@lentenlands Oh wow! amazing!

I saw the headline listing for that the other week, but was dying to get my hands on the actual page! 

Wow @LentenLands, what a find!

Weirdly enough, you posted this just as I was typing up my own Rumour post, and one of the things I had been mulling about a few of my sources, and now also this as well, is that in all the various "semi-official" bits of information we've had recently, the title is only ever referred to as "Narnia".

Not "The Chronicles of Narnia" nor any other combination of Title and Subtitle. Just "Narnia".

This now makes it even more weirder - if they are confirming MN as the book, then why still title it as "Narnia". Why not say "The Magician's Nephew"? I'm probably reading way too much into it, but it strikes me as odd 

The other question this raises, is whether Jason Issacs was just guessing or whether he actually knew?

I don't think the timelines of the sources and reporting would work in terms of either source feeding off the other, so I assume both are independent?.

Update: Looking a bit closer at the chronology, iI guess there is potentially a chance that we are seeing some degree of circular reporting here... or maybe simply that they are all feeding off the long term online assumption that they will probably start with MN this time around.

@lentenlands It doesn't really give an accurate synopsis.

The reason for their journey is not to save a life. [did they read it?]

I don't believe Mr Gresham will be involved in the production, but his name may be included merely for respect. 

@coracle, I think that @rose worked out that the text description there has been cribbed from the Harper Collins website - i.e. it's not a formal synopsis provided by the production.

A couple of other oddities about this - they have listed Matthew Aldrich there (presumably because they took the info from IMDB where he is still credited)

They've also not listed Greta Gerwig's production company "NB/GG Pictures" who I would presume would be a credited company, as they were on Barbie and other projects she's done with her husband (Noah Baumbach, providing the "NB" part of the company name)

Posted by: @coracle

@lentenlands It doesn't really give an accurate synopsis.

The reason for their journey is not to save a life. [did they read it?]

Well, it could count as a very loose synopsis — after all, Digory's most ardent wish is to find a way of curing his dying mother, even though that in itself is not the reason why he and Polly are journeying to other worlds... I doubt whoever wrote that has actually read the book (or the movie script, if there really is one now) and is probably just cribbing bits from the publishers' blurb, as others have said, and/or from other sources that may be equally vague. 

Anyway, even if this and the things @icarus mentions in the other thread are merely coincidental or circumstantial and we still don't have hard evidence for any of it, it's certainly starting to get intriguing... 

Overall, I think my verdict on this story is that I am highly skeptical of PWs information in the body of their listing (for all the reasons discussed above), however I do have moderate confidence in their reasons for listing it.

I think they, like us, probably heard toward the end of November that Gerwig's Narnia was finally starting to get going in earnest at Shepperton (see also other rumour thread) and that they then directed one of their staff members to go online and collate some basic production information - which they largely just copied and pasted from IMDB, coupled with a generic description from the Harper Collins website of what they assumed was the first book.

However...

I would also say I am still fairly confident that Magician's Nephew will be the first film, if only because there are only really two logical starting pairs - MN/LWW or LWW/PC - and I just can't see that PC makes sense from a Greta Gerwig perspective (a story about fighting to restore the male heir to a hereditary monarchy feels anti-Gerwig if you ask me) nor does it make sense from a Netflix Corporate perspective (Walden's PC hardly made much of an impact on popular culture or the box office, so I can't see them being desperate to return to that well anytime soon).

MN by contrast gives me plenty of Gerwig vibes as a story (and feels much more in keeping with the sorts of Victorian era books Greta Gerwig has mentioned liking as a child in interviews, such as "A Little Princess" and "Little Women" - vibes wise , not story wise that is) and also feels like the stronger bet from Netflix's corporate perspective of wanting to make a bold statement and to distance themselves from the previous adaptations and appeal to a younger generation who've grown up exclusively with MN as the first book.

Plus we've heard Gerwig herself make hints towards MN with her "wood between the worlds" comment, whereas I'm not sure we've ever heard her reference a single specific thing from any other story yet 

Obviously it all remains to be seen, but my money is firmly on MN at this stage.

This was the synopsis from the book edition that I grew up reading — I think it’s a fairly accurate description. It's overly dramatic, sure. But they always try to amp up the tension or epic nature when promoting a book or movie.

I can’t wait to dissect whatever they do end up releasing, though  

Posted by: @lentenlands

Now, while Production Weekly isn't always 100% accurate, they have an extremely solid hit rate. Especially when compared to free services like ProductionList.

Great find!

In my experience, these production websites seem to largely just parrot publicly known information. Each time they renew their Narnia listing, it's been in response to a piece of news that was announced the previous two weeks.

Occasionally, though, they’ll make a unique claim but it typically ends up getting denied by studios/directors. A similar website called Production List has filming starting January 31st in New Zealand. Gerwig did mention Father Christmas specifically in her Time Magazine article back in February.

Posted by: @icarus

Plus we've heard Gerwig herself make hints towards MN with her "wood between the worlds" comment, whereas I'm not sure we've ever heard her reference a single specific thing from any other story yet 

Posted by: @impending-doom

Posted by: @icarus

Plus we've heard Gerwig herself make hints towards MN with her "wood between the worlds" comment, whereas I'm not sure we've ever heard her reference a single specific thing from any other story yet 

 

Gerwig did also mention Father Christmas specifically in her Time Magazine article back in February.

Well, she is doing two movies or so we've been told.

Posted by: @col-klink

Well, she is doing two movies or so we've been told.

Yes, but having Gerwig reference two separate stories doesn't help us narrow down which one she's going to adapt first. It's completely baffling that we're this far along and still don't know - are Gerwig/Netflix just toying with us?!

@coracle, here's where Production Weekly pulled their description from.
https://www.cslewis.com/us/books/ebook/the-magicians-nephew/9780061974168/

So, I've had a day to mull over this post. I'm personally leaning towards believing it, and here's why. 

1. There has been more than one actor/actress drop hints that MN is the story in the works the past few weeks. [ETA: Correction, Jason Isaacs. I thought I had seen another, but now I can't find it.] These people do NOT frequent Narnia websites and their information comes from behind-the-scenes sources.
2. I know Netflix is wanting to be different and stand apart. There have already been three film versions of LWW -- Walden's made it to the big screen whereas MN has never been done before. And as a side note here, for those who don't remember this, back in the day when Walden and the C.S.Lewis Estate relationship broke down, it was because Walden wanted to do MN next because it was the second best selling Narnia book out of the seven. We all know that's because of the Chronological publishing order, but even so, outside of the fan base, if you're going to read one Narnia book nowadays, there's a good chance it's going to be MN. 
3. I've never gotten past Gerwig's mention of the Wood Between the Worlds. (Which, I might add, was the one interview I've seen that gave me hope that maybe this version of Netflix's Narnia wouldn't be totally trashed.)

Posted by: @impending-doom

It's completely baffling that we're this far along and still don't know - are Gerwig/Netflix just toying with us?!

Toying, no. Saving the big reveal for lots of publicity, yes. 

Posted by: @col-klink

Well, she is doing two movies or so we've been told.

In this day and age of Hollywood, that doesn't necessarily mean two separate books. The big money is make as many sequels as possible and make one story into as many separate movies as you can.  

There is little doubt in my mind that this property is Netflix's new big flagship and they're going to throw as many resources at it as possible to make it (from their perspective, not necessarily ours) good/high quality. But also string it out as long as possible to reel in the $$$$$.

I remember wishing back in the days of Walden Media that someone would do the bird's eye view of this project and film the entire Chronicles in chronological order to keep the Pevensies' ages accurate even through HHB when they're young adults. Now with AI that makes that sort of thing irrelevant, but even that thought makes me wonder if Netflix may be thinking along those lines. And it still doesn't help determine whether they do MN or LWW first. The only overlapping character there is Jadis. (Aslan doesn't count.)

Posted by: @fantasia

@coracle, here's where Production Weekly pulled their description from.
https://www.cslewis.com/us/books/ebook/the-magicians-nephew/9780061974168/

Presumably written by the same uninformed assistant who wrote on the cover of one of the books that LOTGK was also Jadis?

Sigh, it's sad when making something more exciting is put ahead of truth. 

Thanks @fantasia

Posted by: @fantasia

@coracle, here's where Production Weekly pulled their description from.
https://www.cslewis.com/us/books/ebook/the-magicians-nephew/9780061974168/

Ah, right. (Because that's the US version of the site and I'm in the UK, that link transfers me to a different part of the website and I had to click on a few more things to get to the summary of MN — here it is for any UK users: https://www.cslewis.com/uk/books/paperback/the-magicians-nephew-the-chronicles-of-narnia-book-1/9780007323135/ The book summary is the same.)

Well, nice to know they went to what seems like a reasonable source — the publisher's website — to get what they think is the synopsis, rather than just making stuff up. Not so nice to know that the actual publisher's website, and the current paperback edition of the book itself, have a blurb that really isn't an accurate representation of the contents of the book...  

(Not uncommon, unfortunately, especially with classics that have been through lots of editions over the decades. I've also seen more than one example of a new edition of a book with a cover illustration that doesn't represent anything that actually happens in the story and was obviously drawn by an artist who hadn't read the book, but was just guessing at the contents from the title.)

And as a side note here, for those who don't remember this, back in the day when Walden and the C.S.Lewis Estate relationship broke down, it was because Walden wanted to do MN next because it was the second best selling Narnia book out of the seven. We all know that's because of the Chronological publishing order, but even so, outside of the fan base, if you're going to read one Narnia book nowadays, there's a good chance it's going to be MN. 

Ooh, that's interesting — I hadn't heard about that. True, it's got to be the result of MN having a number 1 on the spine in all editions since the 1980s, but at least it is a book that's definitely worth reading. And while I'm firmly on the side of original publication order when it comes to reading the books, starting a new screen adaptation with MN makes a lot of sense for a number of good reasons and I won't be upset if Gerwig and Netflix do that.

3. I've never gotten past Gerwig's mention of the Wood Between the Worlds. (Which, I might add, was the one interview I've seen that gave me hope that maybe this version of Netflix's Narnia wouldn't be totally trashed.)

Yes, that stood out to me too. Whether or not it was a veiled hint that that's the story she's working on first, it definitely means she's familiar with the entire series and it means enough to her that she can pull out a reference that nobody would be familiar with if they've only seen the screen adaptations, and use it as a metaphor that made sense in relation to what she was saying about the creative process.

In this day and age of Hollywood, that doesn't necessarily mean two separate books. The big money is make as many sequels as possible and make one story into as many separate movies as you can.  

Er, yeah, there is that. But actually, if she makes MN a two-parter, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. All of the Chronicles could do with more than a two-hour timeframe to fit everything in properly in a screen version, and out of all the stories, MN is the one that has the most transitions between different worlds. In fact it includes three different settings that each have significant action and are worth lingering in for the atmosphere of each one: 1) Late Victorian London; 2) the ruins of Charn; 3) the new world of Narnia as it's created. This is a story that might actually be better done across two films — a two-part miniseries, if you like — in order to do it justice and get the pacing of it right.

Or else, if it turns out Gerwig is doing both MN and LWW, that will be interesting too, to see how the hints in MN of what's to come (Digory growing up to be the Professor; Jadis becoming the White Witch; the origin of the famous lamppost in Narnia; the creation of the wardrobe from a tree with Narnian origins) are brought out and then fulfilled in the next film. In the original books, that aspect works much better if you read LWW first and MN later (as I did as a child), but in a movie series that follows the chronological order, it could still be done well if both MN and LWW are made by the same director.

It helps, anyway, that LWW is still by far the most familiar of the Chronicles for those who haven't read them all, and so people who've seen one of the screen adaptations of it, but haven't read MN, will still be able to watch a film version of MN and have the same "Oh, that's where that came from!" reactions that they would have if they'd read LWW before MN.

Wherever all this ends up going, it's certainly exciting to have so many hints of progress — however sketchy — at long last...

Posted by: @impending-doom

Posted by: @lentenlands

Now, while Production Weekly isn't always 100% accurate, they have an extremely solid hit rate. Especially when compared to free services like ProductionList.

Great find!

In my experience, these production websites seem to largely just parrot publicly known information. Each time they renew their Narnia listing, it's been in response to a piece of news that was announced the previous two weeks.

Occasionally, though, they’ll make a unique claim but it typically ends up getting denied by studios/directors. A similar website called Production List has filming starting January 31st in New Zealand. Gerwig did mention Father Christmas specifically in her Time Magazine article back in February.

Thanks. I will say that Production Weekly hides its information behind a paywall because it gets it straight from the casting/crewing grids that are sent out by talent agencies. 

Sites like Production List are essentially just guessing or pulling their information from publicly available sources, but PW only takes information that's sent out.

Now, it's not totally unheard of for a studio to send out false/inaccurate information to an agency when staffing a production. But it's suggestive, at the very least.