Posted by: @narnian78

They made the mistake of trying to modernize the 1979 animated production of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The Pevensies were made to look like they came from 1970’s, when the production was made.

I've never watched that version in full, but I've seen a few clips, and other than the distinctly 1970s turtle-neck jumpers and hairstyles, the dialogue and narrative all seem to be pretty book accurate from what I could tell.

I was wondering therefore if you could expand on some of the mistakes in that version that resulted from the change in time period, and how it affects the story, as I feel that could be a really interesting point of evidence for the debate 

@icarus I'm not a fan of that adaptation but I don't remember the changes to the time period relating to (what I consider) its weaknesses either, so I'd be interested in Narnian78's response too.

@icarus 

It was mainly the appearance of the Pevensies looking too modern for the 1940’s time period in which the book was set, and the animation didn’t look old fashioned enough for me.  If you have people in 1970’s clothing and the animation looks like a Peanuts special it doesn’t work so well with the book’s time period.  I think it was the same animators that created the Charlie Brown specials, and I liked those, but  Narnia is a completely different thing, and it should not look like the 1970’s.

Here is the complete film of the 1979 production:

I don’t dislike the film, but I think it is not completely accurate to the book in appearance.  The BBC series and the Walden films at least mostly looked like the time period of the books, and I prefer them over the 1979 film.

I remember seeing the 70s version as a teenager. Except for the clothing, there wasn't anything of the 1970s in it, though I thought it was slightly hokey. But then, I was a teenager...

What surprises me now is that Mr. Tumnus looks like a relation of The Yellow Submarine's Blue Meanies, except he's red!

@cobalt-jade 

I thought it did look like 1970’s style of animation.  There was no old fashioned medieval quality about it which makes Narnia so appealing.  It looked nothing like Pauline Baynes illustrations, which were better and more accurate to the medieval nostalgia of the book.  The Charlie Brown specials were better because they fit the time period of the 1960’s and ‘70’s.  Narnia does not work with that time period.

I've been debating about whether I should hearken back to the question of whether the opening of the movie adaptation of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, which really emphasized the time period and the air raids, was a good or a bad thing. It's really not what this topic is supposed to be about, but I do feel like I have an interesting perspective to share on the question, yet I don't feel that it's so interesting it deserves its own topic. As you can tell from glancing at this post's length, the part of me that wants to address it won out.  

When I first heard that the movie's director wanted to make a big deal of the WWII setting, my thought was "this is going to be terrible!" (I meant that aspect of the movie, not the whole thing. If I thought the entire adaptation was going to be terrible, I likely wouldn't have gone to see it.) I just thought that the bombing of London was irrelevant to the main plot of saving Narnia from the White Witch and having a bunch of scenes exploring it would weigh down the movie's beginning with pointless filler. As a kid, I also suspected they wanted to make a big deal out of the historical context to make the movie educational and I didn't like my movies being educational.  

However, when I actually saw the movie in cinemas, I found that the WWII stuff mostly consisted of two scenes at the beginning, and it turned out that I loved them. (Mind you, I mostly just loved the train station scene and what Narnian78 and Icarus were talking about was the blitz scene, but I feel like the former wouldn't work nearly as well without being preceded by the latter.) They really got me invested in the characters. (The actress who played the Pevensies' mother was so great for someone with so little screentime!) I can get up on my high horse and say that, objectively speaking, the scenes weren't true to the spirit of the book, but I can't really say I wish they didn't exist. 

(I do think there's a case to be made the WWII-related stuff in the movie raises questions, mainly will the Pevensie parents survive the war, which the movie never answers but I'm personally able to overlook that.) 

To try to tie all that in with this topic...maybe updating the setting for the "our world" parts of the Narnia books could be like that for me: something that sounds like a terrible idea but ends up working for me when I see the execution. However, also like that example with the LWW movie, the adaptation would have to compensate by being extra faithful in other ways, or at least really good artistically. Does that make sense?

P.S.

For the record, I'm a fan of the 2012 BBC miniseries that reimagined Charles Dickens's Nicholas Nickleby in modern days and the 2018 movie that did the same with Louisa May Alcott's Little Women. I'm even a fan of the web series Emma Approved which not only updated the time period of Jane Austen's Emma but set it in America. 

Setting Narnia in the present day would make it seem very artificial.  If C. S.  Lewis were living today he would be appalled at someone modernizing Narnia. Of course he would not like the idea of making his books into movies, but I don’t think one can always agree with an author on everything since movies can help to promote an interest in books. But I think the movies should be as authentic as possible, and that includes the time and place. Taking too many liberties would discourage interest in the original story.

Posted by: @narnian78

Taking too many liberties would discourage interest in the original story.

Isn't that exact issue of authorial intent already at the heart of the debate though?

• Was it the author's original intention to tell a story that happened in precisely 1940?

• Or was it the author's intent to tell a story that happened exactly 10 years before present? (Relative to the reader)

• Or was the author just trying to tell an nteresting story, of which the time setting is unimportant?

All three things are true of the original book, therefore I don't think one can simply argue that there is only one correct interpretation of what the author intended, even as if said I would lean towards a 1940s preference .

@icarus I think the fact that Lewis mentions that the Pevensies were sent to live with Professor Kirke because of the bombs falling on London does indicate that it was his intention to tell a story set (albeit briefly) during WWII in our world, he could very easily have set it before/after the war or not referenced the war at all, as some other British authors, of both children's and adult novels, writing during WWII did not mention the war in any way.

You know, it's kind of ironic that we're talking about the 1940s/50s having a period charm that adds to Narnia. I'm not an expert on C. S. Lewis or anything but I get the impression from what I know that he considered his own society-what was then modern society-to be boorish and unromantic compared to those in the old books he'd like to read. That's not to say he'd consider our modern society an improvement. But, in Glumpuddle's defense (not that I agree with him; but I believe in giving every side of an argument its due), if they set the non-Narnia parts of a Narnia adaptation in recent times and those parts struck viewers as tacky compared to the Narnia stuff...that really might be closer to Lewis's intentions. 

@icarus 

But I think the time setting was important to Lewis since he chose it and not another period in history. It wasn’t written just because it was an interesting story, but it was a story that happened at a specific dangerous time in history. Why would anyone want to change that or modernize it? It was also a time that Lewis lived through and knew so well. I am certain that if Lewis were alive today he would not approve any change that would modernize the time period.  His views would certainly matter even for something that is made for today’s viewers. 

Posted by: @narnian78

But I think the time setting was important to Lewis since he chose it and not another period in history. It wasn’t written just because it was an interesting story, but it was a story that happened at a specific dangerous time in history. Why would anyone want to change that or modernize it?

I feel like you're ignoring arguments that other Narniawebbers have made, including Narniawebbers who agree with you that modernization would be a bad thing.

Posted by: @gp

Why do it? Because I think it might be more true to C.S. Lewis's intentions. He set the story in a specific time and place that his readers could instantly relate to. I don't think WII specifically is essential. What's important is that the reader has a proximity to the characters in the story. It gives a very short simple story a sense of realism.

Posted by: @courtenay

This has come up in a couple of other discussions here, including a recent one — I can't quite remember which one — but the idea that the WW2 setting needs to play a major role in the story of LWW is actually something cooked up by modern-day commentators and producers of adaptations. In the actual book that Lewis wrote, "the war" gets mentioned once in the second sentence of the first chapter, as the reason why the children are away from their home and their parents, and never comes up again. There isn't the slightest hint of the impact the war is having on them psychologically or in their relationships with each other, or any attempt to draw parallels between the Allies fighting back against Hitler and the Narnians fighting back against the White Witch.

Posted by: @icarus

I'm definitely with you on the inherent charm of a period setting and I would also agree with you that there is very little narrative gain to be had from modernisation.

There is however the fairly significant budgetary benefit of setting it in the present day... Costumes, hair, locations, set dressing, CGI, etc... it all adds up.wjen you are having to maintain period authenticity.

Posted by: @col-klink

You know, it's kind of ironic that we're talking about the 1940s/50s having a period charm that adds to Narnia. I'm not an expert on C. S. Lewis or anything but I get the impression from what I know that he considered his own society-what was then modern society-to be boorish and unromantic compared to those in the old books he'd like to read. That's not to say he'd consider our modern society an improvement. But, in Glumpuddle's defense (not that I agree with him; but I believe in giving every side of an argument its due), if they set the non-Narnia parts of a Narnia adaptation in recent times and those parts struck viewers as tacky compared to the Narnia stuff...that really might be closer to Lewis's intentions. 

You sure don't have to agree with any of that, but you shouldn't act like no one has made a case for setting the stories in recent times.

@col-klink 

Posted by: @col-klink

Posted by: @narnian78

But I think the time setting was important to Lewis since he chose it and not another period in history. It wasn’t written just because it was an interesting story, but it was a story that happened at a specific dangerous time in history. Why would anyone want to change that or modernize it?

I feel like you're ignoring arguments that other Narniawebbers have made, including Narniawebbers who agree with you that modernization would be a bad thing.

I cannot ignore that C.S. Lewis lived during the time period of the book and he wisely chose to set it during that time.  I am not ignoring anyone else’s view, but I am just expressing a different point of view than your own. I am not sure if you understand my intentions.  I just want a movie that is close to Lewis’s own story.  You should already know that Lewis would have been against modernizing his work.  Why not respect what Lewis originally thought even if it is just a movie or TV series based on his books? 

Posted by: @narnian78

I am not ignoring anyone else’s view, but I am just expressing a different point of view than your own.

I guess what I'm saying is that you keep repeating the same points and you haven't really interacted with anyone's counterarguments. You keep responding to them, but I see no evidence you've really read them. 

Posted by: @narnian78

I cannot ignore that C.S. Lewis lived during the time period of the book and he wisely chose to set it during that time...I just want a movie that is close to Lewis’s own story.  You should already know that Lewis would have been against modernizing his work.  Why not respect what Lewis originally thought even if it is just a movie or TV series based on his books? 

But the few people who have argued in favor of updating or at least have been able to see both sides have also been talking about C. S. Lewis's intentions. See the quotes in my previous post. 

@col-klink 

I have read them even though I haven’t directly responded to everything that is in them.  But I am not sure if that is always necessary to support what I said.  You did not know for certain if I had read them so you cannot assume that I didn’t. But since this discussion is becoming no longer friendly should I even continue it? Your attitude is mostly criticizing and finding fault with other people’s views, which isn’t very friendly and may not be appropriate here.