Getting back for a moment to what I think may be the underlying reason why I still can't believe the rumour is true (and not just because I don't want to believe it)... despite what some people understandably assume, Hollywood does not have "an agenda" — political or ideological, religious or anti-religious or whatever — apart from $$$$$.

Seriously — if those in charge of the movies seem to be pushing certain trends at any time, it's because they've picked up that that's what their target audiences want and are willing to pay to see. It doesn't get any more complicated than that.

That's why I can't quite believe it's the Netflix executives who are pushing for a female or gender-neutral Aslan. I gather it's unclear exactly how much they paid for the rights to all seven Narnia books, but it's said to have been something like $250 million. (Yes, as in $250,000,000.) They are not in this to promote some kind of radical ideology. They need to make a profit, or at least break even. They do NOT want this project to bomb.

Going just by the NarniaWeb poll statistics quoted by the Talking Beasts team — and we have a really good diversity of Narnia fans on here, from many different backgrounds — the "Meryl Streep as Aslan" rumour has left at least 70% of Narnia fans feeling negative about the project (from pessimistic to extremely concerned). If Gerwig herself or anybody else at Netflix were indeed seriously demanding to have a female / feminised Aslan, a good look at the reactions online should show them what a commercially disastrous idea that's going to be. And considering Netflix reportedly already dropped Matthew Aldrich for wanting to make unspecified "updates" to the Narnia stories... I just cannot believe those at the top would now be throwing their support behind something that, judging by the reactions to the Meryl Streep rumour, is going to be the equivalent of flushing millions of dollars down the drain.

And again, this speculation could be totally wrong (as could any others) and we really will not know until some genuine news comes out! 

@courtenay I totally get where you're coming from, especially regarding the financial side of things. Netflix spending that much on the Narnia rights suggests they’re in it to win, not to risk alienating a loyal fanbase.

But I also think it’s worth considering how Greta Gerwig works as a filmmaker. She’s known for being thoughtful, literary, and emotionally grounded in her adaptations. If her name is even being loosely connected to someone like Meryl Streep, I don’t take it as a sign of a “radical” direction, and it could’ve just been a brainstorming moment, not a locked-in creative choice?

You've actually made me also consider how it’s possible that early discussions (maybe even from the Aldrich era) are being taken out of context or misattributed to Gerwig? She hasn’t said anything publicly, and knowing how carefully she handled Little Women and Barbie, I’m always going to be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt until we see real casting news.

Posted by: @courtenay

I know I'm going on a lot lately, but I can't get over the fact that the more I think about this "Meryl Streep as Aslan" rumour, the less it makes sense. (Especially in terms of the likelihood of commercial success, and cynical though it may be, we all know what Hollywood's bottom line is. )

A lot of the reactions - especially the disbelief and grasping for alternate explanations - remind me a lot of the internet discussion following The Last Jedi. The portrayal of Luke Skywalker in that movie was not only so bizarre, but also so counterintuitive from a business perspective, that there had to be another explanation. Maybe the character in The Last Jedi was a crazy clone of Luke (drawing inspiration from the cloned Luke Skywalker storyline in Timothy Zahn's novels from the 90s), maybe it was all a dream, maybe Luke will return from the netherworld of the Force and be resurrected ala Gandalf the White in the next movie etc. That last one is the one that convinced me especially when the title for Episode IX was revealed as The Rise of Skywalker.

It just didn't make sense. Obviously, it upset me as a fan, but why would a company buy the rights to Star Wars and then shoot themselves in the foot with regards to arguably the most beloved character in the entire series - certainly one of them! But then Episode IX came out, and while there were some half-hearted attempts to smooth over some of the more controversial aspects of The Last Jedi, there was no grand surprise. Things really were as they seemed. I couldn't explain it then, and I can't explain it now. Any Star Wars fan could have told you that The Last Jedi was going to be very controversial, just as any Narnia fan could tell you now that gender-swapping Aslan is a very bad idea. They have to know their decisions are going to stir up a hornet's nest, but I guess they're okay with it.  

Granted, I'm still holding out hope that this is all a big misunderstanding, but it wouldn't shock anymore me if it isn't. Sometimes bizarre, self-defeating decisions are made in Hollywood with no apparent rhyme or reason.

Posted by: @reepicheep775

Granted, I'm still holding out hope that this is all a big misunderstanding, but it wouldn't shock anymore me if it isn't. Sometimes bizarre, self-defeating decisions are made in Hollywood with no apparent rhyme or reason.

True, that. It's just that given the amount Netflix paid for the rights to Narnia, if they mess it up on the very first instalment out of (potentially) seven, they've nothing to fall back on. Once they've alienated the fans — especially as seriously as this decision is going to alienate them (and already has, unless it turns out not to be true) — they (Netflix) will never win them (the fans) over again.

And if it really is going to happen, and they really are going to lose so many millions over it... well, so be it. As I've said, if this film completely tanks over the female Aslan issue and the entire franchise is ruined, at least other studios that might consider a Narnia remake in the future will take note and not try that again. 

The emotional investment we and others have in Narnia is deep, and when something feels like it’s straying from the heart of the story, it’s easy to fear the whole thing might fall apart. But as I've been saying, it’s worth keeping an open mind. We’re still at the rumour stage, and even if the Aslan casting ends up being different than expected, it doesn’t automatically mean the entire adaptation is doomed.

There’s a real danger in assuming that one controversial decision will sink the whole ship, especially before we’ve seen anything in motion. Some of the comparisons being made are to films that also struggled in other areas, with writing, tone, or pacing, which is why changes or problems stuck out more. But if Greta Gerwig brings her usual depth, heart, and intelligence to the storytelling; strong character arcs, emotional resonance, thoughtful visuals, this adaptation could still be something really special.

Aslan is vital, absolutely, but so are Digory and Polly, the emotional arc with his mother, the awe of Charn, the creation of Narnia, and the moral weight behind every choice. If all of that is powerful, and Aslan’s presence is handled with the same seriousness and reverence, then even an unexpected casting choice could still work in context.

It’s also worth remembering that some bold casting choices have worked. Take Judi Dench cast as M in the James Bond franchise. She was the first woman to play James Bond’s boss, a role that had traditionally been male since the character’s creation. At the time, it was a bold and somewhat controversial move. But Judi Dench absolutely owned the role, and by the time Skyfall came around, M's death was treated as a major emotional moment, proving how central and beloved Dench's portrayal had become. She wasn't just a gender-swapped character, she redefined the role of M for a whole new era of James Bond films.

And while there's a lot more surrounding Aslan that shapes people's hesitations to this idea, I still think (in general) If the performance is excellent and the character's spirit remains intact, audiences can absolutely embrace a new take.

@rilianix Well said, although that last part is something that was covered in the Talking Beasts episode: if Aslan is female, or voiced by a female actor, but the movie is spot-on with everything else about his (her) character and the plot in general... well, all three presenters concluded that that wouldn't be so bad. But they'd still be left with the overwhelming feeling of "So then why did you have to do that???"

Which is pretty much where I am too. I'll certainly watch the movie at least once, no matter what it turns out to be like, so that at least I know what we're actually dealing with and can comment fairly. But the whole concept of making Aslan female (or not entirely male) just seems so unnecessary — even for someone like me who's not heavily traditionalist in her religious leanings and generally has no problem with portrayals of God as feminine or as ultimately beyond our human concepts of gender. (I nevertheless also don't have any problem with Jesus definitely being male, and of course that is specifically who Aslan is supposed to represent, so...)

If Gerwig's version of Aslan is female (or feminine-voiced) and yet otherwise does hit all the right notes, well, that'll be a relief. But I suspect I'll still hesitate to call it a "real" adaptation of Narnia, simply because that change goes so strongly against what Lewis would have wanted (going by his own beliefs and views on gender), and I honestly can't see how the film would gain anything significant by it. Definitely not nearly as much as it would lose, in terms of both authenticity and fandom. 

@courtenay I really do understand that feeling of, ‘Why change it?’, especially when it comes to something as central as Aslan. It’s a valid question, and one that comes from a place of deep love and investment in the stories, which I absolutely respect.

For me personally, though, I think I’ve already made peace with the idea that, unless it’s handled very poorly, it’s not something I’d want to hold against the adaptation or Gerwig. I don’t say that to dismiss how others feel, but more as an honest reflection of where I’m at. I think adaptations can still resonate powerfully even if they diverge in ways that feel unexpected.

At the end of the day, I just want this project to bring joy and wonder to as many people as possible. That’s honestly why I keep showing up in these threads and sharing this perspective. It’s not to shut down concerns, but to say: there might be more room for something meaningful here than we think.

Posted by: @courtenay

Getting back for a moment to what I think may be the underlying reason why I still can't believe the rumour is true (and not just because I don't want to believe it)... despite what some people understandably assume, Hollywood does not have "an agenda" — political or ideological, religious or anti-religious or whatever — apart from $$$$$.

Seriously — if those in charge of the movies seem to be pushing certain trends at any time, it's because they've picked up that that's what their target audiences want and are willing to pay to see. It doesn't get any more complicated than that.

For the most part I'd agree with you there, @courtenay that the majority of those in the filmmaking business are mostly driven by the $$$$$$, although I do believe there are some (although probably - and hopefully - a much smaller group of people) that are more agenda driven.  From what we've seen in articles up until recently about Greta Gerwig's respect for the Lewis and the books, I am inclined to hold out hope that she falls into the former category rather than the latter, and I also am hopeful that she will pay attention to the legitimate concerns and either explain the context of her decision if she goes through with it, or if she does want change any character's gender she would do it with a character that wouldn't be as controversial to the stories - as you've pointed out, Strawberry/Fledge is a great example of a character that could have this sort of change without upsetting too many people (except perhaps the most picky).

I do think though if they were to deliberately "thumb the nose" so to speak at genuine concerns this reads of one of two things (1) an incredibly unwise decision or (2) a plan to push an unnecessary agenda just for the sake of it... Honestly though, again, I am hopeful this isn't the case, because as you said, this does affect the potential success or failures of other films & television series they plan to make as part of the Narnia deal and do they really want to kill off the series and/or risk alienating the fanbase (or at least some thereof).

Posted by: @rilianix

At the end of the day, I just want this project to bring joy and wonder to as many people as possible.

@rilianix, I understand what you are saying, and I also am hopeful that this project would bring joy and wonder to as many people as possible.  But I do wonder if this is indeed possible for some (maybe even many fans) if they change Aslan's gender or make him clearly with a female voice without any context and understandable explanation.  What's the point in attempting to get people on board with this project who had no previous interest in the stories, whilst also potentially alienating the more reliable fanbase - namely fans of the books.

Posted by: @pete

For the most part I'd agree with you there, @courtenay that the majority of those in the filmmaking business are mostly driven by the $$$$$$, although I do believe there are some (although probably - and hopefully - a much smaller group of people) that are more agenda driven.  From what we've seen in articles up until recently about Greta Gerwig's respect for the Lewis and the books, I am inclined to hold out hope that she falls into the former category rather than the latter...

Just to be clear, I wasn't talking about Greta Gerwig personally when I said that — plenty of individual directors / film-makers / auteurs do of course have their own personal agenda for what they want to portray on screen. I meant those in charge of the actual studios or production companies, like Netflix and others, are ultimately mainly concerned with making a profit. I'm not saying that to slight them, either, cynical though it is. They've paid a LOT of money for the rights to adapt these books; they need to get it back. If the person they've chosen as director does something so outlandish that the whole thing fails spectacularly at the box office... the people at the top will not be happy. And I don't blame them one bit, really.

Posted by: @pete

@rilianix, I understand what you are saying, and I also am hopeful that this project would bring joy and wonder to as many people as possible.  But I do wonder if this is indeed possible for some (maybe even many fans) if they change Aslan's gender or make him clearly with a female voice without any context and understandable explanation.  What's the point in attempting to get people on board with this project who had no previous interest in the stories, whilst also potentially alienating the more reliable fanbase - namely fans of the books.

Agreed — and I also understand your point, @rilianix. It could be that there's something more meaningful in this than we think. But making a drastic change to Aslan, of all characters — unless there's some incredibly good reason for it that is made clear within the context of the film... it just seems to be the one thing that's pretty much guaranteed to alienate and upset existing fans more than anything else. And it doesn't seem very likely to draw in huge numbers of people who might not have had much interest before. Definitely not enough to make up for the loss of those who are being put off by it.

That's why I keep saying, if this rumour is true, it's a decision that makes no commercial sense — and that's why I'm wondering what's really going on. There's just too much we still don't know, and perhaps won't for a while yet.

People will still be drawn to the books even if the movie doesn’t turn out to be something good.  I don’t think that a poorly made film will discourage the readers too much. But a well made film will attract new readers.  I don’t know if Meryl Streep or Greta Gerwig have actually considered the impact that that a female Lion will have on the readers who expected a more authentic adaptation.  People will always love the Narnia books no matter what happens. They will not go out of print because of a poorly made movie, but it could mean that the books would not be read as often by new readers as when a really good movie inspires people’s interest and curiosity. 

As others have mentioned, the podcasters posed the question "if everything else about Aslan is perfect, will a female voice ruin the movie?"

I would like to ask, if Aslan is not great but the rest of the movie is fabulous (writing, pacing, cinematography, dialogue), will it still be worth watching?

I am of the opinion, yes. I looked it up in my copy of MN, out of 186 pages, Aslan doesn't speak till page 116. That's around 60% of the book. That's after singing Narnia into being. If I can have a great movie up till that point, I will be moderately happy. I'll have been able to see Charn, the Wood Between the Worlds, and Narnia being created. As they said, I think I would feel a bit sad over what could have been truly perfect. But hey, those parts at least will be very exciting to see, regardless. 

Posted by: @anfinwen

I would like to ask, if Aslan is not great but the rest of the movie is fabulous (writing, pacing, cinematography, dialogue), will it still be worth watching?

Of course there's no right or wrong answer to this, but for me, going by experience, I think the answer is no. 

I still remember how much I was looking forward to the 2005 film of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe — especially only a few years after Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy, which I loved — and how crashingly disappointed I was that day at the cinema. The film was definitely good in itself, in terms of acting, cinematography, CGI effects, and so on. But as an adaptation of Narnia, for me it just totally failed to capture the spirit of the original book that I know so well.

One of the problems for me was that they changed so much of the dialogue — usually not in ways that improved it at all — and another was the addition of overblown action scenes like the White Witch chasing them over the ice, and the EPIC-SIZED battle near the end. But the biggest let-down, by far, was Aslan. If he'd been as marvellous and awesome — "good and terrible at the same time", "'Course he isn't safe. But he's good" — as he is in all the books, that probably would have been enough to override the various relatively minor things about the film that I didn't much like. But as it was... my feelings were and are similar to what Glumpuddle expressed in that recent Talking Beasts discussion. Aslan in that movie just seemed like an OK-at-best, rather generic "wise elder" figure — not at all the sort of being who makes something leap inside you even on hearing his name, and who makes you feel "all trembly" to stand in front of him (which is the effect he has on the Pevensies in the book).

And to me, that was it, seriously. If a Narnia adaptation doesn't get Aslan right — the way he comes across in the books, I mean — the whole heart and soul of it is gone, for me.

Just to explain what I mean, I've never forgotten the impact Aslan had on me when I first encountered him through LWW (the book — my mum read it to me when I was about 4 1/2). Nobody in my family was (or is) religious and I only had the vaguest idea of who Jesus was; I don't think I was even aware that he was put to death and came back to life, and I certainly didn't make that connection with what happened to Aslan in this story. I only knew, somehow, that this Lion was THE most amazing and wonderful and (for some reason) important character I'd ever "met" in a book. He stood out to me like no other. A few years later, when I was 7, we bought the rest of the books in the series and Mum and I read them together. And I remember the thrill of excitement I got, and the way my voice quivered if it was my turn to read, whenever there was even a hint (in any of the books) that Aslan was going to come on the scene. I just wanted to know more about him, wanted to meet him, if only I could.

And yes, although I think I had already started to guess, it was at the end of VDT when Aslan reveals he is in our world too — "But there I have another name" — that I got who he was. (And I also got what Lucy meant a few lines earlier when she asked him, through tears, "And how can we live, never meeting you?") 

I only had a very simple and innocent faith at that stage, which was shattered by events in my life a few years later, and there's no need for me to go into that here. I'm saying all this simply because, when I did decisively convert to Christianity as a young adult, I'm convinced that I wouldn't have recognised what I'd found — recognised Him — nearly as quickly as I did, if I hadn't originally encountered Him through Aslan.

And that's my point. That is genuinely the impact that the Chronicles of Narnia can have on at least some readers. I don't know if any screen adaptation can or will ever really capture that, well, Christliness of Aslan. But if one even comes close, it might just start to introduce other young (or not-so-young) people to the One whom we all truly need to know. Or at least hopefully it'll induce them to read the books!! But if it falls flat with regard to Aslan... then it's failed in the very thing Lewis himself hoped his Narnia stories would do. And that's very sad, at least to me.  

Again, I totally understand why people feel strongly about Aslan and how he’s portrayed. I also understand that your comment, @courtenay, is more about if the film doesn't capture Aslan well in general, rather than just focusing on gender, but I wanted to revisit that part of the discussion...

As you mentioned, for many, especially Christian readers (for context, I’m not religious myself), Aslan was their first encounter with something holy and deeply moving in literature. So the idea of changing something as central as his voice or perceived gender can understandably feel like a departure.

That said, I think it’s worth exploring the idea, through adaptation, that Aslan’s reverence and Aslan’s gender aren’t necessarily the same thing, and that a different approach might still work, even beautifully? I know that’s not the case for everyone, especially depending on how one interprets the text and Lewis’s own intentions.

But, from what I understand, Lewis didn’t write Narnia as strict allegory. He called it a “supposition”, what might Christ look like in another world? That gives filmmakers and readers some room to ask: What really makes Aslan feel like Aslan?

For me, it’s not his gender, but the effect he has on others. That moment when everything falls still. The awe and trembling. The deep goodness and wildness. The way Lucy, Edmund, or whoever, just knows he’s near. That’s what makes him “Christ-like.” To me, a female voice, or a female-presenting Aslan, doesn’t automatically take that away. Reverence isn’t about vocal pitch or masculinity; it’s about presence, power, sacrifice, and love.

Think of characters like Galadriel, or even the Spirit of Christmas Past in some adaptations; figures who carry majesty and sacred weight that transcend gender. They can feel holy and mysterious in a way that still stirs something deep.

Even within Christian theology, there’s precedent for divine qualities being expressed through the feminine, like Sophia, the wisdom of God, often represented with feminine imagery. If a female-voiced Aslan is directed with that same sacred weight, it could still resonate deeply, with both Christian and non-Christian audiences.

At the end of the day, if the filmmaker captures that sense of “He’s not safe, but he’s good,” and the world hushes when Aslan speaks, I believe the heart of Lewis’s vision can still shine through, no matter the voice.

I think what we’re inevitably going to run into here is the fact that what makes a faithful adaptation of Aslan seems to be subjective. To me, the Walden Aslan was absolutely definitive, because that’s what I grew up with and I do see the most important elements of book Aslan in there (though he should have been utilized much, much more in the latter two movies). There’s probably a big difference in being introduced to the LWW movie for the first time as an adult who was already very familiar with the source material and being a kid taking it in for the first time, because as a 5-year-old watching the movie as it came out with no prior familiarity with Narnia I very much did feel the things that @courtenay described feeling from the books as a child; the sense of wonder and of needing to know him, even if he isn’t safe, and of inherently knowing there was something very important about him before ever knowing who he was supposed to be (even being raised very devoutly, it was five or six years later that I understood that he was meant to be Christ, and somehow I didn’t even figure it out, it got off-handedly mentioned by my dad as if it was the most obvious thing and it rocked my world lol, and suddenly explained so much about why I felt the way I did about Aslan). I can understand why others may not get that out of it because we’re coming from different places and experiences in life that are naturally going to inform how we take it in, but for me, that magic and importance was absolutely there, and I never felt that he was tame. Coming at it as a child, Liam’s performance always felt both like he was dangerous and simultaneously the highest and most righteous authority there is, who will equally be stern with you when need be and other times be the warm comforter that Christ is to us. What I felt was always pure love, the holiest and realest kind of love.

Not to harp on about why I think Liam’s worked and not to invite further discussion on the matter because that’s really neither here nor there for this particular topic, but to illustrate how these things are definitely subjective. In terms of Aslan being female, or at least having the voice of one, or perhaps being some other less definable thing altogether, I admit I’m sure there will be people who won’t be too bothered by this, and if it’s otherwise done completely right, you may have kids who feel what I felt with Walden, and the important things are communicated effectively to them and probably some adults who are less inclined to care about the difference. I don’t doubt that there are those who could enjoy it for what it is if it does indeed happen and may even be able to feel what one should feel about Aslan. Technically that’s the ultimate goal at the end of the day and it’s good if that can come of it. But whether that makes it still a good version of Aslan… I’m very inclined to say no, but again it’s going to be subjective for each individual.

I wish I could be more open to it, and I’ll probably still watch it just to give it a fair chance and let it speak for itself, but I think for many of us if you change Aslan’s gender, no matter how well done it may technically be, it’s just not going to work for us on a personal level. Whether it be because the character is and should be male, or you’re a Christian and the whole idea is blasphemous, or both, or something else altogether, there are a lot of different angles to take with this that are gonna lead many people to have a problem with it (if it’s true and we’re not all doing this for nothing). I don’t want to minimize what good could still come out of it for people who are open to it, so it’s hard to say it would be objectively a 100% bad adaptation of him, but… near enough as far as I’m concerned. I’m of a faith that believes that gender is an eternal, immutable part of one’s very being, so naturally to me my first instinct is, ‘No, this is so wrong, He is male, end of story,’ and it seems that’s what a lot of people are feeling right now. In my eyes, changing that immediately changes something very, very crucial about who He is and therefore if this representation of Christ is no longer what He is, that’s not even Him anymore, you know? Yes, it’s going to be subjective because not everybody is going to feel that way, or any of the other feelings brought up throughout this thread, but I think for many people, if you get this one thing wrong about Aslan then it doesn’t really matter what else you got right because it’s just not Aslan anymore.

I wish the best for this adaptation, because if people still feel something from it then that’s good for them and it can hopefully direct more people to the books, but ultimately there will be many different opinions about the whole thing and while I can understand and respect more open approaches, I don’t think that can be me.

Posted by: @courtenay

...the only reason that comes to mind ...is that it's some kind of theological statement — we've had too many male representations of divinity down the ages, so let's have a female one for a change. Which... well, there are those of us who wouldn't necessarily object to a female divine character in a totally different fictional fantasy world.

It wouldn't surprise me if that is an idea floating around Hollywood. In fact in a way it has already been done. Bast is the goddess in the Black Panther movie and she is a black panther. I love the Black Panther movie largely for the way they created a society that felt authentic and has strong female and male characters. However, Narnia was not created to have a female god.  If female divinity is what is wanted, the movie being made shouldn't be Narnia.

I still plan on seeing the movie at least once because part of the fun off watching adaptations are analyzing all of the changes. I suspect a female Aslan would be enough to ruin it for me but who knows. VDT still felt like Narnia to me, yet one of the main reasons I don't like Hallmark's Sense and Sensibility is that Eleanor has hot pink eye shadow.

Like others have said this rumor doesn't make sense financially. I wish I could conclude that because it doesn't make sense it won't happen but sense seems to be in short supply in many areas of life.