I've absolutely no problem with the Beavers having "working-class accents" — they are presented in the book as salt-of-the-earth types, and I'm pretty sure most adaptations have given them accents that suggest those kinds of characters. The audio book of LWW (read by Michael York) gives them Yorkshire accents!

I do still totally object, though, to them calling Aslan the "top geezer" — or "bloke", or "guy", or even some more modern colloquialism like "head honcho". If you read their dialogue in the book, both Mr and Mrs Beaver speak of Aslan with the utmost respect and honour, as you would expect for true Narnians. They don't use flowery formal language, but they never say anything about him that comes across as jokey or slang-laden or irreverent in any way. And that's vital, as I know some of us here have been saying in recent discussions about the Pevensies' reactions to hearing Aslan's name for the first time. We need to have this sense that Aslan is someone who evokes complete and utter awe. Otherwise the heart of the whole Narnia saga is gone.

That, in the end, was the ultimate reason why I couldn't, and still cannot, accept the Walden movie of LWW as a faithful adaptation. They clearly, patently, just did not "get" Aslan. And that brings everything else crashing down. 

@courtenay 

I don’t think I would rate the whole movie by certain words that they didn’t get right since there are other parts that were well done. For example in the 1935 movie of David Copperfield W. C. Fields speaks with American accent which seems rather out of place in a film based on a Dickens book. But otherwise it is a good adaptation except for the fact that Fields was not British and couldn’t do the proper accent correctly. I don’t think you should be overly critical of a film that has a few mistakes. As for the first Walden film for the most part they did get the accents right (they sound authentic enough to me), but I think the animals’ voices could definitely have sounded much more gentle like they did in the BBC version.  And the actors playing the Pevensies were fine (especially Georgie Henley as Lucy was wonderful with her first encounter with Mr. Tumnus).  I wouldn’t overlook the better parts of the film. But of course I am looking at the movie from an American point of view (I can’t help that since I grew up here in the U. S.). I think if I had called Jesus a “top geezer” my mother would have washed out my mouth with soap. It doesn’t seem a whole lot different with Aslan.  But I would not toss out the whole film if it didn’t get everything exactly right. 

Posted by: @narnian78

@courtenay 

I don’t think I would rate the whole movie by certain words that they didn’t get right since there are other parts that were well done...I think if I had called Jesus a “top geezer” my mother would have washed out my mouth with soap. It doesn’t seem a whole lot different with Aslan.  But I would not toss out the whole film if it didn’t get everything exactly right. 

Just to clarify, I'm not "rat[ing] the whole movie by certain words that they didn't get right" — if calling Aslan "the top geezer" was the only jarring note for me in the entire film, and everything else was fine, I would have shrugged that off and enjoyed the rest. For a different example, there are a few things I don't like about Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings film trilogy, but overall I reckon those adaptations are absolutely brilliant. So, no, I don't just throw an entire film out because they did a handful of things I didn't agree with. I'm not THAT picky a critic!  

What I meant was, there are in fact a lot of reasons why I don't like the Walden adaptation of LWW, which I've gone into before (and I'm sure others are getting tired of hearing my opinions over and over, so I won't repeat myself). But the worst is that, for me anyway, they just didn't "get" Aslan, in more ways than simply having Mr Beaver refer to him in a silly manner (not insulting, but not at all reverent). Others here in the NarniaWeb discussions have pointed out things like the fact that the Walden film doesn't reveal that he is a lion until we actually see him (so that meaningful, unforgettable discussion about "'Course he isn't safe. But he's good" isn't in it), and then he steps out of a tent where he's apparently been lazing around like a pampered circus animal (I think it was icarus who brought that up in another thread). I would also add that there's no great sense of power and gravitas in either his appearance (good CGI, but his face is oddly ugly and un-lion-like) or his voice — Liam Neeson didn't do a bad job overall, but there's nothing outstanding about his delivery, and it mostly sounds like a very human voice coming from a talking lion.

Probably this matters more to me than any other aspect of the film because, well, we all know who Aslan is meant to be, and to many of us Narnia fans — myself included — that is more important than anything else. And I'm writing here as someone who grew up in a totally non-religious family, in a culture where religious devotion is, shall we say, not considered normal and is more likely to be ridiculed than respected if one is too open about it — and when I first encountered LWW (the book) at under 5 years old, I had little or no idea about God or Jesus or any of that sort of thing. (I'm pretty sure I'd never even heard about Jesus rising from the dead, at that age; that would have come in RE classes once I started school.)

But right from that first reading, I somehow knew that Aslan was a more special character than anyone or anything else I'd ever encountered in any other story — that there was something tremendously important about him that went beyond this story alone. That's the thing that most stayed with me about that book — not that I could have put it into words back then! — and continued as I read the rest of the Chronicles a few years later.

So that is what I would most want any new adaptation of LWW to "get right", or to do better than the previous film and TV versions have done, to get this back onto the topic of the thread.  

@courtenay I agree that introducing Aslan as "the top geezer" is a terrible idea, but I can't help but nitpick at your claim that no adaptation that doesn't get Aslan right can be good. While many fans, particularly Christians, consider Aslan the most important part of Narnia, others don't. I've read critics, particularly non-Christian ones, say they really like the books but consider Aslan an annoying deus ex machina. 

That's the thing about fandom and adaptations. Since different fans consider different parts of the things of which they're fans the important parts and it's a rare adaptation that gets every part right, there are always going to be adaptations that some fans like and others don't.  

Posted by: @col-klink

@courtenay I agree that introducing Aslan as "the top geezer" is a terrible idea, but I can't help but nitpick at your claim that no adaptation that doesn't get Aslan right can be good. While many fans, particularly Christians, consider Aslan the most important part of Narnia, others don't. I've read critics, particularly non-Christian ones, say they really like the books but consider Aslan an annoying deus ex machina. 

Ah yes, but you'll note that I've made clear throughout (well, I hope) that it's my claim that an adaptation can't be good if it doesn't get Aslan right. I don't think I've ever suggested that everyone else agrees with this idea — which of course they don't — let alone that I think they should.  

@courtenay 

Is it possible to get Aslan completely right?  Can an adaptation have a perfect Aslan, or I would say probably not, although I would say that the BBC version came much closer to it than the Walden films, assuming that you can forgive the dated special effects. Even Focus on the Family had a better Aslan in their scripts if you can look past David Suchet’s difficult voice. I think these versions came much closer to Aslan’s true character.  I hope Greta Gerwig can create a better Aslan in her films, assuming that is possible. That is something which needs much more than better technology. I don’t know if she will actually do it. It depends on how accurately and truthfully she plans to follow the books.

@narnian78 

I think it's really hard to get Aslan completely right, especially for those of us that know who Aslan is in our world.

I think that will be one of the biggest challenges for Greta Gerwig (if she does LWW) is that if she can get the character of Aslan right. It's a really hard task.

I wonder who will be doing the voice of Aslan. Liam Neeson and Ronald Pickup were fine, but should have they someone with an angry or a gentle voice or both?  The problem with the Walden films was not with the person doing the voice, but I think they should have given Aslan more of a lead role as he had in the original story.  No matter how real they made the Lion look it would have been more convincing if he had a commanding presence, which would be reflected in his voice. Liam Neeson could probably have done this if it was in the script. A better Aslan would have a stronger presence. I think Greta Gerwig might give us a more majestic Lion that would have a more prominent role. At least I hope she will after having read the books.

Posted by: @narnian78

I wonder who will be doing the voice of Aslan. Liam Neeson and Ronald Pickup were fine, but should have they someone with an angry or a gentle voice or both?

They really need someone who can cover a huge range of emotions and tones, and do it convincingly. There's also been the suggestion, which I agree with, that there should be some sort of post-production modification to his voice — not overdone, but just so that it somehow sounds more resonant and a bit, well, less human than most of the previous renditions of Aslan have done. We need to be able to believe that this voice is coming from an absolutely magnificent, majestic, awesome being, not just from some bloke putting on a supposed-to-sound-impressive tone.

Posted by: @narnian78

I wonder who will be doing the voice of Aslan. Liam Neeson and Ronald Pickup were fine, but should have they someone with an angry or a gentle voice or both?

As @courtenay wrote, "They really need someone who can cover a huge range of emotions and tones, and do it convincingly."  For me I think it is so important they remember the key phrase about Aslan that He is not safe but he is good.  He needs to be able to show gentleness and compassion, anger and wrath, joy and sorrow to mention a few emotions he'll need to do well.  I also wouldn't have an issue with post-production modification to make the voice more resonant, less human and more lion.

Would people object to having a puppet representing Aslan in a modern adaptation of the Narnia books?  I don’t think it is such a bad idea if it could be made tastefully and respectfully as the character was created by C. S. Lewis. The BBC series used a puppet for Aslan, and some of the movements were rather mechanical, but they could probably be corrected with some modern technology. I actually kind of liked the BBC’s Aslan even though it had some technical problems (e.g. the mouth), which might have been solved with the new technology. Combining old and new techniques may not be such a bad idea, and it may help Narnia to look more old fashioned, which is closer to the way the books were written.   In this way the movie or TV series would be different from the Walden films but more like the BBC series.

As much as I really love and have fond memories of the BBC Aslan, @narnian78, I am inclined to think the more realistic Aslan appears in a modern adaptation, the better - as long as his character is in line with the books.  I liked the realistic-ness of the Walden Aslan, my main issue with that portrayal of him, was it didn't really cover the depth of his character very well.  Despite all the weaknesses of the BBC production, I think they did portray a bit more of the depth of His character, partly due to that production having him speak (mostly) word for word what he says in the books - but also the build up to presenting him, how much time he is on screen and even some of the growls and tones which are used.

@Jasmine: As The Lion, The Witch, And The Wardrobe is perhaps the best known book of the Narnia series (if you ask anyone if they've ever read The Chronicles of Narnia, about 80% or 75% would say they have read The Lion, The Witch, And The Wardrobe), there's no way around it will get a new screen adaptation.

Yes, you are right, there will have to be a new screen adaptation for LWW. If the next Narnia production is to be Magician's Nephew, then I have to say, of course, if only to make a new version that would fit in with the producers' vision of a follow-on from Magician's Nephew.  As I recently told a new member, clearly a fan of the Walden movies, the trouble is with a new production, that they can't just copy the Walden designs when each new production is copyrighted, to the companies, directors and scriptwriters producing the movies. 

One of the best reasons for doing MN first is a real chance to break away from what has been done in the past. 20 years after Walden released LWW, in how they depict Aslan and Jadis, at any rate, is still relevant. I should have mentioned this particular site, where people can also reminisce on say, how the Mr Beavers were depicted to their hearts' content.  

@coracle: @icarusand Walden's writers and casting people decided to make Mrs Beaver a more middle class character, nicely spoken and with high social expectations.  She has married beneath her and is forever trying to bring him up to decent standards.

  I don't know if you realize just how funny your description of how Walden depicted Mr & Mrs Beaver seems to me, when as a descendant of Tasmania's earliest wave of British-born inhabitants, married to a working class "bloke" born in Scotland, who insists on teaching me, "English", to bring me up to "Scottish" standards, mainly a bad habit he got into to disguise his worsening hearing loss over the nearly 54 years he has been married to my unapologetically Australian accent. He told me that nobody could understand me when we visited Scotland, nearly 30 years ago, though I could understand those I met, well enough. The real joke is, of course, that his accent now seems more Australian than it did in the past, and that even he admitted, that when he returned to Scotland in1964, his landlady over there, had told him he spoke "proper", even though he picked up some Australian terms like "chook" for chicken. 

I should have thought that Mrs Beaver's skill at using an old Singer sewing machine in Pauline Baynes' illustrations, would have made her admirable by any sort of social standard. The difficulty with using accents as illustrative of characters is that the audience also needs to understand what is being said, whether they come from USA, Australia/NZ or UK, regardless of how they speak at home.

Of course, Aslan would have a universally understood accent, appreciating people as he found them. Thus, he wouldn't use idiomatic words like "bloke" or "chook", himself, but wouldn't judge people who do use that turn of phrase or "drop their Aiches at 'aberfield' only to pick them up at 'Hashfield'". Antipodean Narniawebbers, who have ever visited Sydney, might understand what I mean. Mr Beaver or SC's Puddleglum were appreciated for their intrinsic worth & inner goodness of heart.  Whilst Jadis would be too "stuck-up" to do anything of the kind, speaking in the most offensively "hoity-toity" accent she could find to demonstrate that she had "a high and lonely destiny" and which, of course, would impress Uncle Andrew, with his rather fake way of speaking, to my Aussie ears, anyway. 

That having been said, I preferred Tilda Swanson's icy-cold snake-like suppressed anger at Aslan's world, as Walden's White Witch to BBC's rather screamingly angry-sounding version. 

Posted by: @waggawerewolf27

  I don't know if you realize just how funny your description of how Walden depicted Mr & Mrs Beaver seems to me, when as a descendant of Tasmania's earliest wave of British-born inhabitants, married to a working class "bloke" born in Scotland, who insists on teaching me, "English", to bring me up to "Scottish" standards, mainly a bad habit he got into to disguise his worsening hearing loss over the nearly 54 years he has been married to my unapologetically Australian accent.

... Hopefully this wasn't meant to imply that his worsening hearing loss is directly connected to nearly 54 years of being married to your unapologetically Australian accent.  

Back on topic, we have indeed discussed elsewhere how the Beavers were portrayed in the Walden adaptation of LWW, and I really hope the next version, whenever it comes (maybe a couple of years after Greta Gerwig's MN, so perhaps late 2028?), will improve on that. There was really no need to make Mr Beaver talk like such a crass lower-class bloke ("yobbo" and "ocker" are the Aussie terms that spring to mind), especially with the contrast between the much more well-spoken Mrs Beaver. The Beavers in the book certainly come across as slightly rustic types, and there's nothing wrong with giving them an English regional accent, but they're still both well-spoken, courteous and thoughtful.

Along with that, another aspect of the Walden version that I really didn't like at this point was how the Beavers (particularly Mr) are portrayed as impatient with the Pevensie children's lack of knowledge of Narnia and lack of understanding of what they're getting themselves into with this prophecy and so on. Of course they have no idea about any of these things, seeing three out of the four are newcomers to Narnia (Edmund has only been there once before and only spoke to the White Witch, and Peter and Susan only arrived there earlier that day)! The Beavers in the book explain everything in detail and answer all the children's questions respectfully. Making the Beavers incredulously thick-headed and giving the children an attitude of "sorry, we're leaving" was, I reckon, a silly move on Walden's part. Perhaps they just wanted to add some extra tension and drama to that scene, but if so, it wasn't well done.

Anyway, now that it's extremely likely that MN will be the first film in Netflix's new series and LWW will follow on from it, that does cast everything in LWW in a rather new light. There's far less mysteriousness about Aslan, at least for viewers who've seen the first film (and of course for all the others who've read the books and/or seen previous adaptations of LWW!). But I still think there needs to be a sense of awe and wonder in the air when Mr Beaver first speaks his name, and a little later in the Beavers' house when they discuss who he is. Even though, in this particular movie series, we'll have seen him before, we still need to feel the Pevensies' anticipation and excitement and trepidation when they're told they're going to meet a lion who is King over all Narnia (and indeed, who is the King above all Kings, although I don't think that's spelled out explicitly in the original story).

Now I think about it, in some ways, having MN as the first film — if it's done really well!! — needn't spoil the atmosphere of LWW, although it changes it a little. If LWW comes first, we have relatively little time to get to know Aslan before he goes to his sacrificial death, which at first looks like it's the end of all hope. I know when I first encountered LWW (the book), I loved Aslan at once and could completely understand the girls wanting to be with him on that terrible night, and crying over his body for hours. But for some readers and viewers, it might be less convincing — more like "Hang on... they've only just met this lion the previous day, and he's barely spoken to them directly and hardly even done anything within this story, so why are they getting so heartbroken over him??"

However, if we've already seen MN as a film, we've seen Aslan creating Narnia — which has got to be one of the most awesome sequences ever in a children's fantasy story — and we've seen those scenes where Digory is made to face up to the wrong he did in waking Jadis, and now he's lost all hope that Aslan will give him something to cure his mother... and then he looks up and sees those tears in the Lion's eyes. And of course we'll have seen that after Digory successfully stands up to Jadis's temptation when she tries to persuade him to take the apple to heal his mother instead of obeying Aslan's commands, Aslan does give Digory the gift of saving his mother's life.

So with that background of us having already seen Aslan's awesomeness ("both good and terrible at the same time") and his immense compassion illustrated so clearly (as I HOPE they will be) in Netflix's MN, that could actually give the portrayal of him in Netflix's LWW some extra depth and poignancy — because we know a bit more of who Aslan is and can feel a greater sense of the weight of what he's doing. Ideally, anyway, that's how it could work.

(I should add that I'm still absolutely in favour of reading the books in publication order, because the way they're written presupposes that we don't know about Aslan when we first read LWW as the first book, and we discover him as the Pevensie children do. But these upcoming adaptations are not the books, and they can and should do things a little differently if it suits the film medium better — as long as they always keep close to the spirit of the original stories, which is what matters most to me, at least.)

  @ Courtenay: ... Hopefully this wasn't meant to imply that his worsening hearing loss is directlyconnectedto nearly 54 years of being married to your unapologetically Australian accent.

Who? Moi??? Didn't you know I was supposed to be a librarian for much of my working life, running around telling noisy students to keep their voices down in the library, of all places?   I'd end up telling these so-called nice, quiet, accounting students that if their voices were raised any higher, their conversations would entertain passengers as far away as Central Station, a good 40 km away.

Seriously, though, Hubby's hearing loss was due to a childhood ear infection, so bad in his case that he had mastoiditis, abscesses and even a brain tumour of some sort, which he was lucky to survive, in wartime Scotland, & thanks to the surgeon who operated on him just in the nick of time, in Killearn military infirmary, or so I've been told. Increasing industrial deafness wouldn't help, and neither has personal vanity & a reluctance to admit he really needed to persevere with hearing aids rather than being left to struggle with lip reading etc. If he could survive all that, I'm sure he would survive being married to me. But only if he consented to wear his hearing aids.  

But back to the subject: I do agree with much of what you say about regional accents, and about what you say about the beavers as well, despite all those rude media comments about Western Sydney English accents, when their own North Shore accents aren't really any better. The trouble is with reading the books in publication order, that many people, who find LWW so identifiable, have never gone as far as reading MN, or HHB, for that matter, which is rather a pity. It is then a bit too much of a surprise, when after reading The Silver Chair, the next book in time order would have to be the Last Battle, where the Professor, whom we last saw in LWW, turns out to be a Narnia traveller, himself, as well as Polly Plummer, giving her opinion of Susan's 1950's style alleged debutante-style follies which created so much debate about Susan in literary circles. It was still a shock to me to find out in MN, the very last book I actually got around to reading as a child, long before the films were even thought of, that Digory Kirke was actually LWW's Professor Kirke, after all. 

I expect that Magician's Nephew could still keep that surprise until the ending of LWW when they go back from Narnia to his old-fashioned home, which no doubt cost a fortune to keep in order, especially after the war when repairing larger buildings falling to ruin was rather low on UK Government agendas. By the way, by the time the Pevensie children get to the Beaver domicile, in LWW, only two of them were on their first visit to Narnia, when Edmund met the White Witch on his first visit, which he lied about. Just saying!