I’d say I’m between the wait and see and feeling pessimistic. For all we know this can still be an outright rumor or Greta is playing around with the idea and is purposely wanting to see the reactions from us fans. Again since the script is finished and she does make it clear in it Aslan will be a female lioness and there’s nothing she will do to change that no matter the backlash then I will be extremely concerned.

I voted feeling pessimistic because part of me feels like a female Aslan is something Greta would try to pull off. But silly me was hoping she’d be careful with this and make the female characters that are already written more prominent girl bosses which I have no problem with.

if this turns out to be a female Aslan I will boycott when it’s in theaters, however I will watch when it hits Netflix. I wonder what it is Netflix has planned with the Tv series idea. If this fails what does anyone here think will happen with that?

I voted Neutral/Wait and See, but I'm somewhere in between that and pessimistic at the moment - leaning on the neutral side, as we haven't had an official word on the latest rumour/news about Meryl Streep.

Ever since news first emerged of Netflix getting the rights to the books, I have fluctuated in polls similar to this.  I think on a similar question to this on the home page soon after the Netflix deal was announced I said I was neutral - that was due to the uncertainty prior to that of whether we would or wouldn't get a fourth Walden Media film and all that...

As more recent updates have occurred and it has appeared that Greta Gerwig may be making MN rather than LWW and introducing people to Narnia in that sort of bold new way - taking material that hasn't been presented in film before and putting her own mark on the Narnia series, that news has made me lean more in a cautiously optimistic to excited position.

Then of course the rumoured news emerged about Meryl Streep - this has altered my position again, towards 'feeling pessimistic' since there has been no official response about the rumours and it would appear to me that if there is any truth in the story, that Greta and crew may not have "read the room" correctly, or else worse - be aiming to alter the story for their own agenda - I am hoping the former rather than the latter (if the story is true) - but that's the other reason I'm leaning more toward neutral than pessimistic - as there has not been an official word from Greta or other senior people - and there are circumstances and contexts in which I could be quite understanding of such a casting - Aslan having multiple voices for the singing or other reasons... and the fact that by appearance this rumour doesn't fully seem to fit with the pushing agendas, as I'd expect a younger woman of colour or some other casting along those lines if it were that case...

So in summary, I have been fluctuating in my feelings about Netflix Narnia for quite a while - and I still am.  

I voted 'pessimistic' as probably the closest to my current thoughts. I'm still really hoping that there will be clarity on the Aslan controversy that we in fact don't have anything to be concerned about. However, even if it's not true, I will remain wary of what possible other controversial changes might be made, knowing that Aslan-lioness could have been a real consideration, enough to be reported on in the media.

In terms of overall fidelity to the source material on a scale of Mario Bros 1993 to Mario Bros 2023 I think I'm leaning more towards the former than the latter.

You know, where Bowser just looks like Dennis Hopper for 90% of the movie and then only turns into a dinosaur-looking creature for like 10 seconds at the end 

Not that either of those movies are particularly great, I think I'm just struck by how polar opposite they are in terms of adaptations.

Seriously, some scientist needs to make this the formal scale for evaluating all movie adaptations from now on. 😂

Now that there's news of the children being changed, with possibly three and possibly one being Anglo-Indian, there are clearly some unexpected differences being planned for this movie from the story it is supposed to be adapting faithfully (my words, not GG's). 

Currently I am mentally stepping back from it all, feeling that it will not be a fun time like the early heady days of LWW filming. I don't want to be cynical, but I want to see a movie I'm proud of, and Lewis would be proud of.  If not, I won't be interested in any further ones.

@coracle

Now that there's news of the children being changed, with possibly three and possibly one being Anglo-Indian, there are clearly some unexpected differences being planned for this movie from the story it is supposed to be adapting faithfully (my words, not GG's)

But why should there be more than 2 children, anyway? Given that Digory's father was supposed to be serving in India, I've no problems in particular with an Anglo-Indian child, when, given the length of time UK interests & servicemen had been domiciled in India, by the change of the 20th century, there would have likely been much more such children than was generally recognised during that time. We aren't given any details about Polly, apart from a likely middle-class background, whilst Digory, himself, is staying with his mother's brother & sister, Andrew & Aunt Letty Ketterley, due to his mother's illness. 

Posted by: @coracle

Now that there's news of the children being changed, with possibly three and possibly one being Anglo-Indian, there are clearly some unexpected differences being planned for this movie from the story it is supposed to be adapting faithfully (my words, not GG's). 

None of this is really unexpected. The 2nd boy could be anyone really at this point, even young uncle Andrew. The casting call said he´s important, and then he could show up for one scene. There´s really no saying just yet. Doesn´t mean there´s suddently gonna be a main trio instead of a Digory-Polly duo. And Digory´s father is away in India in the books, and there were plenty Anglo-Indians in the British Raj by 1890s, so Digory´s father could be Indian or half-Indian and so could Digory. It´s 2025, they can´t be all white. 

Let go of the notion of a ´faithful adaptation´. No such a thing as the world is far and wide. 

Not good. I'm not crazy about the idea of Greta Gerwig directing it or Meryl Streep possibly starring as the voice of Aslan. Did the Gresham family let these people do this? Who gave over the rights to such an adaptation? 

@jewel

Did the Gresham family let these people do this? Who gave over the rights to such an adaptation? 

I understand from what I have gleaned online, that the Gresham family might well have other priorities at the moment, when Douglas Gresham, himself, is said to not be in the best of health.  

It appears that Netflix must have secured the rights if they are able to even think of producing any film at all. 

I wonder what would happen if they had artificial intelligence do the voice of Aslan.  That seems even more inappropriate than changing his gender. I hope that it is a real person that will perform his voice. It wouldn’t surprise me if someone would add too much technology to the film. That certainly is the thing that C. S. Lewis would want to avoid if he were living today. 

@jewel Mr Gresham retired last year due to ill health.
The C.S.Lewis company is in charge of all the Lewis material, and it is currently unclear what the Gresham family role is regarding the film and possible changes to the story.  The rights for adapting the Narnia stories were sold to Netflix in 2018 if I remember rightly.

@coracle

Changing the setting, location and ethos of a historical work like MN seems to be fun and games to younger people. It seems sacrilegious to many older ones.

It is not always recognised now, how differently people in the past felt about what we take for granted now in the 21st century. The result is in some films some irritating anachronisms. For example, in a retelling of the Wooden Horse of Troy, Brad Pitt, playing Achilles started alluding to a republic, when at that stage in history, even in Rome, republics had not yet been invented. In the case of 1900 Victorian England, though Universal suffrage applied to adult men, & in the Antipodes women could also vote, it wasn't the case for adult women in UK, which is why suffragettes were on the march. Different expectations of women would explain Aunt Letty's view of Jadis, who never in her darkest dreams would have any idea how government & Queen Victoria's England differed from Charn & her world. 

The same applies to Calormen, in HHB, perhaps loosely based on a WW1 view of the then still existing Ottoman Empire, which finally collapsed in 1922, giving way to Kemal Atatürk's current Türkiye, along with the German, Russian & Austro-Hungarian empires. The old Ottoman Empire was ruled by sultans, made wide use of slaves &, like the Calormene Tisroc with his "19 other sons", was famous for the Sultan's harem, in Istanbul's Topkapi Palace, & its countenancing of pirates in Northern Africa. (And yes, Selim the Grim, who lived from 10 October 1470 to 22 September 1520, was said to have murdered 19 of his kindred to attain the Ottoman throne). 

Posted by: @son-of-eve

And Digory´s father is away in India in the books, and there were plenty Anglo-Indians in the British Raj by 1890s, so Digory´s father could be Indian or half-Indian and so could Digory. It´s 2025, they can´t be all white. 

. 

Why can't they all be white, as that's certainly the way Lewis envisaged the characters. If there was a new TV adaption of the Mahabharata I would not expect there to any non Indian characters and even if they came up with some sort of highly contrived justification for their presence I would find it intrusive and annoying. I don't see why I shouldn't hold any Narnia adaption up to the same standards.

Digory's father could not have been fully Indian as he had English relatives (complete with country estate) on the male side of his family. I suppose his mother could have been Indian but it's rather unlikely. There is simply nothing in the books that even hints that Digory had any Indian ancestry. This is just diversity for the sake of it, and is further evidence that Netflix and Gerwig and more concerned about pushing their own agendas than they are about being faithful to the spirit of the books. 

@hermit the reason Digory being Anglo-Indian doesn't bug me the way Aslan being a lioness does is that Aslan's mane is iconic and Digory's skin color isn't particularly. (Also, I don't want to make any young actors who might play him feel self-conscious about their ethnicity. They have enough reasons to be nervous already.) Plus, I really enjoy Kenneth Branagh's Shakespeare adaptations which tend to cast actors with skin color Shakespeare didn't envisage. Of course, there are countless productions of Shakespeare plays.

This is likely the only movie version of The Magician's Nephew I'll ever see in my lifetime so any problems with it (I'm not talking about actor ethnicity here) are going to bother me more.  

@hermit 

It doesn't matter to me that much if there are people of different races playing some of the characters.  I noticed that Ben Barnes did not have the same accent in Dawn Treader as Prince Caspian in the Walden films.  That was kind of unreal, but it was a minor inconsistency.  I think Digory and Polly should be British as they are in the book.  If the creators of the movie would change their race the story would seem unreal.  The same is true with the gender of Aslan.  To change it is to alter the story too much. I don't know why Greta Gerwig would want to change Aslan's gender.  If she loves the books and believes in authenticity, she will want to keep the Lion as he is in the story.