Posted by: @rose

Which two books is she going to adapt to film?

Just going to point out here real fast that she's doing two films, not necessarily two books. It's possible they'll split one book into two films. 

So, my understanding with Gerwig is that she's kind of a girl-power type of director. Here's the funny thing about Narnia. Lewis actually wrote some pretty rockin' awesome female characters. Lucy, Aravis, Polly, the White Witch, the Green Lady, Jill. And if Netflix chooses to focus on THOSE females for their girl-power characters, as long as they do so while keeping the heart of the story intact, I don't think it will be an issue at all. 

Unfortunately, everybody has to focus on Susan, who doesn't like war and (imho) is the girly-girl to end all girly-girls. So my preference is that Gerwig stay away from Susan unless she takes her in a direction that's counter to what Hollywood is doing right now. I'd like to see her do 'Horse and His Boy' and 'Magician's Nephew.'

Honestly, a big part of my reaction is just relief that Kasey Moore, who broke the story, neither made a huge leap nor deliberately lied to the Narnia fanbase. He seemed like such a nice guy from the interview the Talking Beasts podcast did with him. Nice to know that impression wasn't wrong. 

My opinions on Greta Gerwig directing Narnia adaptations haven't changed really since I posted about it last. But maybe I'll be able to articulate my thoughts better now. Here goes. 

I don't think Gerwig really makes sense, mainly because one of her main claims to fame is being a feminist director and feminists tend to find the Narnia books offensive. I hasten to add that I think the idea of the books being antifeminist is highly overblown. It's true that C. S. Lewis, the author, went on record as having antifeminist opinions but the books aren't about his views on gender. Doubtless, they reflect his views on gender as everything we write reflects our worldview, but they're really not about that. I don't have a problem with a director or writer who is a feminist adapting Narnia. (I was fine with both the BBC and Walden Media changing the line, "battles are ugly when women fight." Honestly, that was never a great line.) 

But here's the thing. Greta Gerwig isn't just a director who happens to be a feminist. She's a feminist director. That's part of her brand. (Of course, there are some feminists who'd say she's a bad one since she makes movies about white people, but never mind that now.) She'd want to make something with an explicit feminist message that wouldn't necessarily anything to do with the Narnia books. While there are several Narnian heroines I'd easily describe as protofeminist as far as personality type go, Gerwig's not a protofeminist. She's a modern feminist. Modern feminists aren't asking for more stories with great female leads or female villains. (We already have those.) They want more stories about the relationships between women and girls. (That's why Gerwig made a lot of sense as an adapter of Little Women, something which was always about that.) And Narnia only has two, count 'em, two female sidekicks, Mrs. Beaver and Hwin. 

Putting gender aside, which I'm happy to do since, like I said, I don't believe Narnia is really about gender, of the three movies Gerwig has directed, only The Barbie Movie is a fantasy and it's a glossy comedic fantasy that has little in common with Narnia. (Disclaimer: I've only seen a couple of commercials for The Barbie Movie. I'm not an expert on it.) It seems like Gerwig's forte is down to earth slice of life dramas about young women. Narnia doesn't seem like it would play to her strengths or interests at all. I've read and listened with interest to arguments from Narniawebbers as to why she might be a good fit...and I'm sorry but I still don't buy any of them Maybe I'm putting Gerwig in a box but it's a box she has made for herself. 

There are three possibilities I see here. Greta Gerwig could create two Narnia movies that Narnia fans enjoy but which alienates her established fanbase. She could create two Narnia movies that her fans enjoy but which alienate fans of the books. Or she could create two Narnia movies that please neither. Option Two is the one I'd prefer to happen since I only watch movies because I'll enjoy them, not because other people enjoy them. But I've no wish to spite Gerwig fans or have her jeopardize her career. The simplest solution to my way of thinking is simply to not have Greta Gerwig work on Narnia. 

It's actually quite a coincidence that this confirmation came when it did. A few days I published a blog post, in part, about Gerwig's Little Women. I worried that I chose a bad time to do that since it's close to Independence Day in my country and most people I know are too busy to read it. But now I'm glad since otherwise people might assume I wrote it in response to this news, which I really didn't. (I think Gerwig's Little Women is interesting in its own right.) Here's a link if anyone's up for reading it. It discusses different ways that books can be adapted into movies. (Are they for viewers who haven't read the source material or people who are fans of it? Should they recreate what the original author was saying or say something new?) And that's something that might interest Narnia fans with Netflix on the mind. Adaptations as Introductions vs Adaptations as Commentary | The Adaptation Station.com

P.S. 

Posted by: @fantasia

Unfortunately, everybody has to focus on Susan

Yeah, I really don't get why everyone assumes that Susan is the most important leading lady in the Narnia series. She's only in three books out of seven and she barely even does anything. (I'm not criticizing you, Fantasia. I'm criticizing others with you.) 

First of all... Oh my goodness, real Narnia movie news! I was beginning to feel depressed about this whole Netflix deal. I know, the project could still get canceled later on like Silver Chair, but at least for now it looks like it's finally moving forward. 

I'm actually quite optimistic about Greta Gerwig directing. When we first heard the rumor back in November I was kind of surprised how negative some people were. I've only ever seen her Little Women, so maybe I'd be more nervous if I'd seen her other films. But I thought Little Women was very well made, possibly even my favorite of all the adaptations I've seen. She really seemed to respect the book and its author and all the fans, which gives me hope that she will be the same with Narnia.

As for what books will be adapted, I don't really care as much at this point. I really do like the Walden films, and I would definitely like to see some other Narnia books adapted to the screen, but I also wouldn't be against a new version of LWW. It could be interesting to see her version of it. My guess is she will do LWW and MN.

Hopefully we'll hear some more news soon!

I think this is a fantastic choice. She's a writer/director who has already successfully produced original and adapted projects. To me, she has a great depth and understanding of the stories she tells. She's good with humour and the more serious moments.

While I've seen a lot of mention of her being a "girl-power type" and I can see why people think that, I think more than anything she'll understand what needs and should be done with this particular project, and while I do think she'll be able to perfectly portray the female characters with a greater depth than has been done before, maybe even providing more depth that's even in the source material, I don't think it will be done in a way that's to the detriment of all the male characters in the two stories she chooses to tell.

I cannot wait to see what she does! I also think starting with any other book than LWW or MN would be a mistake.

I think Greta Gerwig has a lot of challenges ahead of her. I would actually feel a lot better if she works closely with Douglas Gresham. It would be great if he ends up as one of the producers. Now it raises the question what those two movies would be. LWW and PC or MN and LWW or LWW and HHB? I'm sure we'll be hearing more news eventually.

I'll point some things about in regards to "girl power" (I'll go ahead in go in publication order).

LWW- While the main character isn't really clear cut, most of the book is from Lucy's perspective. Susan acts as a motherly figure to Edmund and Lucy, perhaps she tries to look out for them. I don't know if a movie would remove the line from Father Christmas, "Battles are ugly when women fight" (it wouldn't surprise me if it did though). I'm sure that Susan and Lucy learn how to use their gifts (Susan with her bow and arrow and Lucy with her dagger) to defend themselves. Plus, the book focuses more on Aslan and the girls freeing the statues at the White Witch's castle after his resurrection. A movie could possibly cut every now and then to Peter and Edmund at the battle, building up the tension, "Can Aslan free the statues in time?" Yet most of it would be focus on freeing the statues and joyful celebration.

PC- In the book, it is mentioned that Susan hated killing things (given her title as "Queen Susan the Gentle"). In both BBC and Walden, I've felt that the scene where Lucy is with Aslan wasn't long enough. A movie could possibly take their time on that. Then there's the Nurse, which both BBC and Walden cut out. I'm sure that Caspian would have looked to her as a motherly figure and possibly went to her for some advice after they're reunited. Then of course, there's the romp with Bacchus and Silenus and freeing of the school children. The girls could be seen interacting with Gwendolen during the romp.

VDT- The only female characters in the book are Lucy and Ramandu's daughter. Lucy is insecure, and is even tempted to recite the spell that will make her beautiful like Susan, if not more beautiful. Then there's Ramandu's daughter. I think an extended scene with her and Caspian can be so sweet, possibly while he and his crew are still on Ramandu's Island before they leave for the world's end. Then when they come back (except for, well of course, Edmund, Lucy, Eustace, and Reepicheep), Caspian invites her to come with him to Narnia.

SC- Jill is a main character in the story. Given that her mother isn't mentioned and the headmistress doesn't do anything about the bullies at school, Jill has this issue about trust. Eustace may have been the only friend she has. When she meets with the Lady of the Green Kirtle, she may have thought she could trust her. Yet learns that not everyone can be trusted, let alone a beautiful woman wearing green.

HHB- Aravis is a major character. She mentions that her mother is dead, and after her father remarries, her stepmother hates her. After learning that Hwin is a talking horse, she may have started to confide in her. Then runs into her friend, Lasaraleen, who is a girly-girl that likes to talk a lot. I'm sure Aravis was horrified when she and Lasaraleen overhears Rabadash's plan to capture Susan and force her to marry him. During the Golden age, Susan may have taught Lucy how to use a bow and arrow, given that she would use it later for the Battle of Anvard. Aravis may have want to be like Susan and Lucy, and not want to get married in the first place (given her reason to run away).

MN- Polly is also a major character. Digory's mother is near death and most of her friends are away on Holiday. When they see Jadis in Charn, Polly thinks she's a terrible woman, so is not as tempted. Plus, there is the unbreakable bond between a parent and a child. Digory about to lose his mother should be a major part of the story. Plus, where he feeds her the apple from Narnia, they should take their time on that.

LB- Jill is perhaps the only major female character. She may have looked up to Tirian as a big-brother figure. There's not even any Calormene women mentioned in the book. Though it wouldn't mean there aren't any. Then the seven friends of Narnia address Susan as "No longer a friend of Narnia." That is always a concern how a movie would do that. It could possibly change Susan's story or even use the misinterpretations that's been going on for years as a source of inspiration.

If anyone on here would like to add something to all these things I've been pointing out, please feel free to do so.

Greta and Netflix need advising on the history of the previous SC project. 

The Estate will still not want 'action-girl' movies, or a 21st century message. 

This is really quite astonishing news, after so so long without any genuine updates on Netflix's Narnia ambitions — and it looks like I spoke too soon when I said a few days ago (in the other thread) that it was so many months since the Greta Gerwig rumour surfaced that it was now highly unlikely to be true...  

I for one have absolutely no problem with a female and reportedly feminist director taking on Narnia. As others here have already pointed out, there are some very strong female lead characters throughout the entire Narnia series. The very few cases in which some might see Lewis taking a "dated" attitude towards girls and women and their roles — such as "battles are ugly when women fight" — are not overwhelmingly important to the plot and can easily be modified a little without making significant changes to the story. The line I just quoted could easily be left out altogether, or the point made instead that in this case, Lucy and Susan are needed for other things than fighting. (Lucy does, of course, go into battle in HHB, which shows that Lewis either reconsidered his views on women and fighting, or he didn't intend Father Christmas's words in LWW to be taken as gospel on the matter.)

My hope is that the two films Gerwig directs will either be MN and LWW, or LWW and HHB — pairing the most well-known story (which has been done several times before) with either its prequel or its immediate chronological sequel, neither of which have ever been adapted for the screen. All of those books have strong female roles, and I would say HHB in particular has some quite confronting themes to do with women's rights and freedoms. Aravis is born into a society that is clearly hugely sexist and misogynistic, even though Lewis doesn't go into much detail about Calormene culture. I'm pretty sure it's no accident that we never hear of any female rulers or leaders among the Calormenes... there aren't any. Aravis is a member of the upper class, but has virtually no agency, no choice in her life; as soon as she reaches puberty, she's destined for an arranged marriage to a much older man, whom she can't stand. She escapes from a life of material riches and supposed privilege that is really nothing but the proverbial gilded cage, and sets out to find freedom, even though it means learning to overcome pride and accept that where she's going, she may simply be a nobody. There's a HUGE amount for a director with an interest in women's rights to work with in that story!

On that note, as for Susan... I would say that from what Lewis lets us know, the problem with Susan (as opposed to "The Problem Of Susan") is that she becomes so caught up in peer pressure that she ends up largely fixated on her looks and her popularity and on being "grown up", to the point where she manages to convince herself that Narnia and her adventures and her queenship there were never real. That is actually a pointed commentary on a young woman conforming to society's restrictive and stereotyping expectations of women, instead of daring to be different and holding onto much higher and more important things even when the world around you just doesn't understand. If that's not a significant feminist theme, I don't know what is!! But unless Gerwig films LB — which is highly unlikely when we haven't had the rest of the series yet! — we won't get to see her full take on Susan's eventual rejection of Narnia. It will just be interesting to see what she does with her as a character, assuming either or both of the Gerwig films are of stories that include Susan in person (LWW, HHB or PC).

It will be very interesting to see what happens from here!

EDITED TO ADD: Now that I've read the original article in The New Yorker, it turns out that the big Narnia news is just a throwaway line a very long way down in the article, close to the end. It seems a bit strange that no announcement has actually come from Netflix or directly from Gerwig herself, so far. Is The New Yorker jumping the gun here? Do they have definite info that no-one else has, or are they mistakenly repeating the rumour as fact when perhaps it's still not? I'm wondering...

Posted by: @fantasia

Just going to point out here real fast that she's doing two films, not necessarily two books. It's possible they'll split one book into two films. 

I very nearly included that in my post and then left it out for the sake of simplicity. It's definitely possible, and to be honest, it might be my preference. I always wanted mini-series and a two-part film adaptation is a lot closer to that.

Without doing a super long post... I'm excited about this news. I think she's a really interesting choice; she clearly has a lot of passion for the projects that she does, and Narnia deserves that. She's also had some lovely quotes about Christianity and faith that were refreshing to read. I don't think she'll shy away from the Christian themes at all.

That said, I'm also a bit wary because she's definitely going to bring her interpretation. I think there's a good chance that I will think some of her ideas are absolutely genius, while others are completely missing the point. But we'll see.

At the very least, I think she will make something that is sincere and worth talking about, and that it will bring a lot of new and renewed interest in Narnia, which Narnia richly deserves — and I'm more than happy about that!

Posted by: @courtenay

Now that I've read the original article in The New Yorker, it turns out that the big Narnia news is just a throwaway line a very long way down in the article, close to the end. It seems a bit strange that no announcement has actually come from Netflix or directly from Gerwig herself, so far. Is The New Yorker jumping the gun here?

Several other high profile media outlets (e.g. The Hollywood Reporter) have also reported on this, and they would likely not report on it unless they had also checked with sources. It does seem like maybe a fumble on the big reveal for this project, but I imagine the bigger reveal will be what book is being adapted.

Although Greta would not have been my absolute number 1 choice for director, she is still a fantastic choice, and above all it's just a relief that Netflix are going with a serious big name director who will bring a sense of instant prestige and a genuine artistic vision to the project.

If I were to summarize all three of her previous films in a very broad brush manner, it would be that all 3 are about the female experience, and all 3 are about childhood and growing up in some way. Therefore given that the Narnia stories are classics of children's literature, as well as being stories about children, it's not hard to see why it would appeal to her directorial instincts.

Also, as others have noted, more often than not the Narnia stories are told from the POV of female characters like Lucy and Jill, so it's easy to see where Greta's sensibilities would mesh there.

Overall, this is a hugely positive step forward for Narnia, as well as for Netflix.

Plus, with Netflix still chasing that elusive Best Picture Oscar after a couple of close races, this hire potentially signals to me that they might actually see Narnia as the vehicle to deliver that.

I also kind of wonder that even though it's confirmed that Greta Gerwig will write and direct two Narnia movies, if she will end up directing all seven (or even eight, if LB gets made into a two part movie). If that were the case, I think it will depend on if the two she writes and direct are successful.

Let's say she writes and directs MN and LWW (going in chronological order, that is) or even does LWW and HHB as a pair; LWW could end on a cliff hanger, possibly sometime after the Pevensie's coronation and HHB could pick up with baby Cor in a boat and Arsheesh discovering him. If they are successful, they could possibly want her to come back to write and direct the rest of the series.

Posted by: @courtenay

On that note, as for Susan... I would say that from what Lewis lets us know, the problem with Susan (as opposed to "The Problem Of Susan") is that she becomes so caught up in peer pressure that she ends up largely fixated on her looks and her popularity and on being "grown up", to the point where she manages to convince herself that Narnia and her adventures and her queenship there were never real. That is actually a pointed commentary on a young woman conforming to society's restrictive and stereotyping expectations of women, instead of daring to be different and holding onto much higher and more important things even when the world around you just doesn't understand. If that's not a significant feminist theme, I don't know what is!!

You're looking at the story from what might be called a "classical feminist" perspective. (There are various waves of feminism but sadly I can't remember which is which. If I could this part of my post would be way more precise. ) Modern feminists however believe that rather than society brainwashing women into only liking stereotypically feminine things, the problem is that society shames women for liking stereotypically feminine things, like lipstick, I guess, and feel that they have to like stereotypically masculine things to be mature. (This is known as Not Like Other Girls syndrome.) It's from this perspective that Susan's story in The Last Battle is seen as offensive and that's probably where Greta Gerwig is going to come from. If she came from more of a "classic feminist" perspective, I imagine she wouldn't portray Barbie sympathetically. 

That being said, I heartily agree with you that there's no way Netflix or Gerwig are going to want to start a Narnia series with The Last Battle, so we really shouldn't knock ourselves out worrying about that.  

Posted by: @col-klink

You're looking at the story from what might be called a "classical feminist" perspective. (There are various waves of feminism but sadly I can't remember which is which. If I could this part of my post would be way more precise. ) Modern feminists however believe that rather than society brainwashing women into only liking stereotypically feminine things, the problem is that society shames women for liking stereotypically feminine things, like lipstick, I guess, and feel that they have to like stereotypically masculine things to be mature. (This is known as Not Like Other Girls syndrome.) It's from this perspective that Susan's story in The Last Battle is seen as offensive and that's probably where Greta Gerwig is going to come from. If she came from more of a "classic feminist" perspective, I imagine she wouldn't portray Barbie sympathetically. 

Er, yeah, thanks for mansplaining feminism to me. I do have a university degree in history — not specifically in women's / gender studies, but the varied (and often conflicting) arguments that come under the heading of "feminism" did come into it quite a lot...  

One thing I did learn from all that was that it's not helpful to make blanket statements like "Modern feminists believe..." There are a LOT of different "schools" and nuances within 21st-century feminism, to the point where the term "feminism" itself is problematic and "feminisms" in the plural might be better. Some modern feminists do argue that women are shamed for liking stereotypically feminine things, but it would be hard to say whether or not that is currently a majority view among the huge variety of people who call themselves feminists. As far as I've seen, most of the attacks on Lewis himself over Susan's fate stem from the claim that he was essentially a misogynist — that he was so disgusted by the thought of little girls growing up and becoming mature, and liking lipstick and boys and so on, that his one main character who does that is promptly excluded from heaven. It's actually a knee-jerk reaction — any negative portrayal of a female character, especially by an ageing male Christian author, obviously means the said author hates women. This of course isn't at all sustained by a deep and careful reading of the series as a whole, which a good scholar (feminist or otherwise) ought to do before jumping to conclusions.

I also don't know if we know enough about Greta Gerwig's own views on these things to make any kind of judgment yet as to how she might treat Susan, if indeed she gets to touch on that aspect of the stories at all. Going by the article from The New Yorker, her treatment of Barbie sounds like it's both sympathetic and critical in about equal measure. If Gerwig does get to direct LB (perhaps, if her first two Narnia films are successful, she might be asked to do at least some of the others), perhaps she might fill us in on more of Susan's back-story and her inner conflict over knowing, deep down, that she and her siblings DID go to Narnia, while the world she desperately wants to be part of is telling her those things couldn't possibly have happened in real life and only little children would believe otherwise. I wouldn't object to that being part of the story, if it was done well. But we really don't know what to expect yet.

I trust Greta Gerwig to explore each and every character with respect and nuance, exploring each of their pros and cons. One of the big successes with her adaptation of Little Women was her version of Amy March. I know some of you might not have read the book or even seen the film, but one of the sisters of the novel, Amy March, (played by Florence Pugh in the film) was seen as simply spoiled, bratty, and self-obsessed, who has somewhat of a rivalry with our main character, her sister, Jo March, and was somewhat disliked by many readers and audiences, at least in previous portrayals of her in other adaptations, and I think just naturally because of how much they root for Jo within the story.

But in Gerwig's adaptation, many people believe that Amy is finally awarded some depth and perspective that other adaptations have failed at, with Amy's action finally being understood and recognised. While, obviously, she is initially seen as spoiled, bratty, and self-obsessed as the character is written, Gerwig and through Pugh's performance, we're allowed something more than that without altering who the character is...

Now I'm not saying it's exactly the same. I wouldn't say Susan needs that type of particular exploration, but I just think it's a good example of what Gerwig has been able to do in her writing in another adaptation, which could lend itself to whichever Narnia stories she ends up telling, and who knows maybe there will be some who haven't understood Susan as a character yet, who will with Gerwig's adaptation?

Posted by: @col-klink

 

Posted by: @fantasia

Unfortunately, everybody has to focus on Susan

Yeah, I really don't get why everyone assumes that Susan is the most important leading lady in the Narnia series. She's only in three books out of seven and she barely even does anything. (I'm not criticizing you, Fantasia. I'm criticizing others with you.) 

This is something that came up very early in the Walden project.
The two writers (who never understood Narnia and were just making a living) commented that  "Susie" was the voice of the author. When I disagreed online, some guy was scornful of my ignorance, and eventually asked me who I worked for, thinking I was in the industry. But that idea was always going to be wrong. Susan was the last Pevensie to follow Aslan, trailing behind with her fear and inconvenience.

If the comment in the Barbie/Mattel article is something new, then we'll hear more soon.

But if, as I suspect, it's just a throwaway line from a journalist's beat-up of the previous rumour article, or he's googled Greta online, then we have nothing to fear, and there is no news.

@col-klink I agree with most of what you said.
Perhaps there's nothing happening in the summer, and so people are making stories from minor events or social visits?

I could cope with Greta doing HHB. Not sure what else I'd trust her with.