This was actually the original plan, but it was scrapped because they weren't allowed to overwork the child actors, I believe. (Also, they wouldn't really be able to reuse sets. The books are so different from each other in regards to locations.)

It's taking so long because they have to wait until each movie is a success in order to make the next one. PC wasn't greenlit until after LWW came out. Disney bailed on VDT and that really delayed the production. And SC will be greenlit after VDT comes out, if at all, and it will take them at the bare minimum 6 months for preproduction, 6 months for filming, and 6 months for post production.

Harry Potter's advantage was that since each film is a virtually guaranteed success, they can start working on the next movie before the previous one is even released.

Sadly, they should have been able to make them every two years. Not have us fans wait so long between them.

And I am still angry at Disney for backing out. It's not like PC lost money or failed miserably at the box office. They splurged too much on some PC things and made it too long- but in no way was the movie a box office bomb.

I believe that in the end it is all about faith in a series. Disney should have shot The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe back to back with Prince Caspian. I think in retrospect, and hind sight is always 20/20, it was a pretty sure bet that the first one was going to do well. However, they didn't have enough confidence in the series. Take Lord of the Rings. They took a risk by shooting all 3 together. Suppose the first one bombed? Then they would have been in trouble, but they had enough faith in the series to stick out there necks and take the leap. Really the majority of problems go back to Disney mismanaging this franchise. Even before the The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe had opened in theaters, they had already started to sow the seeds of there own demise. The moment they decided not to release them a year apart they doomed this franchise.

If they marketed the films to stand on their own unique stories more, and less on trying to connect eacho film to each other, it wouldn't be a problem with being so long in-between films.

No one would gripe with two and a half years between films 'Prince Caspian' and 'Voyage of the Dawn Treader' but it becomes a big deal when people see 'The Chronicles of Narnia' as the biggest letters on posters/trailers. They think it's some big continuation of a story that they have no interest in catching up on and remembering.

Yeah originally they were going to release PC, VDT, and SC back-to back-to back, at one year apart as the "Caspian Trilogy", but everyone complained about PC, Disney got nervous and bailed, and we're stuck here waiting to see if SC will even get greenlit.

I agree a bit with mm1991, they should have placed more emphasis on the individual stories, rather than stringing the series together. Also I'm starting to think that releasing Wardrobe first was a mistake, they would of had a better idea of how the series would do if they started with MN, since its less famous. It also would have established for Non-book fans that the Pevensies aren't the only main characters. I think they should have released MN first, then LWW, PC, VDT, SC, HHB, LB. That would also have helped stabilizing the following before reaching the darker stories like PC, SC, and LB. But as Tarquin said, hindsight's always 20/20

I'm glad they're doing the movies in almost the way the books were published originally. Although MN would've set up a lot for the movies, LWW is more well known and was more likely to bring in the cash. I'm thankful that they HAVEN'T made these movies back-to-back but a couple years apart. glumPuddle, on his vlog, made me realize that it's better that the movies aren't so rushed, or else we might not be getting as good of a movie. If the movie makers get lucky, they might be able to make the movies slightly faster, but for now, it's a relief to be able to breath between movies. Besides, there's more room for spectualation!

It makes me sad that Narnia isn't getting as much good publicity as before I really want them to keep making the movies but they might decide to stop if the movies don't start getting more positive feedback

An interesting... and depressing article.

Not sure what my thoughts on it are, but the writer seems to have some well-thought out arguments. I was reading a PluggedIn blog post about VDT, and one of the commenters wrote about what she believes is the primary reason behind VDT's lackluster box office performance so far:

violamom said:
I don't think the weather was the reason Dawn Treader did so poorly in its first weekend...there was bad weather when LWW opened, too, and that certainly did not affect its performance. Dawn Treader is easily the best of the three in terms of the characters and their relationships, and the visuals are sumptuous without question. I can even forgive the idiotic plot changes which have earned the critics' ridicule by being clearly "slapped on" over the original plot--the eeevil green misty cousin to the smoke monster from Lost? Seven swords that glow blue when orcs are...oh, wait, wrong movie.

I believe the number one reason why we're not seeing the box office numbers this movie deserves is this: it doesn't have the marketing powerhouse of Disney behind it. Disney plastered the world with commercials and constant "cameos"/behind the scenes things/Ben Barnes Fangirl Recruiting ads, especially on the Disney Channel. Which is aimed at the kids. Who would think "this looks AWESOME...Must. Go. See." Who would then beg their parents to take them. Said parents would see the Disney logo and think, "Ooh--a family film! It's Disney! Therefore it must be good!"

I feared from the very beginning of the Walden/Fox collaboration that Dawn Treader would suffer in the marketing department...as much as I love and adore Walden and its mission, it is LOUSY at marketing (which may just have more to do with lack of funds than anything else). Some of my favorite movies of theirs are films noone ever heard of, and/or didn't see: Band Slam, The City of Ember, Amazing Grace...

Fox also has a VERY dubious record in its fantasy adaptations--anyone remember Eragon? Or infinitely worse, the travesty known as The Seeker?? (Which absolutely is the WORST possible adaptation of a gorgeous book I've ever seen. No competition anywhere.)

As far as merchandise goes, I've seen nothing except some coffee mugs and...wait for it...MOUSE PADS. (Reepicheep on a mouse pad?...oy...) Man, I can really see the kids begging for a coffee mug for Christmas.

So, despite the movie's obvious quality, both in production and in theological value, unless Narniacs everywhere flood the movie theatres in the next couple of weeks, and drag every Tom, Dick and Harry in there with them, our beloved series will not see the continuation to the big screen it deserves. And that makes our household truly sad. We will still write letters to Walden, encouraging them to persevere (real letters, not emails, that is), but unless they can make these movies without going broke, I don't know how much good it'll do. *sigh* And I so wanted to see Will Poulter in The Silver Chair...

What are your thoughts?

I think the writers of this article missed one very important reason people didn't see Dawn Treader this weekend. -One that was quite obvious to most of us in the Midwest:

A HUGE BLIZZARD!!!

I've decided that the weather is Walden/Fox's fault:
1. They had Lucy say the snow spell.
2. They used a lot of snow in the trailer.
3. They made a snowy Aslan poster.
4. They brought the White Witch back which of course means snow.

I can't speak for everyone in the U.S., but I know that people in MN were pretty much stranded for the weekend. ... My day was unexpectedly busy on Friday, so if I hadn't specifically made time to see VDT Friday night I wouldn't have been able to see it all weekend! (And it might have been wiser not to see Dawn Treader that night, since the snow was predicted to start falling around midnight, I believe.

Where I was the ice / snow was supposed to start around 9 I think. Luckily, the only day my family would all be together to see the movie was the 10th so we squeezed it in, racing the weather home. My dad hit a bit of icy roads on his way home and was delayed a bit but the rest of us beat the weather. I might have been able to make it to the Cities that night but I went home with my mom and sister instead so I was snowed in until Monday. I probably could have gotten out Sunday afternoon but then I would have had to drive home in the dark.

I'm not saying that Dawn Treader would have made $65 million if there hadn't been a snowstorm, but I am saying that if the weather stopped my plans of seeing the film this weekend, then you can be sure it stopped several other people's plans of seeing the film this weekend as well.

It stopped my plans as well. Although since I already had my ticket, they got some money off of me.

I think the writers of this article missed one very important reason people didn't see Dawn Treader this weekend. -One that was quite obvious to most of us in the Midwest:

A HUGE BLIZZARD!!!

That is a very good point

I've decided that the weather is Walden/Fox's fault:
1. They had Lucy say the snow spell.
2. They used a lot of snow in the trailer.
3. They made a snowy Aslan poster.
4. They brought the White Witch back which of course means snow.

Oh dear! But snow spells wouldn't account for the wild weather we've been having Down Under, now would it? At least the dams are filling up which is nice after a decade of being in drought and having water restrictions.

I've come to the conclusion that one of those four reasons does rather nail the problem. People do tend to see LWW as a stand-alone classic. They don't really see it as part of a series. It is sort of LWW versus the other six books. I wonder what might have happened if Walden had insisted on producing The Magician's Nephew first? I'm sure that Disney wouldn't have wanted to do anything with that book if they could grab their chance at LWW.

I believe the number one reason why we're not seeing the box office numbers this movie deserves is this: it doesn't have the marketing powerhouse of Disney behind it. Disney plastered the world with commercials and constant "cameos"/behind the scenes things/Ben Barnes Fangirl Recruiting ads, especially on the Disney Channel. Which is aimed at the kids. Who would think "this looks AWESOME...Must. Go. See." Who would then beg their parents to take them. Said parents would see the Disney logo and think, "Ooh--a family film! It's Disney! Therefore it must be good!"

I agree with this. And also the rest that Dekkie said. The marketing definitely has been lousy, almost as if Theatre managers didn't really want people to go to that particular movie. I agree that Walt Disney has a certain association with family values, even when it makes something rated PG 13 +.

There is something else I think is true. VDT is a good bed time story to read to your 5 or 6 year old child and to get them reading for themselves. It is a story that can be enjoyed at all ages. However, some of its themes are a bit deep to explore for a 5 year old, and a film based on the book might have been better with a higher rating, such as PG 13 + , as in PC. Or am I grousing too much that it isn't done for old ladies to watch PG movies unless they are accompanied by children?

Too long between installments: Yeah, sure is. The pacing of the Narnia movies reminds me of when you go to the zoo. People will stand around the zoo cages and wait for the animals to do something *amazing*. Eventually, they do. The people stand in awe and then wait for the animals to do something amazing again. Unfortunately, they don't and the people move on to the next cage. Little do the people suspect that watching animals takes... Patience. If you wait long enough, the animals will do something amazing again. But, it means waiting. Frankly, its quite possible that most people have moved to the next cage.

TO BE CONTINUED!

Yeah originally they were going to release PC, VDT, and SC back-to back-to back, at one year apart as the "Caspian Trilogy", but everyone complained about PC, Disney got nervous and bailed, and we're stuck here waiting to see if SC will even get greenlit.

I think the Caspian trilogy would have helped the series. But it really all started with the release date of PC.

Prince Caspian would have been a success had it been released in December of 2007. But unfortunatly Walden didnt want it to hurt "The Water Horse"'s boxoffice, so they moved it. Stupid move since it pretty much killed the series.

Had PC been released in December of 2007 it would have at least made over 600 million, but it would probably make much more. Here is why:

A. Less competition. Instead of being sandwhiched inbetween Iron Man and Indiana Jones it would have battled Alvin and the CHipmunks and the Golden Compass (National Treasure wouldnt be competition since Disney wouldnt release that movie and Narnia within such a short timespan. Disney would probably have moved National Treasure up to a November or January release). Which brings be to point B.

B. The Golden Compass. Christians boycotted that film and made a huge deal about getting everyone to NOT see it. Had Prince Caspian, a CHRISTIAN ALTERNATIVE to that movie been around, Christians would be telling everyone to see that movie instead. Now since both Iron Man and Indiana Jones arent anti-Christian, Christians had no reason to tell people not to see those movies. In fact they wanted to see those movies themselves. Had Narnia gone up against the Golden Compass it would have made much more money. In addition, Narnia would be looked on as more of a success since it "defeated" another big fantasy series.

C. Its that time of year. Fantasy movies generally do better at Christmas time. That didnt work for VotDT because of Fox's horrible marketing, Fox's horrible reputation with fantasy movies, and the fact that most people forgot about Narnia. But this is back in 2007, when people still remembered the first Narnia pretty well. It would have had a long holiday season to make lots of $.

D. It wasnt too long. 2 years in between films isnt too long of a wait. Especially considering that promotions for the film would begin during late summer, early fall. So people would probably have about a full year without hearing about Narnia (considering the release of the LWW DVD being Spring of 2006 and the first few trailers of PC showing up late summer of 2007). Unfortunatly by waiting 2 and half years, a lot of people lost interest in Narnia. It would have still done well had there been no competition, but since it was sandwiched inbetween bigger blockbusters, it was pretty much ignored in May of 2008.

Had they released this film in 2007, much more people would have seen it and Narnia would have made more money. And in making more money it would have established itself as a firm franchise (Like LotR and Harry Potter). Disney would then get more confidence in the series and they probably would have shot VotDT and SC back to back, or with a really brief break inbetween. That way we would have seen VotDT in May of 2009 (which would be less than a one in a half year break since PC came to theaters). And since Disney is better at advertising and since Narnia would be more fresh in people's heads and sinec Narnia at that point would have been established as a sucessful franchise, VotDT would make more money.

Unfortunatly PC didnt make money, was overlooked by Iron Man and Indiana Jones. People saw it as a flop and because of that they saw it as a dying franchise that would only have one successful film (LWW). People heard Disney dropped the franchise and they thought Narnia was done with. Very few people knew VotDT was being made, and those that did were put off with Fox's marketing or the fact that Fox was making it. People were making fun of the film as a pathetic attempt at Fox to save a dead franchise. The film was mediocre and didnt get great reviews, so word of mouth isnt helping. And now the franchise is suffocating as it slowly prepares to die.

Josh you basically summed up my opinions.

As well, VDT had a stench of failure since Disney jumped ship on it (no pun intended ) A lot of people thought the franchise was over and done with after that.

I'm going to use these 4 ideas to compare Narnia to Harry Potter:

1. Too long before installments:
I won't argue with this one too much. There is a signifigantly long period of time between each of the films. I do not, however, think that this is why the franchise is hurting.

2. The books are too different from each other:
Hmmm... ok, let's think about this. There are solid arguments to prove and disprove this comment. I'll briefly touch on a few. The books are all similar because children are transported from our world (with the exception of HHB) to Narnia to help Aslan rid Narnia of evil (with the exception of VDT). Other than that, I think that what makes the book and movies so appealing are their differences. I love Harry Potter, but, no offense, movies 1-6 all deal with a boy and his friends attending a magical boarding school and getting into mischief. God forbid the kids get to Narnia by means other than the wardrobe, claims have to be made that they're different from each other?!?

3. Nobody read past the first book:
I agree with this to an extent. Most people read only the first book IN SCHOOLS, but if you're reading at home for pleasure, you will definitely read the entire series. The author's argument is that one won't want to read past the first book unless they like fantasy novels, and to him I say, if people don't like Harry Potter, they certainly won't read past the first book. In fact, I know plenty of people who stopped watching the Harry Potter movies after the first one, because they found it too BORING, which leads us to the final point.

4. The movies are just not interesting:
This one aggravates me the most. The author specifically states that the movies are not interesting, so does he mean he wants them to make more deviations from the books to make the movies more exciting, or less to bring back the interesting parts from the books?? I think to say that the Narnia books are not exciting is a completely innapropriate statement. As I said before, I absolutely love Harry Potter, but it's sad that the Narnia movies are considered boring because we don't have a boy returning to Hogwarts year after year.