@lentenlands 

I don’t know what C. S. Lewis would have thought of changing the reasons for the Pevensies staying at the Professor’s house from the air raids to the archaeological expedition of their parents. The 1967 production was a loose adaptation that was more like a play than a strict version of the book. Still it is not all bad, and I wish all of the episodes had survived.  If they had more money they probably could have had better costumes and sets, but I think what they had was still serviceable. They probably should have kept the World War II time period at the beginning. I don’t remember that references to any time period were mentioned, but the series looked very old fashioned.  At least the setting didn’t look too modern in appearance. 🙂

@narnian78 that was the production that was originally going to be a sort of narrator + some actors (known as 'Jackanory') style, but it grew bigger. However it wasn't budgetted for lots of fancy costumes or effects.

It does seem kind of unrealistic when the clothing is updated and the characters use old fashioned English. This has been done in live Shakespeare plays, and I think it would be out of place in Narnia whether it was in a play or movie. If the characters are speaking like people would in the 1940’s they should appear like they came from that time period. That is the best way to preserve the dialogue from the books.  Of course the Pevensies did act more like medieval royalty later in the story, but that was long after they reached Narnia.  The Narnian world actually changed their character and made them more like they were living in a medieval time. It was the advantage of being once a king or queen in Narnia and always remaining that way.

Interesting discussion and thoughtful points made. 

I pretty much said my thoughts in, I believe, another thread (or was it this one - hmm) that I'm very keen for the 1940s setting to be kept.

((Warning: the following text may be hard to follow as I'm not great at voicing my thoughts articulately and it may seem a tad ramble-y... There are also probably a few points I have forgotten to make, as well, but I shall have to make another post to add to this if necessary.))

I must admit that the podcast on the matter did get me questioning just why it was so necessary for me that it stick to the original timeline. I suppose a lot of it is my fascination with the past, and sometimes/most times I find modern life hard and value the escapism that a slice of history can bring (obviously I don't mean escapism in a way of saying that everything was much better then!). Though saying that, the War years and earlier 20th Century England overall, particularly in its depiction of rural life, has been painted as simpler, more idyllic times, where people would help each other out (pulling together particularly during the War) and just push through the difficulties of life. How much this ideal has been fabricated or not - times were certainly tough in many ways, but there is something to be said about this idea - the wistful feeling towards such times is strong. I'd bring the word 'traditionalism' here, too. There is also through this a sense of innocence that fits the 'fairytale' aspect of the Narnia stories.

As others have covered, the character of the children of these times fits the greater Narnia narrative with a particular sense of wonder and reaction to the land which would not be the same reaction that modern children would have. To be modern about it would have the children questioning their situations more with contemporary ideas that could make other scenes more awkward, or very much changed. Why can't people accept stories set in the not-so-distant past, anyway? The 1940s were already some time back by the time I was getting into Narnia and it didn't bother me as a child. I didn't need it to be contemporary to get things from it. I think I feel it just might be a bit too jarring to change the setting. However, I wouldn't completely write it off if they planned to do it in very considered way.

(I hope I made some sense! 🙂 )