I just read the article. It didn't really surprise me they were running down HHB. Most of the people I know in RL dislike it too (including myself). But what does surprise me is how everyone on articles like that keeps saying that the books are hard to adapt because the Christian elements are "difficult to strip away". Why do they need to be stripped away?

~Riella

Yes, I saw that, too, Ithilwen. I wonder if these commentators would be as ready to strip away the Buddhist elements from Monkey, or the religious elements from other similar tales. It is precisely these comments about wanting to strip away the Christian elements in the Narnia series which is why I still think there was a solid anti-Narnia body of opinion ready to boycott VDT on religious grounds alone. I'm not surprised either that Golden Compass was mentioned in at least one of these attached comments.

I think though that the Magician's Nephew isn't as religious a tale as was VDT. For fully half of the book it is all about the irreligious and unscrupulous Uncle Andrew, the vanishing of Polly and the children's bringing back Jadis from Charn to London and how they want to get her away from there.

It isn't until they all land in Narnia that there are any Christian elements in the story. And I don't think that any of the 'Christian' elements could be edited out without ruining the film altogether. If it wasn't for it being off topic, I'd also ask why HHB is so disliked. I found it a good story.

Monkey? As in Sun Wu Kong? Did they come out with a western film based on Journey to the West?

I don't know about HHB being unpopular. We know VDT is the most beloved among people who've read the whole series, and PC seems to be the least beloved. But, other than that, it's hard to tell. I know lots of people who absolutely love HHB, and can take or leave MN, whereas I know others for whom it's the other way around.

@Anhun, yes, my children loved to watch a television program called Monkey which was based on a journey to get scriptures from somewhere or other or take them somewhere else. The lead character was called Monkey and his offsider was called Fish. They seemed to have good adventures. The children loved it immensely, though I was only able to see a couple of episodes. I don't know if it was a good reproduction of the original tale or not.

But I think that just as this tale replicated the Buddhist links without fear or favour, then Magician's Nephew's Christian links should also be shown as the author intended. At least this time around, MN won't be compared with a previous BBC production, because there isn't any.

I looked it up, and while there have been more versions of Journey to the West than you can shake a stick at, none of them are western made. I think the "Monkey" that you're talking about is the Japanese version from the late 70s, that was later imported to the UK and Australia and dubbed in English. So, it was originally intended for an audience who consider the source material a beloved classic, and are comfortable with the overtly Buddhist themes, or Buddhist themselves. Western standards of political correctness had no bearing on the production, so I don't feel it's a fair comparison.

I've been considering the argument for making MN next and it really seems rather flawed. Yes, the book has sold more copies than the rest of the CoN. I get that. Yet they don't seem to have considered the fact that it is also the first book in the series. One typically starts reading a series with the first book. Also, if all the sales of the other books of are less than that of MN, that does not imply that people are necessarily enjoying the book. They could just as easily be disliking it so much that they decide not to continue reading the series. It seems to me that the decision to make the movie was made and then they floundered around to try to find some sort of justification to present to the fans.

Yes, Bookwyrm, you do have a good point about Magician's Nephew and how flawed the reasoning is. However, MN hasn't always been the first volume of the series. When I first heard of the series back in the 1950's, it was LWW which was the first volume. When LWW was the the first volume in the series, did your arguments that nobody wanted to read further because they disliked LWW still apply?

Also, I have my own reservations about MN being the second most popular book. Is that the second most popular book after LWW, the proved favourite of the series? Or is it the second best volume of the six remaining stories? I really would like to see sales figures for each Narnia story before I made a judgement, but unfortunately that means taking out an unaffordable subscription to get such privileged information.

Furthermore, I don't work in the children's literature field, much as I'd have liked to. So I can't give any idea of the sort of library borrowing statistics which would give a really good indication of each book's actual popularity in my home district at any rate. Even if I could, that would only be a minute sample of a relatively small population in the English-speaking world. For a comparison, do we even have a poll here on NarniaWeb where everyone can rate their favourite Narnia story?

I looked it up, and while there have been more versions of Journey to the West than you can shake a stick at, none of them are western made. I think the "Monkey" that you're talking about is the Japanese version from the late 70s, that was later imported to the UK and Australia and dubbed in English. So, it was originally intended for an audience who consider the source material a beloved classic, and are comfortable with the overtly Buddhist themes, or Buddhist themselves. Western standards of political correctness had no bearing on the production, so I don't feel it's a fair comparison.

Well thanks for that information, and yes, you are probably right that the version my very Australian children watched was probably a dubbed English version of a Japanese import. I think that what you are saying is that the producers exported that story to the ABC, where we saw the program, and, in tandem, also to the BBC. These are both Government agencies which aren't constrained by usual measures of commercialism. Yet both agencies are products of very Western countries, whatever people might think Australia's, or even UK's position on the planet is.

In one way I agree it was an unfair comparison since ABC (Australia) often puts on programs like Monkey that are interesting and entertaining rather than commercially viable, and that consequently, ABC isn't usually the one with the top TV ratings. But in other ways I don't think that your objection holds water.

Surely back in the late 1970's and early 1980's I can't have been the only mother in Australia or even in the district whose children found these programs enjoyable and imparting good values. And knowing what I do about what is or isn't PC, and the sorts of people who were neighbours and on the local P&C, I can't be too sure there weren't those who would have strenuously objected to such viewing if they realised the program was on at the time, let alone its Buddhist links.

In fact I didn't even realise the story was a Buddhist classic until years later, not unlike those who enjoy the Narnia stories without always realising the Christian connections. I am more than a little annoyed at those many comments to media sites, including IMDb's Voyage of the Dawn Treader site, or the current news media articles about MN, which insist that a pre-requisite for filming Narnia stories successfully is to edit out the Christian symbolism inherent in them.

Yes I agree the Japanese might feel comfortable about Buddhist beliefs, despite their Shinto heritage, and I only wish that Westerners felt just as comfortable about their own Christian heritage which informs the Narnia series. Regrettably, judging by the sorts of opinions provoked by VDT's recent release, that doesn't seem to be the case. And I worry that the anti-religionists will be out in force over MN, especially if they object to its poetic and mystical creation of Narnia scene.

Monkey was dubbed (badly) into English, yes. Great series though. I've seen some of the original Japanese version and it doesn't have the same cheese factor. In this case, the bad dubbing was a plus!

OK...
1) I want Adamson back for MN.
2) What do these people have against HHB? I mean yeah I'll admit when I first read it it was a dissapointment, but only because of my flawed thinking that there should be more of the Pensevies... Now I know better, and now its my favorite book.
3) They'd better not recast Eustace... Even for LB they'd better not recast Eustace...Seriously no recasting Eustace!

Well I'm off to class! more later!

1. I don't but I'd prefer him to Apted.
2. I'm not sure. Lots of people enjoy HHB. It's not a favourite of mine; actually the first time I read it I disliked the book because it was so different and didn't feel Narnian. Also, some of the dialogue was elaborate and I found some of the Calormen speeches very dull. Over the years I've grown to enjoy HHB though.
3. Agreed. Eustace should still be played by Will (he was one of the very few good things about the VDT movie).

Ok I'm back I'll try to keep these points more on topic (@Warrior that is true about the Calormene dialogue) (the last two are to the movie makers)

4) No added battles, although I would not mind them elaborating a little with Charn... but don't over do it.
5) No cheesy dialogue!
6) This should aim for the same audience as LWW, not to dark, not to light. It should NOT be kiddie friendly to the point where it feels like I'm going to see a Disney cartoon, but I should be comfortable taking an 8 or 9 year old.
7) Reread ALL of the books before you make a script, especially MN, LWW, and LB... but read ALL of them!
8) Get the music to sound like Narnian music, ie mix themes of the previous three Maybe Williams and Arnold could co-compose?
9) Act out the script while writing it to proofread it, at least act out the dialogue to see how it feels.
10) Aslan should be shaped like he was in LWW but colored more like he was in VDT or PC.
11) NO ADDED ROMANCES!!!
12) Don't get angry at us I know we fans can be very demanding, but it's only that we are so passionate about the series we love. Most of us I think are willing to accept changes, if they've been thought out well, and don't contradict the major themes in Narnia, or CS Lewis's philosophy. Although I'll admit we can get overly passionate as well...
13) Don't write the script to please other people or to make money, instead try your best to make a piece of art, try your best to bring Narnia to life, think about carefully, put your heart into it... and you will be rewarded. Sometimes art doesn't always follow logic, but it still works well in the end

I totally agree with all you've said, wolfloversk, especially with 13. Movies today always seem to have the same formulas. That is what they sadly added to VDT, which without it could've been much better. MN is NOT the type of story that can fit with a normal movie formula. But if they try making something different that doesn't follow the average movie standards, they could in fact create the greatest film in the modern day because they were willing to do it their way. The movie makers need more confidence in the books they're adapting, or I assure you, MN will be another film that loses the hope and interest of the fans.

But I fear since VDT did so well with a changed plot, they might consider that if they do it that way again, they'll get even more money. That would be the worst case scenerio (sp) I could imagine right now. Let's hope since it partly sounds like the movie makers are excited to make MN (the other part because of the money), that they'll at least look like they're actually really trying to make a great adaption and a fantastic movie.

When LWW was the the first volume in the series, did your arguments that nobody wanted to read further because they disliked LWW still apply?

I'm not actually arguing that. All I did was point out that having the most sales of all the books does not = popularity. The movie people are arguing this and it doesn't logically follow.

I'm not actually arguing that. All I did was point out that having the most sales of all the books does not = popularity. The movie people are arguing this and it doesn't logically follow.

MN might not be the second most popular, but it is the second most recognizable. People might be more inclined to go see a movie if it's based off of a book that they have read/remember. Although SC might be liked more percentage wise, MN might be liked by a larger raw total of people.

I see what you mean Bookwyrm. Just because our local electronics stores were sold out of Blu-Ray editions of Prince Caspian and the latest Harry Potter film (HBP) last Christmas doesn't mean that those particular films are really more popular than, say, the somewhat more available Blu-Ray Coraline or the Revenge of Kitty Galore. It could mean that whilst PC & HBP were in stock they were just lazy Christmas present ideas. You could also argue that people who did buy Coraline or the Revenge of Kitty Galore, didn't necessarily buy these movies because they really liked them, but rather because umpteen copies were available for parents desperate to keep the kids occupied for a bit. I agree with you that much the same reasoning might apply to purchases of Magician's Nephew, especially if it is now perceived as the first in a well-known children's series.

I think Minotaur is right though about Magician's Nephew being one of the more recognisable Narnia stories. There is an episode of Midsomer Murders called 'The Magician's Nephew' and of course The Silver Chair gave its name to the Australian pop band, Silverchair, plus a system of Aged care management in USA. That does not bode well for the somewhat less recognisable HHB and LB.

11) NO ADDED ROMANCES!!!

What about Uncle Andrew's MN ideas that Jadis might fancy him? Those were definitely in the book, and yes, they could be taken as 'romance' in a comical way.