But there is the one "action" scene in there. However, I would prefer they play up the chaos of the scene instead of play it up as an action scene. The part where Jadis pulls off the lamp post crossbar. If they play up how chaotic those moments are, it would be all the movie needed in my opinion. Not that it needs anything in the first place.

I would be ok with a BRIEF flashback to the destruction of Charn to show the use of the Deplorable Word. And obviously the fight at the lamppost in London. That's it.
But really, I can't think of too many places where they could cram in some kind of action scene.... Unless all of the animals break out into some sort of cat fight over what to do with Uncle Andrew. No, I don't think adding in action sequences is the thing the fans should be worried about in this one...

Amen, glumPuddle.

I might be foolish in saying this, but I'm not really worried about added action scenes in The Magician's Nephew. There doesn't seem to be a lot of places to add scenes and the scenes that can be expanded upon (Charn's war and the fight at the lamp-post).

In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader the added action in the Lone Islands was, I think, not so much a matter of adding an action scen "because people love 'em" as it was just paranoid filmmakers not wanting to film an unconventional scene. After Prince Caspian, I don't think the filmmakers are necessarily looking for every possible place to put in action.

I sincerely hope I won't be eating my words, but for now, I'm at ease.

Added action would definitely ruin MN. A couple of other places where they could play up something already in the book is Digeory's fight with the Witch as he is jumping back into the home pool and when he is getting back on Fledge (a pushing and grabbing sort of fight). If they Think MN needs more suspense (it has plenty), they could really overdo the walls falling down in Charn.

This is something I totally agree with. I have always been one for emotional stories more than stories full of action. That, for some part, is why I love MN, because Digory's struggles and many other things that hold emotion and meaning in them is fun to read about. Even if I know not everyone had the same feeling, I had tears in my eyes at a couple parts of it. I want to be able to feel like that for MN.

But if they add action scenes, I fear that what makes the book special for me will be lost with unecessary fighting for the movie. I wouldn't be so afraid about this if I hadn't seen the movie makers add in action scenes for LWW (which I liked OK), PC (which I liked as well, and VDT (which I'm sort of mixed on). This isn't the kind of story to try to squeeze in something like that, because unlike the movies before, MN has very few action scenes if you can even call them that.

I would be mostly fine (depending on how they do it) if they added in the destruction of Charn, but please, they shouldn't dare add anything in at all. Even making a bigger deal about a tense scene, like the one where Jadis is in the streets, would be horrible! So, yes, I beg that they don't try to put unwanted and unimportant actions scenes, and just leave the suspense to catch interest, not fighting or such.

This is one of the reasons I'm not entirely sure I ever want Walden to make MN. What has so far been played up in the Narnia movies are the elements of fantasy and epic battle sequences. MN has no epic battles and much less fantasy than any of the other books. I tend to think of it as a period drama with a dash of fantasy while most of the other books are fantasy with a hint of period drama. None of the other books spend so much time in England. If I'm not mistaken, in LWW, PC, VDT, and SC the children are drawn into the other world before the end of the first chapter. This is not the case with MN.

Also, MN is a character drama. There were multiple interviews where people said that VDT the movie was a character driven story. It was not at all a character driven story. If VDT is the filmmakers definition of a character story than I don't want them to make MN.

MN cannot have action scenes added to it. The tone of the story will change. And if the tone changes, then the connection will be lost. The audience has to be feeling what Digory is feeling. They have to cry with Digory when he asks Aslan to do something for his mother. They have to feel the inner conflict when Jadis offers him the apple. Digory wanting his mother to be well is what drives the story. If action is added to it, I think that connection will be lost. Action sequences usually do not make an audience feel more connected to the characters. It is those quieter moments where the audience gets to know the characters that a connection is made.

....I tend to think of it as a period drama with a dash of fantasy while most of the other books are fantasy with a hint of period drama.... Also, MN is a character drama......

I tend to see the films also as period dramas with high fantasy and fairy tale elements added to them. If they could focus on being a more subtle fairy tale/character-developed and character-driven story, they might have a winner. VDT was sorely missing in character development and building sensible character motivations for the characters' actions. If they could only see how much more gripping drama/emotional investment is created by doing that versus putting in battles and action sequences coming out of nowhere it would really help.

The worst-case-scenario is that they add a battle between Aslan's newly-awakened creatures and Jadis, who somehow summoned a bunch of evil creatures from Charn. Digory must run back to Aslan ASAP in time to tell them that an evil army is coming.

And now I hate myself for thinking this, because I know that it is utterly plausible O_O

I would be ok with a BRIEF flashback to the destruction of Charn to show the use of the Deplorable Word. And obviously the fight at the lamppost in London. That's it.
But really, I can't think of too many places where they could cram in some kind of action scene.... Unless all of the animals break out into some sort of cat fight over what to do with Uncle Andrew. No, I don't think adding in action sequences is the thing the fans should be worried about in this one...

That bit about what to do with Uncle Andrew was meant to be pure comedy. I don't know how the film makers would stage it, but I do hope this scene is shown as written as far as possible.

Otherwise I agree that the scene with Jadis tearing off the lamppost helped to create the chaos, which allowed Digory and Polly to get her out of London. I do think an action shot of Jadis' sister at the head of an army walking up the palace terrace steps until Jadis wipes them out with the Deplorable word would be ok.

In The Voyage of the Dawn Treader the added action in the Lone Islands was, I think, not so much a matter of adding an action scen "because people love 'em" as it was just paranoid filmmakers not wanting to film an unconventional scene. After Prince Caspian, I don't think the filmmakers are necessarily looking for every possible place to put in action.

Yes you could be right. The problem with the whole Caspian/Bern sequence, even in the book, is that it also raises more questions than it answers. Gumpas probably was in cahoots with slavers even in the books. Bern who had stayed on at the Lone Islands had remonstrated with Gumpas several times he said, but what had Gumpas done about it? Nothing. What had Bern done about the problem other than remonstrating with do-nothing Gumpas? Well, nothing. And what would Gumpas reasonably done especially if he was in cahoots with the slavers? Yes, imprison Bern.

The trouble with imprisoning Bern is that the ingenious solution to Gumpas in the book can't take place at all. And that isn't all. When Bern first appeared in the book, he was coming out of a pub where he had obviously been slaking his thirst. And when Caspian mentioned quite a few things worth having these things did include beer and tobacco. Definitely praising beer and tobacco is a no-no for film makers eyeing a PG rating.

I think the Lone Islands action scene was the final result of all these deliberations rather than action for the sake of action in the movie. I don't see such problems with MN, though I wonder what they will do with Uncle Andrew and his brandy tippling.

I can't really see a place where they could add a lot of action scenes, particularly with swords! That is unless they change the plot quite a bit...But for now I'm not worried about that.
If they do manage to add action scenes somehow, it could hurt the film depending on where and how they add them (and right now I can't see any place where they could add big action scenes and have it be good.)

The book is an emotionally driven drama. CS Lewis didn't take the lazy way out.

You're forgetting that Lewis was writing books, not film scripts. In books, the characters' emotional experiences have the strongest immediate impact. Whereas, in a movie, the characters' emotions require a lot of development in order to have the same level of impact.

In a movie, action has a stronger immediate impact, where as, in a book, action has little or no impact, and the author must make an effort to tie the action to the heroes' emotions in order to give it significance. Lewis did this in HHB, although, in my opinion, the best example of this is a book called War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy, but I'm getting off topic. My point is, adding action scenes to a book is not a lazy way out, it's actually harder.

I say, the more action the better!
and MN has action scenes!
I don't care if there's more or less action. I know that the filmmakers will do an awesome job!

My point is, adding action scenes to a book is not a lazy way out, it's actually harder.

It is lazy when you don't fuse the proper emotion into those action scenes. While it's redundant to keep bringing up LOTR as an example, it's still worth mentioning that Peter Jackson and his crew may have increased the action in the films but they always found a way to include very powerful emotions from the characters during those battles and fights which made their decisions easier to accept.

But the makers of Narnia, for the most part, have failed to do this and I think VDT is the perfect example of turning an emotional book into an almost soul-less movie. The additional fighting scenes weren't the problem but the scenes didn't feel like they really mattered, they were just there to quicken the pace, and that took away from the impact of the original story.

[Anhun sighs] Again, you're talking about movies, not books. Gpuddle was praising Lewis for focusing on the characters' emotions, rather than creating lots of fight scenes, by saying that he wasn't taking the lazy way out. I feel that he's giving Lewis more credit than is due.

In a book, where you can spell out your characters' every thought and impression in black and white, a description of emotion will grab the readers' interest more quickly that a description of a fight scene (which requires some visualization), unless you put a lot of thought into weaving emotion into the fight. Saying "and they had a battle" won't get anyone interested.

The thing is, I don't think adding fight scenes will help this movie adaptation in any way. Now it kind of worked in PC, where they took what was, in my opinion, a dull book with shallow character development, and turned it into fairly decent popcorn entertainment. MN, on the other hand, is a powerful emotional journey for Digory that takes him all sorts of strange places, both out of this world and within himself, before he reaches his spiritual destination. It's a unique story, and no number of stock Hollywood action sequences will be able to eliminate that uniqueness. If they emphasize action over emotion, they will only make the journey seem bizarre, confused and pointless; unique in a bad way, basically.