The sets themselves. 

If only this movie was adapting a different Narnia book, one that it made somewhat sense to set in the 1950s, then I'd be stoked for it. (Do people still say stoked? Oh well.) I think they look beautiful. 

But even though I started this topic to inject some positivity into this discussion, I'm not asking anyone to lie about their opinion for my sake. If any of you dislike the sets for reasons besides the time period they depict, I'd be interested in reading why.

https://www.narniaweb.com/2025/08/magicians-nephew-adaptation-to-shoot-at-manchesters-victoria-baths-scene-to-take-place-in-the-1950s/

My guess is we'll get an interview with Gerwig about the new Narnia movie sometime in 2026, but I don't know enough about how these things work to say when. I'd be interested in reading other Narniawebbers' estimates. 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360778945/iconic-hotspots-new-international-tourist-fees-will-apply-and-what-could-be-next

The idea is to reinvest the fee money into the places. It makes sense for Cathedral Cove; its access track was badly damaged in 2023, but has now been repaired.  I have been down that track (not an easy stroll), and the beach and rock caves were wonderful.

Cathedral Cove was used as the beach in Narnia not far from Cair Paravel, where the four Pevensies found themselves after being pulled out of a railway station by magic.

Which locations would make sense to film on-location today?  Have the Terraced Houses in London changed much over the last 100 years since the time when the book was based?  Or are they much the same today and could pass for an early Twentieth Century London street today?

Do you think there are any other locations that would make sense to shoot on-location in London?

Ladybird (2017) opens with the following quote:

"Anyone who talks about California hedonism has never spent a Christmas in Sacramento" - Joan Didion

Little Women (2019) opens with the following quote:

"I've had lots of troubles, so I write jolly tales" - Louisa May Alcott

Obviously lots of movies open with a quote, so its hardly a uniquely "Gerwig" thing to do, and indeed its not even a device she employs for the opening of Barbie either, but 2 out of 3 isn't bad, and its more than enough justification to ask you guys what quote you think she should use if deciding to open the Magician's Nephew in a similar fashion.

It should ideally be no longer than the ones above, and should likewise speak to the overall themes and ideas of the movie itself.

CS Lewis quotes are an obvious starting point, though I'll offer bonus points if anyone can come up with a suitable non-Lewis quote which perfectly encapsulates the themes of Magician's Nephew. Perhaps one by Joy Davidman?

Thinking back, I feel like my ideas back then were much more aligned to those of Markus & Mcfeely when it came to adaptating the books - I'd read a passage and think "well you'll have to change that visual, otherwise it will look too goofy on screen" or "they'll need to rearrange this section in order to fit the story into a more conventional three-act narrative structure". And in many ways that's exactly the approach Adamson took with the adaptations - streamlining off all the rough edges to create 2.5 solidly made and highly polished blockbuster style movies.

However, maybe now it's just because I've got older, or maybe its because I've become a lot more well versed in cinema in general (or even that cinema itself has become more diverse as an art form since the early 2000s) but I now find that my sensibilities are perhaps the exact opposite to what they were before - I'm now way more sold on the idea of keeping in some of the things that might be perceived as corny and old fashioned. I'm much more willing to see films taken bold risks on unconventional narrative structures, themes and ideas. 

Anyway, I guess I was wondering if anyone else has gone through a similar mindset change.

How have your sensibilities on films and adaptations changed since the Walden days?

When the police arrived and found no lion, no broken wall, and no convicts, and the Head behaving like a lunatic, there was an inquiry into the whole thing. And in the inquiry all sorts of things about Experiment House came out, and about ten people got expelled. After that, the Head's friends saw that the Head was no use as a Head, so they got her made an Inspector to interfere with other Heads. And when they found she wasn't much good even at that, they got her into Parliament where she lived happily ever after.

{ym}:rofl:

Is there any possible way to include that? It'd take a long time to show, and the climax of The Silver Chair is already lengthy and complex without it. (The BBC miniseries didn't show the Head at all.) But it's so hilarious that it seems a shame not to include it in a movie adaptation without it. 

The only way I can think of is to end with Jill writing a letter to her parents explaining what's been happening at Experiment House (minus the Narnia stuff) which we'd hear as voiceover, probably over a montage of the events described. (If they did do that, I think it'd be cute to end the letter and the movie with her telling her parents she'd finally made a friend and for the last shot to be of her and Eustace.) But that would be telling, not showing, which is frowned upon by critics. (If I were writing the screenplay that way, I'd be tempted to bookend the movie with letters from Jill to her parents, the first one about how bad things are at Experiment House and the last one telling how they've recently improved. But that'd receive even harsher criticism for telling, not showing.) 

Do you guys have any ideas?

Well, truth be told, not many people on Narniaweb are talking about the movie that much now. It's kind of yesterday's news. {ym}:lol: But I still feel the predominant opinion on the site is that the VDT movie was a bad film/adaptation. Of course, there are other Narnia fan sites and it's likely that there are more people on them who love that particular movie. I'm not on those sites much so I can't speak knowledgeably about them.

But I wonder if when the generation of Narnia fans that grew up watching the movie comes of age, the tone of the conversation might change. That's what happened with the Star Wars prequels. Although they made tons of money (unlike VDT), the fan "establishment" considered them terrible. They had their defenders, but the consensus was that only kids could enjoy them. Then those kids grew up and, more or less, took over the internet. While people still laugh at the prequels' sillier aspects, it's with more affection rather than a sense of betrayal or outrage. Here's a good article that explains this. 

‘The Phantom Menace’ at 20 - Washington Examiner

Keep in mind, a lot of the criticisms leveled at The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010) on Narniaweb, such as the dialogue being cheesy, the plot being full of holes, the actors' line deliveries (some of them anyway) being flat, were also the typical charges laid against the Star Wars prequels. (If you want my opinion on the subject, I think it's true that nostalgia is probably blinding some of the prequel fans who grew up with them, but I also think their childhood innocence may have allowed them to see storytelling virtues in the movies that older fans missed.)