Posted by: @coracle

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. 

As it should be. I think the Walden movies did a good job with the battle scenes without showing any blood. It does show that it can be done. Even the romance between Caspian and Susan in the Walden adaption of Prince Caspian was kept at a PG-level, even though it wasn't in the book.

Posted by: @coracle

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 ne t company wanting a girl-power SC focussed on Jill as a "kick-a**" girl, excuse my asterisks!)

I understand the asterisks, because that implies to the tone of language. CS Lewis would have probably chosen a different word today. He would have most likely chose the word "donkey" instead of the "a" word. Even the word "gay" has changed over time. It didn't always mean as what we think of today. It used to be mean "merry" and "happy".

@jasmine_tarkheena (off topic)

In British English the word ass and donkey are the same thing. The word for the 'rear end' is different in spelling and pronunciation.  I have no problem with it and I doubt Lewis would .

And back to the topic!

In talking about concerns for the rating system of Narnia, I think we can all agree that each movie should be kept at a PG-level.

As I have mentioned about violence, the Walden movie adaptions did a pretty good job with doing the battle scenes without being too graphic. It's still intense, but there wasn't any blood.

For language, some words that CS Lewis used might offend some people. The Focus on the Family Radio adaption of The Last Battle removed the dwarfs calling the Calormenes "darkies", indicating that some might find it as a racist comment. Would CS Lewis have chosen a different word than "darkies" today? It's hard to say.

For sexuality, Walden kept Caspian and Susan's relationship at a PG-level, even though it wasn't in the book. They should keep any kind of a relationship, especially between Caspian and Ramandu's daughter and Cor and Aravis, at a PG-level. Even Rabadash's lust for Susan should be kept at a PG-level.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

For language, some words that CS Lewis used might offend some people. The Focus on the Family Radio adaption of The Last Battle removed the dwarfs calling the Calormenes "darkies", indicating that some might find it as a racist comment. Would CS Lewis have chosen a different word than "darkies" today? It's hard to say.

Good point and I can totally understand them removing that word in a modern adaptation, just out of not wanting to encourage young viewers / hearers to go using it in real life, even innocently. That said, it's never been edited out of the book, and it's only the Dwarfs who use it, and they're presented as very nasty, self-centred, contemptible characters whom we as readers aren't supposed to want to imitate!! It'd be a lot worse if any of the "good" characters used racial slurs for the Calormenes, but they don't. Even so, the use of that word (or any other insulting terms) isn't an essential part of the plot and it doesn't seriously matter if adaptations leave it out.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

For sexuality, Walden kept Caspian and Susan's relationship at a PG-level, even though it wasn't in the book. They should keep any kind of a relationship, especially between Caspian and Ramandu's daughter and Cor and Aravis, at a PG-level. Even Rabadash's lust for Susan should be kept at a PG-level.

I'd definitely prefer them not to include any romances (or implied romances) that aren't in the books, even at a PG level!! But it's easily possible to portray two characters romantically attracted to each other and not show anything that wouldn't be suitable for pre-teenage viewers. Disney movies do it all the time!  And even with Rabadash, Lewis himself carefully keeps everything within appropriate bounds for young readers (publishers' standards for what could and couldn't be included in a children's book were certainly stricter in the 1950s than they are today!), while still making it clear enough what's motivating the Prince. I know I as a 7-year-old first-time reader could understand this passage about Rabadash obsessively "wanting" Queen Susan without needing to have any clear notion of what he would do with her when he got her...  

"But I want her," cried the Prince. "I must have her. I shall die if I do not get her — false, proud, black-hearted daughter of a dog that she is! I cannot sleep and my food has no savour and my eyes are darkened because of her beauty. I must have the barbarian queen." (HHB, Chapter 8, "In the House of the Tisroc")

For the purposes of a film / TV version, I can imagine they might add a scene in which Rabadash proposes to Susan, she (clearly realising he isn't a good man) turns him down, he advances towards her menacingly and insists he MUST and WILL marry her, and then perhaps Edmund walks in at just that moment and Rabadash backs off, and that's what leads to the Narnians' decision that they need to escape from Calormen as quick as they can... that isn't shown in the book (I'm inventing it off the top of my head!), but it's perhaps one age-appropriate way they could get the point across in a screen adaptation.

Posted by: @courtenay

I'd definitely prefer them not to include any romances (or implied romances) that aren't in the books, even at a PG level!! But it's easily possible to portray two characters romantically attracted to each other and not show anything that wouldn't be suitable for pre-teenage viewers. Disney movies do it all the time!  

Nothing against romance as a whole, but there is a time and place for it. Now Disney movies doing it all the time is kind of a stretch. Not every Disney movie has a romantic couple, but quite a majority do. When I talk about relationship between Cor and Aravis and relationship between Caspian and Ramandu's daughter, I think we can all agree it should be kept at a PG-level.

Posted by: @courtenay

And even with Rabadash, Lewis himself carefully keeps everything within appropriate bounds for young readers (publishers' standards for what could and couldn't be included in a children's book were certainly stricter in the 1950s than they are today!), while still making it clear enough what's motivating the Prince. I know I as a 7-year-old first-time reader could understand this passage about Rabadash obsessively "wanting" Queen Susan without needing to have any clear notion of what he would do with her when he got her...  

"But I want her," cried the Prince. "I must have her. I shall die if I do not get her — false, proud, black-hearted daughter of a dog that she is! I cannot sleep and my food has no savour and my eyes are darkened because of her beauty. I must have the barbarian queen." (HHB, Chapter 8, "In the House of the Tisroc")

When you read the passage of Rabadash wanting Susan for his wife, that he can't sleep, you know then it's not the same as real love. Now the way his lust is presented in film/TV would be a concern. The way that Frollo's lust for Esmeralda is presented in Disney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame makes you wonder if it is a kid's movie. So I could see that the way that Rabadash's lust for Susan is presented would be a concern.

Posted by: @courtenay

For the purposes of a film / TV version, I can imagine they might add a scene in which Rabadash proposes to Susan, she (clearly realising he isn't a good man) turns him down, he advances towards her menacingly and insists he MUST and WILL marry her, and then perhaps Edmund walks in at just that moment and Rabadash backs off, and that's what leads to the Narnians' decision that they need to escape from Calormen as quick as they can... that isn't shown in the book (I'm inventing it off the top of my head!), but it's perhaps one age-appropriate way they could get the point across in a screen adaptation.

I can see that happening. I think Rabadash would be kind of like Gaston in Beauty and the Beast, where he wants to have Belle as his wife, because they're both attractive! Maybe that could be the case for Rabadash, "Hey, I'm a handsome prince and she's a beautiful queen. So yes, we should be married!"

Sexual harassment is not exactly appropriate for family viewing. Now maybe Rabadash proposing to Susan and she turns him down would be acceptable. When Edmund walks in just the moment where Rabadash advances towards Susan, it would be as he was saying, "Ah, excuse me, but you're in a kids movie."

Shasta and Aravis are two children. Shasta was surprised when he heard that Aravis's father was marrying her off (to a much older man). 

There is no room for them to have a romance in this story. They slowly move from disliking each other (Aravis looking down on the scruffy peasant boy, Shasta not keen on the proud rich girl) to understanding and accepting each other. By the end of the battle, they are friends. Lewis mentions that when they grew up they married.

And that's that. It's a children's story. 

@coracle 

Even a close friendship should be kept at a PG-level. How a relationship is defined is relevant.

When I talk about that there's a time and place for a romance, I'm referring to any forms of media in general, not just Narnia. As I've mentioned, not every Disney movie has a romantic couple.

The Horse and His Boy can easily be advertised with Cor and Aravis as a couple, though it doesn't have to be. They argue quite a lot at their first meeting. Even after they married later in life, they continued to argue, though they make up for it.

In Voyage of the Dawn Treader, Caspian was drawn to Ramandu's daughter's innocence. It wasn't just a physical attraction, as Hollywood often tends to do.

So how a relationship is defined and presented is crucial, especially in a children's story. I think we can all agree that they should not go overboard with it.

@jasmine_tarkheena 

Perhaps (to save the cost of new sets, new actors, and new costumes), they might not actually show them getting married (10 years later as adults), but have could throw in a 'prediction' conversation.  Someone at the end saying how well-matched they are, and such good friends. Perhaps they'll marry one day. Other person mentions that they still argue. First person says that wouldn't stop them having a good marriage.  This could be King Lune and Lucy.

This is out of my head, and is entirely G cert.

Posted by: @coracle

Perhaps (to save the cost of new sets, new actors, and new costumes), they might not actually show them getting married (10 years later as adults), but have could throw in a 'prediction' conversation.  Someone at the end saying how well-matched they are, and such good friends. Perhaps they'll marry one day. Other person mentions that they still argue. First person says that wouldn't stop them having a good marriage.  This could be King Lune and Lucy.

That's totally fine, to a certain point. Aravis might mentioned she doesn't want to get married (implicating her reason for running away to Narnia). Even King Edmund might say, "They sure make a nice couple! Maybe they'll marry one day!"

Because she's going to live at Anvard Castle,  Aravis might say she'd like to be like Q Lucy and Q Susan and not ever get married. Lune might say with a smile that she has plenty of time to think about that, and we see him looking over at Cor as the scene changes.

Are we off topic?

It would be so easy for other books that have battles to become more violent than G or PG. Not one of them needs to be. Lewis, as we have noted, didn't give the gory details!

Posted by: @coracle

Because she's going to live at Anvard Castle,  Aravis might say she'd like to be like Q Lucy and Q Susan and not ever get married. Lune might say with a smile that she has plenty of time to think about that, and we see him looking over at Cor as the scene changes.

Are we off topic?

It would be so easy for other books that have battles to become more violent than G or PG. Not one of them needs to be. Lewis, as we have noted, didn't give the gory details!'

Well, kind of off topic and kind of not. I think the way that Rabadash's lust for Susan is presented would imply as well. It could easily be taken on a violent and sexual tone. Sexual harassment would not be appropriate for a G or PG-rating.

In tone of language, there's a moment in The Last Battle where Tirian hears the dwarf Griffle using dreadful language, which implies that he was swearing. However, the book refrains from the actual words.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

I think the way that Rabadash's lust for Susan is presented would imply as well. It could easily be taken on a violent and sexual tone. Sexual harassment would not be appropriate for a G or PG-rating.

I think it depends on how it's actually portrayed... we've already mentioned Gaston's treatment of Belle in Disney's Beauty and the Beast, and I'm sure there are other films aimed at young audiences as well, where the anti-hero is pursuing a young woman in a way that she clearly doesn't welcome and that even young children can understand as wrong and unfair, without needing to go into details. It can definitely be done in a way that's not too explicit but still gets that message across. I would think the screenwriters and producers would know what the "official" boundaries are in the industry for what can and can't be shown under a G (U in the UK) or PG rating. Lewis certainly managed, in the original books, to keep "adult themes" subtle enough to not cause problems with his publishers in the 1950s, a time when standards for what was appropriate in children's books were stricter than they are now.

Honestly, I think the only serious concern in all this would be if Netflix or some future producer decided to do a "darker", more "adult" version of Narnia than we have in the actual books or in previous screen adaptations. As I've already said, that would go against not only Lewis's own intentions, but also the expectations of just about all the fans of these books that have been rated as children's classics for the past 70 years. Unless the producers want to cause epic outrage and end up with only a very small audience, they really have no choice but to keep the entire series suitable for under-12s. It's the only decision that makes sense there (not just morally but commercially, which is what film makers typically care most about!), so I'm really not sure why we need to be too concerned about this whole topic.

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

In tone of language, there's a moment in The Last Battle where Tirian hears the dwarf Griffle using dreadful language, which implies that he was swearing. However, the book refrains from the actual words.

That's something that the makers of the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit films did well. If someone was swearing or saying something nasty, they did it in the character's own language!  But they also used toned versions of harsh words, "you maggots!" - as Tolkien and Lewis both did in their books.

Posted by: @coracle

Posted by: @jasmine_tarkheena

In tone of language, there's a moment in The Last Battle where Tirian hears the dwarf Griffle using dreadful language, which implies that he was swearing. However, the book refrains from the actual words.

That's something that the makers of the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit films did well. If someone was swearing or saying something nasty, they did it in the character's own language!  But they also used toned versions of harsh words, "you maggots!" - as Tolkien and Lewis both did in their books.

You're just reminding me of Captain Haddock in the Tintin books by Hergé — being a rough old sailor, he swears frequently, but to keep it suitable for children, all his insults are words that aren't actually rated as swear words, like "Blistering barnacles!" and streams of invective such as "Poltroons! Ectoplasms! Bashi-bazouks!"  

I can't think of any moments in the Narnia books where a character's use of "dreadful" language is an essential part of the plot, so I'm pretty sure we won't have to worry about a screen version including swear words. (I hope.) There is, on the other hand, the Deplorable Word in The Magician's Nephew, but I'm hoping they won't tell us what that is, in case someone decides to use it...  

Seriously, though — as this is another thing that needs to be kept appropriate for a PG rating — for that scene, if they show it in a flashback, I can imagine a close-up of Jadis mouthing something as the accompanying music rises to a crescendo and so we don't hear the actual word that she says, and then the whole scene is blotted out with dark smoke or something similar... and as it clears, we cut to a long shot of Jadis left standing in the utterly devastated landscape with no-one else left alive. I was just imagining that scene with the bodies of her sister and other people of Charn lying dead on the ground, but a) that really might be getting too graphic for a family-friendly movie, even if they're not shown in close-up; and b) we're not told that Digory and Polly saw any evidence of dead bodies or bones or human remains lying in the ruins of Charn at all. So perhaps they were all reduced to ashes on the spot? Lewis definitely does imply, in Aslan's warning speech near the end, that the Deplorable Word is akin to nuclear weapons in our world. But that's something that's best touched on only very lightly for young viewers. I was 7 when I first read The Magician's Nephew and only had the vaguest idea of what Aslan was talking about — thank goodness, really, or I'd have been terrified — but naturally I understand it more now.

@courtenay I like your reminder of the reduced swear words used in Tintin.

In fact, reduced swear words appear in many books, including adult ones. Until the later 20th century, books for normal consumption would not pass the censorship of most countries, if they had the sort of words used by many people today! 

In a mid-century book about a woman's heroism in WW2, when she first meets the hero he says to another soldier, "Get those mucking women away from here", (not realising the women are English), and one of the women says, "I'll thank you not to use that sort of language!"
[I hope nobody is offended by my using this example; most examples use gentler substitute words, 'blooming', 'darned' etc]