That picture is sad! And your analogy is very good. I agree very much glumpuddle.

I think there is still hope that the books haven't been "sold" like that, as we haven't seen the movie. At least, that is my hope. Based on the trailer, I would think the movies have already been sold like a piece of meat.

That's kind of heartbreaking... while I am fine about the movie's changes, it just sickens me of what Michael Apted said in that interview.

Well, who says all the themes are gone? LWW and PC both had many of the themes from the book. How do we know that all the theme of the VDT are gone without even having seen the movie.
Yes I am worried that a lot of the themes will be missing, but I think that this topic should have been made after the movie came out, (That is if the themes really were gone) rather than before when we haven't seen it.

By the way that is rather fancy writing for a slave trader

gP, I think you describe clearly how many Narnia lovers feel about the movie adaptations. I feel the same way about what Hollywood has done to each remake of Pride and Prejudice and Jane Eyre. However, in the case of Narnia, I don't lay the blame at the feet of the movie folk. Narnia is a pearl of great price that was sold...for quite a big profit, I imagine...and the seller had to know what was likely to happen once the rights were sold. The C. S. Lewis estate (or whoever) bears some or all of the responsibility for the movie adaptations. If the estate had to give up all control over the final scripts, then it had the option not to sell the rights. This is generally how Hollywood operates and everyone knows it. I do not fault them for being what they are. Right or wrong, their first responsibility is to their investors. We will never know whether or not adaptations that followed the books more closely would have been as or more profitable. I have been very pleased with the first two installments and am eagerly awaiting VDT! I am not worried like so many on NW seem to be. Worry solves nothing. I have the choice to watch or not watch the movie. Whether I think the adaptation is good or bad, the one thing that will never change is the book...and that, I have forever. For Aslan!

^^ aragorn2, like I said at the end of my post, I am not saying this has happened, I am just saying recent trailers and interviews have put the fear of that in me.

Yea I can see your point I just think it is a little early for things like this.

By the way, when will you part 2 of the trailer analysis be out?

I wounder whit C.S Lewis would think about he work being "SOLD" like that people making it in to something it's not I don't see whey Apted seem to think that Narnia need's to be like Star Wars and Harry Potter.

I understand where you're coming from gP. And to a certain extent I agree with you. It does make me unhappy that Narnia doesn't seem to be getting the same love and embraced with the passion that Lord of the Rings did.

But to equate the selling of a human life with a less-than-perfect adaptation of a book, and the filmmakers to Pug makes me a bit sick and angry to be quite honest. I very much doubt that's what you were meaning to imply there, but I really don't appreciate the analogy myself, and I doubt the filmmakers do either.

I was just thinking about that fantasia_kitty, that is a pretty lame comparison.

But to equate the selling of a human life with a less-than-perfect adaptation of a book, and the filmmakers to Pug makes me a bit sick and angry to be quite honest. I very much doubt that's what you were meaning to imply there, but I really don't appreciate the analogy myself, and I doubt the filmmakers do either.

I'm certainly not equating the books to a human life. I am merely using it as an example of something that is of great value being treated as if it is not as valuable as commercial gain. I'm simply trying to illustrate a point. Getting worked up over my choice of analogy would be to miss the point. Using a different analogy wouldn't change my argument.

And I was speaking about Lucy more as a character from the mind of CS Lewis than an actual person. When I saw that picture, I got an image in my head of Lewis' creations with signs saying "sold" on them.

(FK is not doing this... but I think it very likley that the people who don't like my argument but can't think of a way to refute it will resort to attacking the way I went about making my argument, or my choice of analogy. Again: FK is not doing this.)

Ok, Ok. Slavery is carrying this way too far. Really. If you feel that strongly about it you probably shouldn't go see the movie. I am not at all trying to belittle the importance of the books, but they are NOT as important as the human life.

I love you, glumPuddle, with all Christian love and I respect you and the fact that you have the right your own opinion. But it is my thought that if you can even bring yourself to compare slavery with the film adaption of these very special books, you in no manner grasp the full weight of slavery.

Yes, the books are important, but they are not as important human life and shouldn't be compared to slavery in any way. It does offend me deeply that you would even go there. I won't cry about it or let it trouble me, I just want to let you know that I find it highly offensive. Do you know slavery still goes on throughout the world, including the U.S.A.? It's called human trafficing and it's a VERY serious issue. See link below for more information on that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_traf ... d_response

The problem with your argument is that they aren't selling the books like you're making them out to. When a person is sold into slavery it changes his or her life forever. They will always bear the pain and emotional scars even if they are set free from slavery. And with people once you sell that very special person into slavery and devalue them so, you lose that person as they are forever. They won't ever be the same. They are an individual lost to the world.

The books are different. Even if they change the story all around for the film, the books will always be the same. They aren't saying, "Hey let's adapt the book to fit our version of the story!" The books are are still the same. I wouldn't dare belittle the books and say they aren't important. I would be mad if they ever changed what is written in the books. But the films don't do that. They are two separate things. The value of the books are not compromised because the books aren't changed. As for the story in the movie it is BASED on the book, it is not the book. The movies have inspired, and will continue to inspire, some viewers to read the books and learn the real stories of Narnia. They could go into it with the wrong impression, true enough, but I think once they get into it they will love the books for what they are and the films for what they are.
In the long run, I think the movies will cause more of an interest in the books and therefore expose more people to the message of Narnia.

Making a statue of a person and not making it right is a better comparison.
Justice is not done to the person, but they are not harmed by it.

I meant to say I think identity theft would be a better comparison.

Did it ever say in the book what kind of slavery Lucy and the others were being sold for? Its a really sad picture.

While I don't mind the changes as much as others, I do see where glumpuddle is coming from. I don't mind changes to improve the filim, but changes that are made just for the sake of selling money (like throwing Tilda into the film and adding MLG's to appeal to a younger crowd), make me upset.