Ugh. They'll probably just get Aslan to scratch in the sand again. I'm so annoyed about the undragoning. If they manage to do HHB, they'll probably just have the sound-effects, show the expressions but not show the claw wounds, which again, would be lame. I don't even think the sound-effects would make it into the PG-version. Ugh. Seriously, even Focus on the Family (who admittedly censored some of the violence in the series) did these bits properly.

Today while browsing the Talk About Narnia forum I discovered that Valiant has had a discussion on just this point going on for a while! So you can head on over there to get some better developed insights on this topic. Though feel free to make a post here as a well.

Ugh. They'll probably just get Aslan to scratch in the sand again. I'm so annoyed about the undragoning. If they manage to do HHB, they'll probably just have the sound-effects, show the expressions but not show the claw wounds, which again, would be lame. I don't even think the sound-effects would make it into the PG-version. Ugh. Seriously, even Focus on the Family (who admittedly censored some of the violence in the series) did these bits properly.

True. FotF changed the scene when Tash eats the Calormene captain in TLB. They simply had him fly away with his prey.

Yes I was wondering the same thing (which is why I created the other thread ) It seems that thus far, they have watered down tough Aslan. They got the "good" part, but they forgot the "not safe " part. I have no idea as how the would adapt this b/c as Adeona mentioned,watering it down that would defeat the whole purpose. I didn't actually mind Aslan scratching his paw in the sand, but I didn't like that they showed so little of it, that Eustace didn't seem to have experienced any pain, and that they pulled a "Beauty and the Beast."
I just dont want them to get rid of the fact that it should be painful.

But at least with Eustace's undragoning, Aslan isnt meant to be punishing Eustace or showing his "not safe" side.

Not having Aslan slash Aravis's back would significantly weaken his character. They don't have to show the wound, but honestly it wouldnt be as effective.

What they may do is just completly remove the part where Aravis's servant gets beaten and scarred. Which of course would remove some of Aravis's character as well.

If HaHB gets made, this is something they cannot screw up.

This is a challenging part to adapt. I still want it in, but Aslan slashing Aravis's back won't be easy to show.

I was sort of ok with Eustace's undragoning, but Eustace getting his skin ripped off by Aslan is not the same reason as Aravis had. She was horrid to her servant and deserved to feel the same pain as that servant had (sorry if I'm totally off here). But how will people react to seeing Aslan doing this? This scene is really necessary to Aravis's arch, but just like Eustace's undragoning, is must be done in the right way so that the message and purpose of this slashing isn't lost.

This is a film they'd be adapting this to, so they might be able to figure out how to shoot the scene so when Aslan slashes her back, it's still obvious what is happening but isn't too gory. Don't trust me on my word, though. I need to refresh myself by reading HHB first!

Given that Walden's Aslan is an expensive CGI which has cut down on his appearances in all movies to date, and given that a generic lion in the distance could probably be used for at least some scenes, or limiting Aslan to his roar, or voice, as we saw in VDT, I'd say that it is the Hermit who might supply the explanations and the appeals to Aravis' conscience about being scratched.

If there is a problem with Aravis being clawed across the back as a disciplinary measure, I am wondering how people view historical reenactments on film? People in days gone by, especially on board ships, normally expected there would be a lashing or two of mutinous sailors. Or convicts in Australia's case. Or servants in Aravis' case. Can you really protect school aged children from the facts of history in the name of PG, when it wasn't so long ago that school-aged children, themselves would receive the cane if they were naughty and insolent?

I think that if Aravis is shown getting scratched, or better still, the results of her getting scratched, then the maid getting whipped should also be shown similarly, so that the two incidents can be linked effectively. It is scratch for scratch, remember?

And it is scarcely the only instance of retribution in HHB anyway. Remember the cat scratching Shasta at the tombs, when he 'fessed up to his treatment of a stray cat?

Thats right, they need to show the maid getting scratched. Otherwise people would be calling Aslan abusive.

It's very possible to do effectively in cuts. They can have Aslan chasing them, he jumps, cut away to Shasta as Aravis screams, and then follow Shasta running to her as Aslan stands over Aravis. Aslan leaves, the hermit comes out, and they carry Aravis in while discussing her injuries. Simple as that.

And don't forget that this happens in about five to ten seconds of screen time, probably with shaky camera. The undragoning, as it is in the book, would have taken much longer and would have been shot in a non-shaky fashion.

And remember the Telmarine dude who got pounced on in PC. For the longest time, I never saw him run off and thought he'd been eaten…

I would have Aslan gaze into Aravis' eyes and have her feel very nervous and anxious. That would certainly mirror how nervous the servant lady was.

I would also have Aslan's gaze perhaps give Aravis a headache or joint pain. Or even a fever- perhaps with sweat. No blood or vomit or anything like that. But still painful.

Interesting ways around it but those ideas lack the symbolism present in this scene. Granted Aslan's deep gaze would do that to anyone but I still think the claw wounds are the way to go - some how.

We have to remember that this scene gives Shasta the opportunity to show his courage. Even if Aslan doesn't scratch Aravis, he still needs to chase them so this important character developmemt for Shasta can be present.

Very good point Valiant.

And [this] is scarcely the only instance of retribution in HHB anyway. Remember the cat scratching Shasta at the tombs, when he 'fessed up to his treatment of a stray cat?

Yep. I'm not too worried about that one being erased - I've got a feeling that's just the sort of thing they'd keep - though probably it'll end up being played for laughs.

I am wondering how people view historical reenactments on film? People in days gone by, especially on board ships, normally expected there would be a lashing or two of mutinous sailors. Or convicts in Australia's case. Or servants in Aravis' case. Can you really protect school aged children from the facts of history in the name of PG, when it wasn't so long ago that school-aged children, themselves would receive the cane if they were naughty and insolent?

And you've got a good point about the historical facts - I guess the objection to your point is that there there's a big difference between school-aged children getting caned and slaves getting flogged. A lot of kids are not going to be ready to see a flogging on a level that would even-out with the punishment Aravis received. Which is one reason the film makers will be toning everything down, if they keep it at all. The only safe scene connected with a flogging - that I can think of - would be showing the the maid curled up and crying/moaning afterwords. They could make that sufficiently dark and depressing to get the point across, I guess.

Still, I do agree with what Warrior 4 Jesus said- we need the claw wounds in there somehow!

Well, if Aravis is not injured by Aslan in anyway, then there is no reason why Cor has to make the journey to Narnia on his own.

I would love if this scene is kept in but I know Hollywood will never do it. They might probably just have Aravis injured by a real lion, not Aslan.