I wouldn't call it a rumour exactly. I've some respect for the Guardian, a proper London newspaper which is often quoted by our own newspapers, whether they disagree or agree with its content. That is why I posted where I did, and also in the spy reports.

I was also startled to find that the only thread I ever posted on IMDB Silver chair should have been answered in such a fashion.

The article is called Death of the film trilogy, posted by David Parkinson, in a blog associated with Guardian.co.uk. If you Google Silver chair narnia you will find it readily enough. The article starts out by querying why we need a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean episode and goes on to slam endless sequels that are in the works for the following years. The Silver Chair and Horse and his Boy references are in the last paragraph.

Some of the finest directors have produced masterful triptychs. But do we really need a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean? Mr Parkinson said. He thinks that some of these trilogies should quit whilst they are ahead, and mentioned several trilogies, then praised Walden/Fox for cutting back from 7 to 5 movies.

But I do agree with you, Ithilwen, that this information should be debated, and this is the right place to do it. Here are my reasons for sharing with you a degree of skepticism:

1. It was supplied in a blog rather than as headline news, or even page umpteen news. I'd expect better of the Guardian.co.uk if it were true.

2. As a blog it is an opinion piece, rather than factual information. Where did Mr Parkinson get the idea that it would be SC and HHB that would be the ones deleted? Why is he so certain, by default, that the 5th Narnia film would be LB? Yes, I do think someone somewhere said something about not all of the movies would be done. But why LB, and not SC or HHB?

3. In support of his viewpoint, Mr Parkinson didn't mention other trilogies that did well. For example, there are the LOTR movies. There are also the Ice Age trilogies, the last one of which, released in 2009, did the best of them all. Somehow or other this information piece does sound like opinion, prejudice and assumption rather than fact.

4. I am rather intrigued that the Chronicles of Narnia as a series crops up at all. It almost seems as if Chronicles of Narnia is something every film journalist wants to quote if they want their opinion to be taken notice of, whatever that means for the films. David Parkinson could have mentioned the Hobbit, which will be parts 4 and 5 of LOTR, though the Hobbit is really a prequel. I am also not sure that there aren't other series that went well beyond a fourth or fifth screening quite successfully.

All the same, I'd like some proof either way, myself. And I do hope the news gatherers on NarniaWeb will find out what is really going on.

This rumour of having only 5 instead of 7 movies of Narnia, has been around nearly as long as NarniaWeb.

Don't fall in the trap of believing something just because the rumour has surfaced again at a big name media source.

We know from several interviews that the Estate wants to do all seven, and so does Walden.

Coracle: That was, when exactly? Things may have changed in the meantime anyway. It would make sense for them to do MN now (For the white witch they like so much) and then just end it with LB (Which has all pevensies again and who knows where they might squeeze in the white witch in LB...)

Well if they did that it wouyldn't make sense because they spent so much tiume setting up for SC in VDT... even with MN first, it would make a lot more sense to make the movie after another, than not make it all together... otherwise the general audience won't understand all the SC references

Paul Martin from Narniafans.com says that he thinks they were just making an assumption that they were skipping it. Let's look at the order of which the books were written:

LWW, PC, VDT, SC, HHB, MN, LB.

The order of the films is supposedly going to be:

LWW, PC, VDT, MN .

If they were going off of publication order of the Narnia series, it would be easy to assume that the production was skipping SC and HHB.

Narnia_Fan12, that makes sense.

I hope they make all 7. I suppose we will just have to wait and see. It would be an odd jump to go from MN to LB. It seems like they would at least do SC to introduce Jill.

I hope they make HHB because its my favorite book out of the series. I also love SC. I just hope they make all seven because it just wouldn't be right.

Narnia_Fan12, That makes sense. Because they are the ones that have been skipped so far it is assumed that they wont be made alltogether. Lets hope that is not the case!

Paul Martin from Narniafans.com says that he thinks they were just making an assumption that they were skipping it. Let's look at the order of which the books were written:

LWW, PC, VDT, SC, HHB, MN, LB.

The order of the films is supposedly going to be:

LWW, PC, VDT, MN .

If they were going off of publication order of the Narnia series, it would be easy to assume that the production was skipping SC and HHB.

Now this is a very fair point! That is, if Walden were really going by publication order. The trouble is, the assumption in the article I originally mentioned, leaves LB as the 5th film, rather than either SC or HHB. A lot of people have said that LB can't be made without doing SC first. Not only because of Jill, who played a big part in LB as well as SC, but also because of Rilian who was the ancestor of Tirian. Not to mention Eustace, who accompanied Jill and Tirian until he was the first to be thrown into the Stable.

The trouble is, that if LB can't be made without SC being screened first, then LB also can't be made without HHB being screened first. How else do we account for the Calormenes and their designs on Narnia? And how else do we account for Susan and her life choices, regardless of how faithful or faithless the film makers care to portray her?

I don't blame Walden for doing MN. It is about time someone 'did' it. And I am grateful for a new Narnia film at all, preferably as soon as possible. I agree that profitability is a factor as each Narnia film is considered. But if there are only going to be 5 Narnia films, not the 7 hoped for, I'd prefer to know which 5 are being considered as a fact, rather than through someone's assumptions.

If the franchise gets as far as 5 Narnia films, in all honesty, which of the remaining films, in your opinion, should be the fifth Narnia film? SC, which has been half promised? HHB, which is next after MN in chronological order? Or LB, definitely the last Narnia movie of them all?

If the franchise gets as far as 5 Narnia films, in all honesty, which of the remaining films, in your opinion, should be the fifth Narnia film? SC, which has been half promised? HHB, which is next after MN in chronological order? Or LB, definitely the last Narnia movie of them all?

Perhaps Silver Chair for the last, if it comes to that?
Quite honestly, the idea of them doing the Last Battle terrifies me. I just can't see them getting it right, and I would much rather have them not do it rather than destroy it.
Sure it would be incredible to see onscreen, but to me it has such a heart-rending, yet at the same time your heart wants to fly out of your chest, story that there seems to be no fathomable way that they could fully translate it to screen. Especially when being made by secular companies.

Of course I'd also like to see Horse and His Boy, but it they don't do TLB, HHB won't be neccessary to introduce the Calormenes.

Does that make sense?

*branishes her copy of SC like a sheild*
ack! I do hope they don't skip SC or HHB!!!!!
that would be sad.
if they went from MN to LB, that would be a weird transition, or lack therof. I mean, how would they be able to get audiences to see that MN is BEFORE LWW and then LB is AFTER all the other books?
and how on earth would they explain Jill if they didn't do SC?
hmmm.....

just my two cents!

Just your two very vital cents, Libby!

At first, I panicked when I read that in one of the other forums. Now that I've seen what all that the movie makers can do, I worried they actually would do this.

But after thinking it through (and reading NWebber's comments to this like 12's), I realized it doesn't make sense. There is a lot of things that are needed to make sense of the other films, like:

1. Jill's intro
2. Father Time's intro
3. Characters that appear later on in the Inner Narnia
4. Calormen's intro

Not that all of these are important, but they do help LB in the end. And didn't Walden say that they wanted to make all seven into films repeatedly? For now, I think this is false, and that unless I find more evidence, that this is just a prediction or another faulty rumor.

1. Jill's intro
2. Father Time's intro
3. Characters that appear later on in the Inner Narnia
4. Calormen's intro

Not that all of these are important, but they do help LB in the end.

actually, looking at your list, these are VERY important, Jill's intro being the most, IMO!!!!!
we need SC. it's very vital! and I honestly don't get why they think audiences will go see MN over SC. everyone loves Will Poulter! even in the reviews for VotDT where the reviewer was not a fan of the movie, they would rant about how awesome Will Poulter's acting was as Eustace! audiences want to see Will Poulter/Eustace in another film!

and if they only did 5 films, then the Narnia Freaks are gonna freak out! (no pun intended )
at least, I know I'll be sad if they don't do SC and HHB.....

If they leave out HHB and SC, they will probably leave Jill Pole out altogether. The Calormenes would be introduced in LB, as would Father Time. Any other characters that weren't seen previously would be left out of the Inner Narnia.

~Riella