If you think about it, shouldn't VDT have been the longer film in the first place? [...]

Good point, Boy Scout. While book!VDT is "only" longer by about 20 or so pages (in comparison to SC), because of the way the plot is designed, that's a whole lot more material. In order to get a proper feel of each island, you'd need about twenty minutes each. And without combining Deathwater and Dragon's Island, thats averages out to a total of 100 minutes. Add in ten to twenty each for Aslan's country, Eustace's house, the first meeting, and ending, and you're looking at a possible run time of 160 minutes minimum. Film!VDT was a paltry 113. :/

I voted for Andrew Adamson, though I also very greatly agree with the majority. VDT needed a lot more time to be done 'right'. I do like the movie, but even coming out of the move theater I felt it was much too rushed. Perhaps if they had more time they could have handled Narrowhaven properly - the book way. Or even explained the green mist, though I am not sure, without a great amount of back story, if they even could be explained. The islands, each of them, needed more time for sure.

Though, I feel, like some others here, that Mr. Adamson had a passion that Mr. Apted did not. Though Mr. Apted is probably a good director, Mr. Adamson seemed to know the books. He had grown with them as a child and was bringing to them a magic. I am sure some of what muddled VDT was not all the directors fault, but with Adamson I think, perhaps, we might have gotten a better adaption.

I also feel that Disney would have helped a great deal. It would have launched a much better marketing strategy, though a bit too much might have been spent for PC's marketing. Also, Disney brought a 'feel', though I think all factors played into this, that Fox didn't. Fox is a great company - I like it very much - though I am more partial to Disney. With Disney, Mr. Adamson, and more time I think that VDT would have been amazing.

I do like VDT, the CG and cinematography were wonderful, and it had some good parts. The entrance into Narnia, through the painting, being one of them. But it most certainly has its flaws...

I remember when I first walked into the theater and saw the run time, I was like "WHAT!?" because it was so short. So I would say that it definitely needed more time, even then I still think it would have been terrible.

As short as the movies was (and yes, it was very short) I just don't think more time would have saved it. The fact still remains that there was a ridiculous amount of disagreeing behind the scenes. Plus, the filmmakers did not understand the moral or theological concepts behind the story. The morals are what really make the Narnia series what it is. If that isn't there, it isn't Narnia. No matter how much longer you make it.

~Riella

I voted for giving it more money. That might have eased up things, and perhaps even have allowed for some more time - I guess some cuts were made because it would have cost too much to make the extra minutes (especially if characters like Reepicheep or Aslan were to figure prominently in the scenes).

I guess, though, that economic freedom is what I'm talking about, not just adding so many millions to the production budget. That's a somewhat different concept.

I voted Andrew Adamson.
I think hes a great directer.

Andriel

Andrew Adamson would be my #2 choice. I think if he were director we at least would have gotten stronger performances from Georgie and Skander. He had a great connection with the kids.

Disney's marketing might have helped VDT make a bit more money (Fox's marketing was quite shoddy, to be honest) but I don't think the movie itself would have been much affected. And a better movie is what I want. Disney wouldn't have been happy with VDT's earnings unless they were more than PC's by a decent amount, I think. I'm not sure even their advertising skills could have pulled that off.

I don't think VDT needed more money - the sets and effects are all as beautiful as could be desired. The only thing I can think of that more money could have provided is the dying dragon Eustace sees. Which would have been nice. OH - the Green Mist was not "As beautiful as could be desired", true. But I don't care how stunningly creepy it could have been. It still stinks as a plot device.

I choose more time as the best improvement that could have been made. So many important scenes were rushed through, so many quintessential moments watered down to cheap winks at the book. With more time, I like to imagine we'd have seen a really meaningful moment with Lucy and the Albatross, more time spent tasting the sweet waters and sailing through the Silver Sea. The storm could have been more intense, we'd have seen more spells in the Magician's Book, learned more about the dufflepuds, and expanded the Lone Islands/Lord Bern blip. Even the information dump by Coriarkin could have become more natural. (A girl can dream...)