I have to agree with that more then anything that is going on in this thread.

Someone makes a movie about your mom. In short, they represent her as a jerk and a very mean/bad woman. Wouldn't you be mad? Would you just say, "But that doesn't change my mom!"? The last bit is true, but it changes the way people view your mom!

To a lesser extreme, that's a bit of what happens in unfaithful adaptions. It gives an untrue picture of the original story, and, quite frankly, that bothers me because of the misrepresentation.

That is not a good analogy, because everyone who does not know the books is saying that it looks awesome.
They are not portraying it as a bad book, maybe just not as meaningful, but still an awesome story.

I think part of the mindset here is that many fans of the books don't even WANT more films to be made if the cost of the film is slashing up the story.

But one thing to remember is that there is more than one mindset on this board. While you may prefer to see NO movies over a semi-faithful adaptation...I'd rather see a semi-faithful adaptation than NO movie in the theatres. The box office speaks for itself, as PC's issue was not popularity, but profitability. PC was one of the most expensive movies of all time.

And your analogy needs to be rethought because VDT is getting a lot of positive reviews.

Ditto Wagga and Aragorn2. The analogy does not stand up to scrutiny. If "Mom" is so wonderful, then there is an air of intent to what the movie makers created...they were intent on producing a movie about "Mom" that was purposefully innacurate. As Wagga stated, there may have been more to "Mom" than her child would know ...other aspects of her life to be investigated and represented. The analogy suggests that the producers/directors have created a film that intentionally and with malice does NOT reflect the themes of the book. I would certainly hope that those who are disposed to regret the film before they have seen it are not attempting to "know something of which they are ignorant." Certainly you are not insinuating that even though the final film version may not measure up to your expectations, those involved in its production intended to create a movie that contained none of the themes of the book. They are viewing the book from a different perspective than you. That they may choose to focus on a different theme than you doesn't mean that either party is wrong or right...just different. I choose to believe that they have made the best VDT movie that they can and I am excitedly awaiting Fox's artistic interpretation of a great book. For Aslan!

I believe I said, "To a lesser extreme."

You can change the analogy around and say that the Film Mom believed in the religion of Islam while your mom was Christian. Perhaps film Mom was a good person. The point is, she wasn't YOUR mom.

Marie Antoinette was a mother also, and her children would have had every right to be upset about how she was portrayed by her detractors. It doesn't mean that such filmmakers in making her look a jerk weren't telling the truth, nor that the facts of her life, nor the bravery of her eventual death, are changed.

But the fact is that the filmmakers are telling (we assume, from your facts) the truth about Marie Antoinette in that case. They are accurately representing her. The filmmakers of an inaccurate adaption are just that-- inaccurate. They change the story in many cases.

The other thing you mention is sets-- and I agree that they look MARVELOUS! But see, I'm talking about the story. And expensive movie or no, story can be focused on. The script can be written well regardless of budget. So whatever production costs are, I don't think they apply so well. And I'm happy that the ship and the sets look great! That's a positive thing!

Which means basically they have stopped being fans. Of the movies at any rate, or of any movie at all being made of CON.

Note that I said, "fans of the books", so that doesn't really apply. I was actually ADVANCING that they were beginning to stop being fans of the books.

And anyhow, my post was meant to try to make clear the mindset of many book fans who are in favor of a faithful adaption to those who really don't understand.

I don't think thats what sweeetlilgurlie meant by her analogy. I think what she meant was that no matter what anyone says about your mom, she will always be the same as she has been before. However, if someone creates a FALSE imageof her, then other people will have a false perception of your mom, even though you won't.

No matter what, the books will not change, nor your impression of them. However if the movies gives a false image of the book, then others will have a false perception of the book.

Now this is not to say for certain that the movie will give a false impression of the book, but with the WW and this Green Mist, and all, one is inclined to believe it is very possible These changes could alter the themes and basic plot of the book.

I disagree that the movie does give a false image of the book. It starts with Eustace, Lucy and Edmund being sucked through a picture into Narnia and that happens both in the movie and the book. They meet Prince Caspian there on board the Dawn Treader, which is a faithful rendition of the book one, even to the open mouth on the dragon.

Caspian's mission is to find, rescue and avenge seven lords who had fled his tyrannous Uncle Miraz. But it appears that these lords, faithfully depicted around the Dawn Treader's ship's bell, which I have seen, weren't just political refugees or mad adventurers to be picked up in any Border Patrol episode. They were on their own mission, as well, which is annoying NarniaWebbers.

Except for possibly Octesian, whose fate Lewis leaves to the imagination, all the lords are found exactly where one expects to find them. Where they were found in the book. So Lord Bern is found in prison, rather than exiting a pub or on a mountain path, spying out the land (BBC). They all still get taken prisoner, Lucy still gets Sold, and they all get to get away somehow.

Even if the route is not quite the same, the Dawn Treader reaches the same destinations, makes the same discoveries, meanwhile being blown off course by a storm. Edmund still fights with Caspian when they find Restimar, the scenery is still the same for Aslan's table and for the Magician's book, and Lucy still gets tempted by a beauty spell. And just lke the book Lucy actually tries a spell she shouldn't, as well as the Visible spell. Not the eavesdropping spell, which in any case underlines what an insecure sort of person Lucy is, and which was not included in the BBC production either.

For lack of a Ramadan it seems Coriakin gives out directions, and RD gets to be a bit more of a guiding star than Ramandu's Wheel of Fortune assistant. Ramandu, as in the book, is retired, so there is nothing out of kilter with the book if he is away munching fire berries out of our sight.

I could go on about the rest of the movie, which ends, just like the book, when Lucy, Edmund, Eustace and Reepicheep reach Aslan's country and meet Aslan. Eustace does get dragonned and undragonned in the Movie, just like the book, and he will be just as whiny and impossible in both movie and book.

I don't think it is necessary for NarniaWebbers to do their own version of Eustace's whining that the movie Dawn Treader is the ship they don't want to travel on, that it doesn't meet their own expectations of what an ocean-going movie VDT looks like, that they have to make do like the rest of us with what is available, and that they want to complain to the British consul at every port of call.

I would hate to see the Dawn Treader sunk like the Titanic under the icy weight of complainers' disapproval, and the ship scuttled before it even has a chance to have a maiden voyage.

I would hate to see the Dawn Treader sunk like the Titanic under the icy weight of complainers' disapproval, and the ship scuttled before it even has a chance to have a maiden voyage.

*Shudders at the very thought...*

You know people's analogies never do seem to come across as they were intended on NW do they?

I vote we all calm down, breathe, at think outside of the box for a minute. Let's get to the point of what the other person (including gP and sweeet) is saying, and not get caught up on the details. That doesn't mean we have to agree with them, but at least we should try to make sure we understand what they are saying. Secondly, we should think outside of the box with the movie as well. Who here can tell me line by line, point by point, action by action, and theme by theme, what will happen in VDT or what it will be about? We are working on guesswork, it is the very nature of pre-release fan discussion and debates. Nothing is set in stone yet, which is a reason both to fear and to hope. So let's all take it easy and think logically for a minute. What does the book mean to me? What are the themes that must be brought out? Does it seem like the movie will meet my expectations, why or why not? What's the worst case senario? What's the best case senario? What are other people trying to prove in their arguments and analagies? Remember things don't have to be disproved to be disagreed with.

I am still holding hope out for this film, although there is a lot of fear as well. I have said it before and I shall say it again, I'm going to watch the movie, before I even try to figure out what it's themes are.

Here are some lessons we could take from this discussion.

1) Future book authors, pay attention to your publishing deal, especially concerning derivative works and adaptation rights. NEVER let anybody touch your source material (no matter how tempting it might be) unless they worship your book or unless you're absolutely sure adapting it to some other medium is one of their LIFETIME DREAMS.

2) If you want to be sure any posthumous adaptations of your work will be faithful, pull a Charles M. Schulz and make sure your last will and testament prevents anyone from making any further adaptations to your work unless they're unedited, literal copies of the originals, word by word.

3) Should following the two rules above actually prevent you from reaching a publishing deal and you do want a chance of a big-budget film adaptation being made, either do it yourself - and enjoy a lifetime of bankrupcy - or let it go and try to enjoy whatever they've made with the manuscript you spent 7 years trying to write.

I don't know if anyone here is a writer and unfortunately, very few authors get offered a big screen adaptation of their work (much less have any say in choosing staff for production), but if anybody on this forum ever finds him/herself in this incredibly rare, unlikely position, you know what to do.