Except for The Last Battle, The Chronicles of Narnia films should stay at PG. 

What ratings systems?

As far as I'm aware Netflix is not subject to the ratings authorities of either the Movie Industry or the local Television regulators.

Apparently they do provide guidance markings in some form (according to their website) however browsing around Netflix on my TV right now I can't see a single visible rating on offer for any piece of content.

Perhaps it depends on how your app is configured, but I guess my point is that compared to a theatrical release (where classification has a huge impact on potential box-office) the advisory rating on Netflix doesn't seem to make that much of a difference?

I think Netflix does it by TV standard (TV-Y, TV-Y7, TV-G, TV-PG, TV-14, TV-M.

Ratings are different around the world. In the US, there's G (which is rare nowadays), PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17.

CS Lewis once said:

"Let there be wicked kings and beheadings, battles and dungeons, giants and dragons, and let villains be soundly killed at the end of the book. Nothing will persuade me that this causes an ordinary child any kind or degree of fear beyond what it wants, and needs, to feel. For, of course, it wants to be a little frightened.

Narnia could be easily taken to a PG-13 rating level or even an R raing level. I actually agree with @jewel that every Narnia except for The Last Battle, should be kept at a PG level. I don't think you can do The Last Battle with a PG rating, because there's a lot of intense and violent moments.

I know that there are some Narniawebbers on here who are parents, so the rating system for Narnia would obviously be a concern.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

The scene where the White Witch kills Aslan on the Stable Table, they could easily show it actually happen.

I can't think of very many things that would go more solidly against Lewis's intentions and his writing style. He had enough complaints from critics that the Narnia books were "too violent for children" as it was. But he in fact never describes any violent scene in very great detail, if he describes it at all — and pretty much every time he does, he makes it clear that violence is a horrible thing and that it's only justifiable when there is honestly no better option. He himself served in one of the most bloody and brutal wars in history — only for a relatively short time, but he saw more than enough there that he never wanted to talk about afterwards even to adults, let alone to young children. There is simply no way he would have described the killing of Aslan or have wanted any screen adaptation to show it happening.

Both book and adaption tend to falter as it happens, but you still know it happens.

I'm not sure what "tend to falter" means. It comes across in his writing as a very deliberate decision, and every adaptation I'm aware of has respected that:

The children did not see the actual moment of the killing. They couldn't bear to look and had covered their eyes.

I still remember my own inward relief and total understanding when Mum first read that line to me, when I was about 4 1/2 years old!

I'm aware it's often defined as a very British trait — understatement, or "implied, not stated", as a way of getting a point across in a more meaningful way than showing or describing it graphically would do. I'd say Lewis uses it very effectively here (and in other places as well, but Aslan's death is probably the stand-out example), and that in fact makes the scene more powerful than "showing" it (verbally or visually) would do. We know what's about to happen. We see the Witch raising the knife and hear her declaring "despair and die". We don't NEED a graphic portrayal, on the page or on the screen, of what happens when the knife comes down. I would say describing blood and gore, or even the look on Aslan's face at that moment, would not only be too scary for many young readers, but would actually cheapen the scene. By having Lucy and Susan cover their eyes at "the actual moment", Lewis is drawing us straight into their thoughts and feelings — they don't see it, so we don't either, and if we have even a skerrick of empathy, we'll understand why they weren't looking. And leaving that "actual moment" up to our imaginations, rather than describing it, is honestly more chillingly effective than giving us a picture of it.

I really hope that Netflix — IF they really are going to produce a Narnia series at all (I'm beginning to doubt, as I've said elsewhere) — will have that much respect for the way Lewis deliberately wrote, and the age group he was writing for, and not make any of their films / serials go above a PG rating. I agree with others here that The Last Battle would be very difficult to keep at that level, but even in that book, Lewis doesn't go into unnecessary detail over the battle itself; he brings out in a number of ways that it's like a feverish dream to those experiencing it, and that when fighting for one's life, "you haven't much time to feel either frightened or sad" (again, he is writing from actual experience).

With that in mind, I'm sure it would be possible for good and thoughtful screenplay writers to get across how terrible the battle is WITHOUT making the violence too graphic — again, cutting the scene at the moment a sword or other weapon comes down, or showing casualties lying dead without any close-ups of their injuries. If the film-makers have any sensitivity at all towards both the intended audience and the original author, they should be able to do that effectively.

Posted by: @courtenay

 

I'm not sure what "tend to falter" means. It comes across in his writing as a very deliberate decision, and every adaptation I'm aware of has respected that:

 

The children did not see the actual moment of the killing. They couldn't bear to look and had covered their eyes.

That's what "falters" means. It's like turning the camera away or jumping to the next scene in movies or turning off all the lights or even having a flashing light on stage. In religious movies, I'm sure we've seen where they show the guards going to the prison, getting ready to behead John the Baptist. They usually cut to the next scene before it even happens.

Posted by: @courtenay

I really hope that Netflix — IF they really are going to produce a Narnia series at all (I'm beginning to doubt, as I've said elsewhere) — will have that much respect for the way Lewis deliberately wrote, and the age group he was writing for, and not make any of their films / serials go above a PG rating.

Any company could make a Narnia adaption, since we are speaking of future adaptions. Walden rated all three of the movies PG, so at least six of them should be kept at a PG-level.

Posted by: @courtenay

I agree with others here that The Last Battle would be very difficult to keep at that level, but even in that book, Lewis doesn't go into unnecessary detail over the battle itself; he brings out in a number of ways that it's like a feverish dream to those experiencing it, and that when fighting for one's life, "you haven't much time to feel either frightened or sad" (again, he is writing from actual experience).

There is the Battle of Stable Hill, and there's also a moment where the dwarfs shoot the horses. There's even a moment where Tirian and Jewel unintentionally kill two Calormenes. Hey, they could even show the railway accident. Then there's the moment where Tash shows up in the stable, which I'm sure it would give kids nightmares for a long time.

@jasmine_tarkheena 
Are you saying that 'falter' has a different meaning when applied to filming?

In all other situations, it indicates losing strength or courage, being hesitant in action or speech.

Posted by: @coracle

@jasmine_tarkheena 
Are you saying that 'falter' has a different meaning when applied to filming?

Yes, that is what I am saying. It can all applied to books, when you read about something is about to happen, though there is no detail given.

So in Narnia movies, tone of violence is one thing. There's language to consider. There are some words in the book series that some readers might find offensive. In the Focus on the Family Radio Theatre adaption, they removed the dwarfs calling the Calormenes "Darkies" and replaced the word "ass" with "donkey".

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

Yes, that is what I am saying. It can all applied to books, when you read about something is about to happen, though there is no detail given.

Coracle's said what I was trying to say — I don't think "faltering" is the right word for what Lewis was doing in avoiding describing the killing of Aslan. He wasn't losing strength or courage, which is what "faltering" actually means. He was making a deliberate decision not to include details of a brutal incident that would very likely upset young readers (or their parents!!) — and as I've said, I find the scene stronger and more memorable precisely because we're NOT told those details. Any attempt to describe the knife going in, the blood flowing out, the look on Aslan's face at the final moment, etc. would actually cheapen a really dark point in the story and risk sounding terribly melodramatic and overdone.

And to get back on topic, we're talking about the age-appropriate ratings of future Narnia films / series; I don't know how film and TV ratings work in the US, but here in Britain, PG is the highest rating that's considered suitable for children under 12. Whichever way you look at it, the intended audience of the Narnia books definitely includes children under 12. Showing violent scenes in graphic detail — which Lewis ALWAYS avoids doing, even in The Last Battle — would go against the whole spirit of the Chronicles, more than almost anything else I can think of. And since the books and previous adaptations have been established for so long as "family favourites", I can only imagine a not-suitable-for-children version of Narnia would go down like a lead balloon with most viewers. I hope to goodness Netflix, or any future producers, won't do that.

@courtenay 

In the US, the ratings are G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17. We are having a discussion of what concerns that we might have about how Narnia films would be rated. This would be especially for those who are parents. 

There's even a moment in The Silver Chair where they cut off the serpent's head. It's the last thing you expect to come from a children's book. It might be a concern if they show that in a move adaption of The Silver Chair. 

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

We are having a discussion of what concerns that we might have about how Narnia films would be rated. This would be especially for those who are parents. 

Er, yeah, I did pick that up.  

My point is, simply — if someone wants the killing of Aslan to be shown on screen, when Lewis himself chose not to describe it and depicting it would almost certainly land the film with a not-suitable-for-children rating... how would that count as a faithful adaptation of a beloved story for children, and how likely is it to be popular with the general public? I'm sure there are people out there who enjoy "darker" rewrites / remakes of children's stories, but I doubt many devoted fans of Narnia — or parents who are simply looking for "family-friendly" shows for their kids to watch — would be happy with that kind of adaptation.

@courtenay 

The same could imply where in The Silver Chair, they cut off the serpent's head in a fight scene. While the book describes the aftermath has a mess, there's still no details given. 

There's also tone of language to consider. There are some words in the book series that some readers might be offened by. I'm that there are some parents who wouldn't their children to repeat those words. 

Then there's tone of sexuality. Rabadash's lust for Susan in The Horsr And His Boy is not explicitly written, being a children's book. However, a movie adaption could easily take that on a sexual tone. It would be kind of surprising, like it what was for Disney adaption of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Sex is such a big no-no for Disney or any family-friendly movie company. While the issue of lust is a relevant topic, I don't think movie adaption of Narnia, especially in The Horse And His Boy, should go overboard with it. 

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

Then there's tone of sexuality. Rabadash's lust for Susan in The Horsr And His Boy is not explicitly written, being a children's book. However, a movie adaption could easily take that on a sexual tone. It would be kind of surprising, like it what was for Disney adaption of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Sex is such a big no-no for Disney or any family-friendly movie company. While the issue of lust is a relevant topic, I don't think movie adaption of Narnia, especially in The Horse And His Boy, should go overboard with it. 

I don't think so either, and I doubt the vast majority of Narnia fans would either. But that's the point we keep coming back to — as soon as a Narnia adaptation starts featuring things that would give it a rating higher than PG, it's no longer classed as a kids' film. And that goes squarely against how the books are written and how Narnia in general has been marketed for the past 70+ years. I can't imagine any studio would want to risk offending the majority of fans and losing their main audience just for the sake of producing a "dark", "edgy", "different" version of Narnia.

Plus, a relationship, especially between Cor and Aravis and even Caspian and Ramandu’s daughter, should be kept a PG-level. They can have them sharing a kiss at the end, it’s fine. 

Well, I certainly hope that the producers and writers for Netflix will 'stay inside the lines' (to use a colouring-in expression) set by Lewis when he chose not to describe, depict or present material that was not helpful or appropriate for his readers. 

I hope that nothing will induce or allow them to step into areas that Lewis hesitated to give us. 

Considering the history of the last two production houses, I think the Estate will be tougher now. (Walden not renewed after going way outside the lines on VDT, and the next company wanting a girl-power SC focussed on Jill as a "kick-a**" girl, excuse my asterisks!)