesnt like Narnia any more. They had potential to make a good series after LWW. But poor marketing and release dates hurt PC financially, and long waits between films hurt VotDT as well as that film sucked. The audience doesnt know what to think of it. The younger fans were put off by some of the more mature elements of PC and the older fans will avoid the series like a plague after the sickly sweet made for toddlers "Voyage of the Dawn Treader".

You know, I never thought I'd say this, but I think they should just cancel the series, wait 20 years and then remake it. The current population isnt going to see it. So I think if we wait awhile, they could bring Narnia back (and better) for a new generation who doesnt have any preconcieved notions about the franchise.

Let's face it, the Narnia franchise has lost most of it's hype and the general public just doesnt like Narnia any more.

The more accurate thing to say is the American general public has mostly lost interest, the big money-making audience. I think people nail it on the head when they say the reason for the lower financial returns is because the filmmakers don't know which age groups to focus on or what groups of people they want to reach. It's all over the place right now and that's hurting the box office. If they kept it more consistent from the start, I doubt we'd see as many problems.

What I'm not impressed with is when Walden rarely admits to making artistic or marketing mistakes, like in this interview, and instead will try to say that people were just in the holiday rush and couldn't make it. No, it's more like they chose not to make it. The marketing, what little there was of it, failed to reach them and the quality of the film wasn't good enough to create significant positive buzz among viewers. That gave the general audience little incentive to take a break from their shopping.

Fair point again, Skilletdude! But the problems with PC and VDT are also a reminder that just because a film did well the first time, it doesn't ensure success in subsequent adventures. Now, the Pirates of the Caribbean have been a runaway success, no? People went to see these well produced movies at PG 13+ and enjoyed a bit of relaxation from their everyday lives.

What do you make of the latest movie? Not to mention the extract quoted below, from this review.

A sequence set aboard a ruined ship inexplicably balanced on the edge of a cliff is inspired by the famous tipping shack sequence in Chaplin’s Gold Rush, but fails because we never really get a sense of the physics of which way the ship is tipping and why. And there’s a nice gravity-defying conceit at the Fountain of Youth that recalls the best bit in At World’s End, the ship-inverting logic for escaping from Davy Jones’ locker, and also, very slightly, the wood between the worlds in C. S. Lewis’ The Magician’s Nephew.

Now I haven't seen this movie yet, and given the savagery with which this review pans the movie, I am curious just how well it will do. Particularly as I suspect there are 5th and 6th Pirates episodes in the works. What I also think is that success is never guaranteed with a movie, however popular previous episodes were, and to tell the truth I didn't enjoy the third Pirates episode as much as I did the previous ones.

I am also curious as to why the Narnia name still gets bandied about if the previous two films have not been as successful as people would like, and also if that tendency to use Narnia books to diss other films is not also a factor in the alleged unpopularity of Narnia films.

When Unfortunatly, even if the Magician's Nephew (or Silver Chair) is made perfectly, I think the film's are destined to flop or underperform.

Let's face it, the Narnia franchise has lost most of it's hype and the general public just doesnt like Narnia any more.

Now I know there are quite a few of you who criticize the VDT product, and when it comes to the marketing, I agree. VDT was not marketed at all well. According to Josh, Narnia is not seen positively, and I suspect it is not only because of PC or VDT, or even Walden's inability to decide which age group it should direct its marketing campaign to. The fact is, that the Narnia series, being more overtly Christian than either LOTR or HP, has been in the sights of a mainly anti-Christian press and film industry for a long time.

I do agree that Walden has been naive about any hostility this particular series might generate in the press and among retailers. Just how bad was VDT really, compared to 1. Gulliver's Travels or 2. Yogi Bear? Not to mention 3. Little Fockersor Megamind, neither of which did anywhere near as well as VDT in worldwide box office takings. I am also wondering if the association with Christian films means that VDT is targeted by critics more than most? Don't forget that VDT at least broke the $400 million mark worldwide, unlike Tron: legacy, and that according to IMDb it earned $416 million dollars worldwide, easily in the same ballpark as PC's $418 million dollars worldwide.

What I'm not impressed with is when Walden rarely admits to making artistic or marketing mistakes, like in this interview, and instead will try to say that people were just in the holiday rush and couldn't make it.

Exactly, Flaherty takes no responsibility. He also says that PC's darkness came naturally from the book, even though Mark Johnson said in a much earlier interview that they intentionally darkened it to attract teens to the franchise. The right hand and the left hand . . .

He also says that PC's darkness came naturally from the book, even though Mark Johnson said in a much earlier interview that they intentionally darkened it to attract teens to the franchise. The right hand and the left hand . . .

I think both are kind of true. They saw that the PC book was darker, and decided to remain faithful to that because they thought it would attract an older audience.

In this interview, Flaherty seems to be saying, "we didn't necessarily want to make it darker, but we were stuck because of the book!" I don't believe that is really their philosophy. If they had known that staying faithful to the book in this area was going to be a turn-off for many audiences, they would not have done it. For example: In VDT, they saw that the book did not have a villain. Figuring that would be a turn-off, they decided NOT to remain faithful to that.

I think Walden has passion and good intentions... What they lack is backbone. I think they always start out wanting to be faithful to the book, but give up if that means taking a risk or they can't think of a clear-cut way to sell it. They need to either get a backbone, or hire a director who has backbone.