I think how expendable the rest of the series is depends on how much money this next one makes. I could see the order being MN then HHB (if they make it) then having SC and LB at the end. But they may have to get a different actor to play Eustace. But SC would be awkward with either both Eustace and Jill looking like adults or worse with Eustace looking like an adult and Jill as a little girl. So I don't know how they are going to spin that aspect.

In terms of good story-telling I don't think SC is expendable at all. It would be hard to do LB without doing SC. So it might make more sense to do MN, SC, HHB, LB - just because the actors aging isn't as much of a problem in HHB as it will be for SC.

If Walden left out SC then there would be serious problems for TLB. The only logical option would be to leave Jill out of TLB because the story relies on her coming to Narnia before. It will seem random to just throw in a new character for the finale. Also, with Jill gone the ending is thrown out of wack. There are two possible ending scenarios if Jill isn't there.

1. It ends as normal but there are only six friends of Narnia.
2. Susan takes Jill's place as the seventh friend. Personally, I think that Susan's fall contradicts her established character development in the movies but I would never forgive the film makers for cutting another character so Susan can get her place in Aslan's Country. Plus event though many people thought Susan's fate was cruel, most fans will be outraged over such a radical departure to the source material.

A faithful adaption of TLB would be impossible without the SC. Jill is a key character and the series and the story will fall apart without her.

SleepingDragon, I agree with you.
For this reason I am totally against any ideas of leaving out SC or Jill, it just wouldn't make sense. Jill is a well liked character and she has already been mentioned, suggesting that she is relevent (Why say anything if it wont matter later?) Plus, Susan coming back would contradict the whole message that Susan stood for (hope that makes sense...)
Waterkid72 is right about SC being one of the best written books in the series and in my opinion as well as many others it is the best option to follow next. Missing it out would be a BIG mistake as it would just anger fans. and missing Jill out of LB would be even worse

To me the most expendable book in the series is LB. None of the other books rely on it for interest or back story. Each book in the series is a self-contained narrative with it's own proper conclusion. There's no need for a finale to the overall "story" since there is no on-going story. And it's so dark, much darker than SC, it would be very difficult to market to family audiences.

I don't really see how anyone could like MN over SC. Although SC is not my favorite and not really close to being my favorite it does include Jill and Eustace who are some of my favorite characters. I personally enjoy reading SC and I do think it would make more money than MN. I sure hope they don't pass it by.

Think they should bypass MN and go on to Make SC and LB. Even though HHB is my favorite story out of all of the books, I think it would be pointless to make HHB and MN. I mean if they wanted to make MN it should have been the first one.

Think they should bypass MN and go on to Make SC and LB. Even though HHB is my favorite story out of all of the books, I think it would be pointless to make HHB and MN. I mean if they wanted to make MN it should have been the first one.

If they didn't make MN, Digory and Polly's appearance in LB would be confusing for non-book fans.

Digory was introduced in LWW, and Polly could easily be left out altogether. The biggest problem in doing LB without MN first would be the rings subplot. Without considerable time spent on explanation, the rings would come across as a contrived, and rather puzzling, plot device.

Also HHB is needed to provide an introduction to the Calormenes. In PC, at first it seems that the Telmarines are coming out of nowhere, but in the end Aslan explains all. It's like a mystery solved. But when it comes to explaining the Calormenes and their culture and religion, there's no elegant way to do that in the context of LB. If they do LB without MN and HHB first, they'll either have to change it beyond recognition, or the audience will be spending most of the movie saying "Huh? What is THAT about?"

^Not that the film makers have shown concern over the audience getting confused before. After all, they never gave an explanation for the green mist.

Actually I don't see why mist of any sort, green or not, has to have an explanation. Fog is fog. It fogs up the place, seeps everywhere, closes airports, makes travel more dangerous without fog lamps and can make people feel depressed and lost. Especially when horribly foggy autumn mornings are compared disparagingly to the almighty pea-soupers of UK . Not to mention that fog or 'miasma' was blamed for people feeling sick. That is RL. If it were green in RL I'd be looking at what greenish gases are around and why. Are Narnian peas the same shade of green as the VDT pea-soupers?

Digory was introduced in LWW, and Polly could easily be left out altogether. The biggest problem in doing LB without MN first would be the rings subplot. Without considerable time spent on explanation, the rings would come across as a contrived, and rather puzzling, plot device.

Also HHB is needed to provide an introduction to the Calormenes. In PC, at first it seems that the Telmarines are coming out of nowhere, but in the end Aslan explains all. It's like a mystery solved. But when it comes to explaining the Calormenes and their culture and religion, there's no elegant way to do that in the context of LB. If they do LB without MN and HHB first, they'll either have to change it beyond recognition, or the audience will be spending most of the movie saying "Huh? What is THAT about?"

I agree. You could probably get the whole of the other books in the series done, including LB, without Polly Plummer, if you left out MN. But now MN is to be done, anyway. That takes care of the rings, the Professor, the back story of the wardrobe, the lantern and the Witch, not to mention at least two friends of Narnia. I agree that HHB would introduce the Calormenes if LB is to be done, especially their ambitions to acquire Narnia. Besides, it is an opportunity to show the Pevensies in action, especially Edmund. Not to mention explaining Cor, Corin and Aravis at the end of LB, plus the ballads Eustace and Jill heard sung in SC.

But if MN and HHB are to be done beforehand, how would filmmakers do LB without doing SC first? Jill Pole is a major character in LB, one of the seven friends of Narnia. Eustace and Jill rescue Tirian, play no small part in rescuing other characters and stand by him at the Last Battle. And they are among the first people Tirian sees once he passes the Stable Door. How could anyone make LB without making all three previous Narnia movies?

In fact I am fairly sure that if any movie is deemed to be 'expendable' it is LB, with HHB a close second.

waggawerewolf27, Your last 2 paragraphs express my feelings exactly....I don't really know who suggesed leaving out SC but it really makes no sense if we want to make the whole series!

MN is my favorite book so I'm glad it's being made. But SC is my second favorite book so it is abit conflicting lol. Overall I think it's a smart move on the business side of things to make MN because it is a prequel to LWW and it shows the origins of the WW ,how Narnia came about, the lamp post ect. So in that respect it is very cool and could draw alot of people in. However I don't think(and I hope) they would ditch SC. Jill and Puddleglum are two of the most beloved characters in the series and the LOTGK is a very unique villain. They made all of the Harry Potter and LOTR films so why should Narnia be any different.

Overall I want all the stories made and imo the most expendable book is Horse and His Boy but I want to see that made as well. It's sad the franchise started out with so much potential and has gone down hill
Hopefully MN does really well and we get HHB, SC and LB!

They made all of the Harry Potter and LOTR films so why should Narnia be any different.

The Harry Potter and LOTR films all made a ton of money, whereas the last two Narnia films lost money.

Did they loose money?! I thought they just didn't make very much?

PC was a catastrophic money loser for Walden and Disney. According to an article in the LA times, as of late 2010, even with home media sales and TV licensing, Walden still hadn't made back the money they spent on PC.

VDT was a money loser, but not so catastrophic. By my estimates (which are not infallible, I admit) they are about 50 million in the red for VDT when you take into account worldwide box office and US home disc sales. I have no idea how they make money off of rentals or foreign home media, so that might narrow the gap even more. VDT should achieve profitability sooner rather than later, but it still lost money in it's theatrical run, unlike LWW and the Potter and LOTR films.