The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005)

[Dragon Goddess]

Originally posted by Dave
Except that 'The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe' was first published in 1950 and 'Casino Royale' in 1961. 'The Hobbit' was first published in 1937, but 'The Fellowship of the Ring' was not published until 1953.

So who copied who? Lewis and Tolkien were contemporaries.

*Chuckles.* I think part of the point to Tolkien's Foreword to the Lord of Rings is that his story isn't an allegorical piece like the Narnia books, or George MacDonald's Golden Key. I'm no great fan of LotR, but I've always liked Tolkien's words about a story with "applicability" versus an allegorical story.

Originally posted by Dave Anyone know why, since they have plans to film the whole series, Disney have begun with this episode? I know there is debate over which book to read first, but in the books I have the publishers say you should read them in chronological order and have numbered them that way. Lewis himself said it didn't really matter, but sided slightly with chronological order.

I can think of two possibilities.

1) What exactly is your publisher's idea of "chronolgical order?" You see the publisher of the series when I read it, the producer of the set from which most of my Narnia books comes, published them in the order they were written. That makes The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe the first book by... ah... external chronological order. Lewis didn't write The Magician's Nephew until later. It comes first strictly by the internal chronological order.

2) I haven't read the books in a while, but do any of the other stories feature Santa Claus? Maybe they just picked it as the Christmas story.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Dragon Goddess
What exactly is your publisher's idea of "chronolgical order?"

I have to admit I only read them as a child, a long time ago and I never read the 'Magician's Nephew' as I got bored by that time. I did watch some of the BBC TV series.

I think most people do read 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe' first and I did myself, but my children have the books now and in "Book 2" - The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe - full colour collector' edition published by Collins in 1980 it lists the books on the second page "In Reading Order".

I also read that CS Lewis wrote a letter to fans in which he said that he slightly came down on that order (which is the chronological order of the events as they happen in Narnia itself), but that it makes the books appear more allegorical than was his original intention.

My point was more that if Disney is setting out to make all seven then why not start with the first. It strikes me that they have gone with the one that will have the biggest box office draw because they are unsure of it's success. If they need to test the water in that way, maybe it is not so certain that they will make the whole series.

As for PTeppic's comments, I would have to agree that the story is a little weak, but it was for kids, and if it was not for Lewis and Tolkien then I doubt there would have been Conan, Elric or any of the packed shelves of 'Fantasy' that now fill bookshops.

[Annette]

I've never read any of C S Lewis' books. My daughter has just read The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe and thorughly enjoyed it. We've just been to the cinema to see this film and as a family thought it absolutely brilliant.

I don't understand why people go to the cinema to see films and then pick them to pieces. I go for the enjoyment of seeing a film together with my family.

I've listened to a couple of 'critics' who've slagged the film off and I know its their job to let people know what they think of the film, but at the end of the day isn't that 'peoples choice' to go see the film or not. I think that if we listened to a critics description and took it to heart then most of us wouldn't even bother visiting the cinema at all.

I hope you understand the point I'm trying to get across. I for one would love to go and see the film again. My opinion is that it was good and worth seeing twice.

As for the child actors and Tilda Swinton I think they played fantastic parts. She (the White Witch) came across to me as an evil piece of work.

Thats my opinion anyway.

annette

[Dave]

The Odeon free film guide 'Addict' tells us that this is an adaptation of the story by Lewis Carroll. It's not a typo as it appears twice on the page. That just shows you how much these critics know.

[Annette]

Thats a good point Dave. I'd heard that The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe was true (or as near as) to the book, so why criticise the way its been adapted on film.

annette

[Dragon Goddess]

Originally posted by Dave
I think most people do read 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe' first and I did myself, but my children have the books now and in "Book 2" - The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe - full colour collector' edition published by Collins in 1980 it lists the books on the second page "In Reading Order".

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is "Book 1" in the series as published by Collier Books in 1975, the set I have. It doesn't give a "prescribed" reading order. The original copyright for the Lion, the Witch and The Wardrobe is 1950, while the original copyright date for The Magician's Nephew is 1955.

Originally posted by Dave I also read that CS Lewis wrote a letter to fans in which he said that he slightly came down on that order (which is the chronological order of the events as they happen in Narnia itself), but that it makes the books appear more allegorical than was his original intention.

"The chronological order of the events as they happen in Narnia itself," would be the internal chronolgical order of the series. I think it's better to read/watch a series in it's external chronological order, not to mention wishing Lucas would stop rewriting the original Star Wars trilogy. The Magician's Nephew isn't the first book written, it's a prequel moved to number one by people organizing the series by it's internal structure.

Originally posted by Dave My point was more that if Disney is setting out to make all seven then why not start with the first.

And my point was that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was the first book written in the series rather than the later prequel The Magician's Nephew.

Originally posted by Dave If they need to test the water in that way, maybe it is not so certain that they will make the whole series.

It's true that the deal is that they get to make the next book in the external chronological order, Prince Caspian, if the first movie is a large enough success.

Originally posted by Dave As for PTeppic's comments, I would have to agree that the story is a little weak, but it was for kids, and if it was not for Lewis and Tolkien then I doubt there would have been Conan, Elric or any of the packed shelves of 'Fantasy' that now fill bookshops.

Conan predates not only Narnia, and the Lord of the Rings, but The Hobbit as well. Robert E. Howard had already written all of the original Conan stories when he comitted suicide in 1936. The year before The Hobbit was published.

[Dave]

Originally posted by Dragon Goddess
The Magician's Nephew isn't the first book written...

I never suggested it was.

Originally posted by Dragon Goddess
...it's a prequel moved to number one by people organizing the series by it's internal structure.

I think that is the answer.

Originally posted by Dragon Goddess
Conan predates not only Narnia, and the Lord of the Rings, but The Hobbit as well.

Yes, I made a mistake there, of course it was. But, at least I knew Lewis Carroll wrote 'Alice in Wonderland'.

[Dragon Goddess]

Originally posted by Dave
I never suggested it was.

Sorry, it's just you were talking about The Magician's Nephew as the first book, and to lots of people it isn't. I went over to Amazon trying to figure out when publication rights for the series tranferred from Collier to Collins, and found someone saying, "The order in which the Narnia Chronicles should be read and published is a matter of great controversy." They also mentioned those thoughts of Lewis's on the order from, "a letter written in 1957 (published in 'Letters to Children')," and pointed out that Lewis concluded in the letter, "So perhaps it does not matter very much in which order anyone read them."

Originally posted by Dave
I think that is the answer.

*Blushes.* I wish I'd been clearer to begin with. Some people, myself among them, are use to The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe being the first book. I'd guess the film makers either are use to it that way themselves, or they did some research and found that a large portion of the audience would be use to it.

Originally posted by Dave
Yes, I made a mistake there, of course it was. But, at least I knew Lewis Carroll wrote 'Alice in Wonderland'.

Sorry, I was just surprised you knew Narnia predates LotR, but didn't know Conan predates them both. Robert E. Howard created a number of different fantasy characters in his life, Conan, Kull, Bran Mak Morn, Solomon Kane. And, while I've never bothered to learn the maps of Middle-Earth, I use to have the maps of Howard's Hyborean Age fully memorized. Obsessive as I am, I can see how someone who isn't into fantasy could go, "C.S. Lewis, Lewis C., through the looking glass, through the wardrobe, what's the difference."

[Highlander II]

3 threads merged to one...