I voted for "Yes, they needed his change to make it work". I believe the book version was great, but I'm not sure how well it could have been adapted without it looking fake. Maybe I'm wrong, but the way they made it in the movie to me is just as magical and adventurous as it was written.

I voted 'no either way'. The book version with the picture was great and I think that this is great too for the film!

I voted Yes, they needed this change to make it work, because it would come across better than if they used the way in the book. It would seem more real.

Every movie has changed the entrance to Narnia (though LWW was really close... just had the first entrance due to hide and seek rather than exploring the house) and I've really liked the way they've changed them all.

I think that having the picture frame growing and growing may have looked a bit silly. Maybe not. Either way, I like what they did in the movie.

I voted 'Yes, they needed to make this change for it to work.'

I voted not better, not worse. I had always imagined that with modern effects that the entrance could have been done as described in the book. (And not look silly but cool. )

But after having seen the way it is being done umpteen times now , I think this way works and is close enough to the book. A wave of water does enter the room in the book, just not enough to flood the room. One slight change I am liking is that the painting still looks like a painting when it comes to life; not completely real as in the book.

So, despite changes I don't think were necessary, I do like it overall.

I voted not better, not worse. I had always imagined that with modern effects that the entrance could have been done as described in the book. (And not look silly but cool. )

But after having seen the way it is being done umpteen times now , I think this way works and is close enough to the book. A wave of water does enter the room in the book, just not enough to flood the room. One slight change I am liking is that the painting still looks like a painting when it comes to life; not completely real as in the book.

So, despite changes I don't think were necessary, I do like it overall.

My sentiments exactly.

I voted for "Yes, they needed his change to make it work". I think it was very intresting how they pull the picture on themselves.

I voted that it's better than the book! IMO, it is! I love it! mostly because it's dramatic and I love drama and the more drama the better!

I voted other. I do like the way it is in the book, but I am not opposed to changes if the changes have good reasons behind them. Like GlimGlum, I think the way it is in the book could have been very cool, but what I have seen of the movie entrance I have liked so far. However, since I haven't seen the entire scene I don't know if I'll like it as much when I actually see the movie. I think it will be good, but I need to see the entire scene before I decide.

I voted "No, it was an unnecessary change." I think it we give some veiwers less of an opportunity to get to know Eustace. Instead of irrationally jumping onto the picture, He just walks in and says "Whats going on in here?" So first time eiwers are going to say "Who on Earth is this kid."

And to me the scene looks comepletely fake/cheap right up until the underwater shot.

I voted "No, it was an unnecessary change." I think it we give some veiwers less of an opportunity to get to know Eustace. Instead of irrationally jumping onto the picture, He just walks in and says "Whats going on in here?" So first time eiwers are going to say "Who on Earth is this kid."

Given how significantly they seem to have expanded the opening of the movie beyond just the bedroom scene, evidently including lengthy new scenes such as Edmund and Lucy out in Cambridge buying groceries for Harold and Alberta, i highly doubt his "What's going on in here?" line will be the first time we meet Eustace in the movie, so i really wouldn't worry about that.

And to me the scene looks comepletely fake/cheap right up until the underwater shot.

I'm not necessarily going to disagree with you there though

Its a combination of the unfinished VFX and the harsh picture quality of the digital cameras which really make it look cheap IMO.

Hmm... I think it was a very good choice to make. Maybe it's just because my imagination has been scarred by the BBC versions, but the way the Pevensies entered Narnia never sat well with me. It worked in the novels, it looked beyond ridiculous and awful in the BBC series. I thought the way they visualised their entrance into Narnia in PC was superb and I love the way they're doing it for VDT (although, I happen to agree to an extent with those who say some of the CGI is underdone and also I'm not a big fan of the change to digital cameras).

I'm pretty sure digital cameras are necessary to shoot in 3D.

Another reason why it shouldn't have been made in 3D. Ick.