I voted that they will find a way to spotlight Digory's spiritual journey and that they SHOULD focus on Digory's journey, but I don't mean both choices in the same way. They SHOULD bring Digory on a really and truly profound and subtle spiritual journey, but I think that they WILL have a few painfully obvious morally kind of moments (like VDT) without any depth to them.

I've thought through this some more, and yes, I still think they should focus on Digory's spiritual journey, and all the other main themes of MN. But at the moment, unless we get some encouraging news by the time it comes out, it appears that MN will become a gimmick like VDT mostly was.

The movie makers do sound a bit more optimistic in making MN than with VDT, although that doesn't mean they'll be determined to make a great loyal adaption to the book. By now, it's obvious they'll have to make changes so that MN will work as a movie, whether we like it or not, but as long as they DO actually stick as close to the book as possible, that shouldn't be the problem. Are they willing to try that, though? Looking back at VDT, I really doubt right now that they have the confidence and love for the books to take risks and make a non-Hollywood formulated (sp) film.

around the same time I start believing in flying spaghetti monsters.

10 US dollars says Walden's MN is going to feature Polly getting attacked by flying spaghetti monsters.

I think that this book could lend itself well to a movie in it's pure form.
But I really think that they're going to use a gimmick and focus on the action of the story. Blah!

Depends on what you mean by it's pure form. Because Digory's journey is reflected mostly in the narrative, rather than the action and dialogue, they could make a version that is completely faithful on a 2-dimensional level, with all of the scenes intact, but is still wildly unfaithful to the spirit of the book. That is what I meant by "focusing on the action." I personally think that would make for a horrible movie that would make no sense whatsoever to anyone who hasn't read the book. The introduction will make people think it's Digory's story, then they get to Charn and, suddenly it's Jadis' story, then they get to Narnia and it becomes Aslan/Narnia's story. And then eventually it goes back to being Digory's story. When you read the book, everything makes more sense because you see it from Digory's perspective. In a film, if they are going to draw people into Digory's journey, they need to add to or alter things in some way to bring his inner struggles and triumphs closer to the surface.

I voted that they'll find a gimmick to tie everything together. I'll believe they're going to produce a faithful adaptation that doesn't shoehorn pointless action scenes into the movie right around the same time I start believing in flying spaghetti monsters.

In Magician's Nephew, they already have a couple of gimmicks to play with. One is the magical rings which transport people into different worlds. And the second and more important one which really ties it all together is the "Dying Mother" gimmick. In Queen Victoria's day, when school aged children would be thrown on the tender mercies of relatives, if they had any, or sent to orphanages and work houses, was even more of a problem than it is now. Even today, in Western societies, losing a mother is still a bad business for young children.

That is also why Digory's mother must be shown and referenced whether the movie is action oriented or not and whatever emphasis is placed on Digory's spiritual journey. Reading the book, and listening to both the BBC and Focus on the family radio versions, I couldn't help but be struck how many times both goodies and baddies refer to Digory's dying mother to get Digory to do what they want, and for Digory, himself, to gain co-operation and sympathy. Even at the beginning, she is the catalyst for Digory being sent away from visiting DM, and told to stay in the yard, so that DM (Dying Mother) can rest. DM, also known as Uncle Andrew's sister, Mabel, is the reason why Uncle Andrew can get away with spiriting away both children to er elsewhere. Etc.

By the way, does anyone know the process of how movies get their scriptwriters? What is to stop ordinary people like us from submitting a movie script if they are sufficiently motivated to write their own script? Or at least to give it a go?

I think it will be ironic if they make it an action film glorifying violence, since this book has such an anti-violent message.

I voted that they should focus on Digory's journey and that I think they will use some gimmick to tie everything together. Perhaps the guinea pig. Make him a lovable talking guinea pig who travels into the different worlds with the children.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the film makers have learned a little bit from the previous films and won't use a gimmick. There is a good chance, however, that they will leave out to a certain extent Digory's spiritual journey and focus on the action. Not my first choice, but not my last choice either.

As much as I want them to focus on Digory's spiritual journey, I get this horrible boding feeling that they are going to use a gimmick (green mist, anyone?). I mean, VDT was about the spiritual journeys of Eustace and the two Pevensies, and the movie makers totally blew it.

Still, if they get some fresh voices in this process, it might have a chance. It's really not that hard to show someone's spiritual journey onscreen. Granted, it is difficult, but it's not impossible. I think the main problem the screenwriters had with VDT is that the protagonists were not "proactive", meaning they didn't make their own decisions to move the plot along. Luckily, with MN, we have a much more proactive protagonist. Even though Aslan is the one in charge, it is still up to Digory at the climax of the story whether or not he is going to go against what he was told and take some fruit for his mother. Two more important factors in a movie script (well, any story, for that matter) are a Dramatic Question and a driving force (in other words, what the character wants). In MN, both are very clear. We have the Dramatic Question: Will Digory save his mother? And we have a driving force: Digory wants to heal his mother. Hopefully the screenwriters will be able to recognize this and keep it intact.

By the way, does anyone know the process of how movies get their scriptwriters? What is to stop ordinary people like us from submitting a movie script if they are sufficiently motivated to write their own script? Or at least to give it a go?

I know how to go about getting a script considered for a movie, but I'm not exactly sure how different movie makers hire scriptwriters. My screenwriting teacher, who was the screenwriter for the movie Charly, told us that the director was a former classmate of hers who asked her to write the script for him. As for other movies, especially book adaptations, I'm not exactly sure. I'm betting that when they already have a story in mind they "shop around" for screenwriters who fit the bill (kind of like how they shopped around for directors for LWW and found Adamson). Then again, in the case of the Narnia franchise, they've been using the same screenwriters each time. The biggest difference is that Andrew Adamson was directly involved with the writing of LWW and PC, whereas I'm not sure how involved Apted was with VDT (a lot more involved, I'm betting, because I read a draft of the LWW script, before Adamson got his hands on it, and it was much closer to the book than the movie was). As for writing a script and submitting it, one, you have to know what you are doing and submit it in the right format and all, two, you have to have an agent who is enthusiastic about your work and willing to represent you. Without those two things, you will have everything working against you if you try submitting a script.

They SHOULD focus on Digory's journey, definitely.

I'm partway through the book but just from the chapters I've read and listening to the FotF radio drama I voted not 'how will they' but 'hope they will' focus on and spotlight Digory's spiritual journey.

....By the way, does anyone know the process of how movies get their scriptwriters? What is to stop ordinary people like us from submitting a movie script if they are sufficiently motivated to write their own script? Or at least to give it a go?

I only know a tiny bit from having sent fanmail once to a TV scriptwriter who later became a film scriptwriter. A studio wouldn't consider a script from any writer without an agent for legal/intellectual property reasons. I would guess the studio then goes through the scripts they receive. Though there may be ways to get to the "head of the line" (eg. writers with good reputations in the industry) that I'm not aware of.