The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe.

[Kribu]

From the little I remember from the BBC TV version, and from some of the books I semi-read later, I - as a person with no religious background - didn't feel any of it was "shoving Christianity in my face". Being older and somewhat more knowledgeable of Christian mythology now, I can and could see the parallels, yes... but I would think that for non-Christian kids, i.e. kids that haven't been brought up with this mythology, it wouldn't really need to be toned down.

It would be just a story for them, I assume, a fairy-tale (and nearly all fairy-tales have some mythological elements in them, and loads of parallels and allegories understandable for grown-ups and older kids, but not necessarily to the youngest viewers/readers who have not been brought up with that background). As long as the parallels with Christianity aren't painfully clearly pointed out (i.e. narrator: and this here is Aslan, a Christ-figure etc), I wouldn't see it as shoving Christianity on the viewers or needing to be toned down.

The people and kids already familiar with Christianity would get the allegories and parallels, and most of them would probably not mind. The kids not familiar with Christianity probably wouldn't "get" them and would look at it as a cool story. I suppose some parents might object, but I've really heard much, much more about Christian parents objecting to their kids seeing/reading "bad" stuff than about non-Christian parents objecting to voluntary entertainment (it's not like watching the movie would be mandatory) having Christian parallels.

And even if the Christian parallels were clear enough for non-Christians (I assume Christians won't mind them being there), I can't see it really turning off too many of the target group (which would still be kids, I guess). As I said above - it would still just be a fairy-tale to them.

I'm quite looking forward to the movie, I think. And being a proper atheist and all, I really don't expect or want the religious overtones to be removed from the story - I mean, they do kind of carry the story and all.

 

[Fas]

Fas: then no movie versions of books can ever be made. Period. It's just not that simple, I fear.

As far as downplaying the Christianity of the series, I only read the LWW one, I think. And so long ago I don't remember it at all, really. But if they want to market this movie world-wide, won't they have to downplay it a bit?

Yeah, it's a different medium. I guess changes are necessary when:

a) It can't be brought to film: (FXs not up to it) or
b ) Not enough time, therefore:
c) makes the story flow more swiftly.

I guess I should wait until I read the thing. But if he wrote it with Christian overtones, my guess is the author wanted to introduce those myths at the kid's level. Isn't it disrespectful to authors, in the name of marketing? Especially to those that are not around.

 

[darth_librarian]

The Christian overtones in the Narnia books are not really overrtones, they are an integeral part of the work. To remove it would leave it empty. Lewis had a liberal background and belived that religon and faith should be
discussed and challenged. I think that alone means that you can't just brush it aside.

His 'Space trilogy', as well as being great early sci-fi, really gets into the meat and bones of a good theological debate on the nature of man and original sin. Worth a read.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/det...F8&v=glance

This can be easily contrasted with his friend and contempory Tolkien. a strict catholic who put a very firm and black and white view of evil and morality into his work.
Yet that was clearly left in the LOTR films.

Mind you, the religous references have been pulled from the movie versions of Phillip Pullman's Dark Materials. Ridiculous really. Pullman, whith his Oxford links, is arguably treading down the same road in his books by using childrens fiction to challenge religous pre -conceptions.

I just hope Lewis's work is treated with more respect by Hollywood than Pullman's.

With regards to TLTWATW, (hmm, catchy) I loved the BBC versions as well, they rocked. I remember all the xmas stuff the BBC used to do with great fondess. Anyone remember the Box of Delights?

On a side note, my real name is Edmund, so i've always had a sympathy for that character and his mistakes.

Mmm, Turkish delight!!

 

[Chilli]

Woo .. I hunted through our book cases .. we have The Magician's Nephew, The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian and The Voyage of the Dawn Treader .. woo, 2 more than I expected to find .. will have to get to reading them just to see how strong the religious overtones are ;-) .. when I last had contact with the story .. I didn't notice them at all.

I really don't see why/how such "overtones" should/could be left out if they're an integral part of the story. First .. well, leaving them out would hardly be in the intention of the author. Second .. why? Even as a non-Christian, one can accept Christian Mythology as an interesting set of stories .. and isn't taking inspiration from old legends something authors do all the time? How many modern pieces of Art take inspiration from Greek Mythology or from other mythology? Why should it, for a non-Chrstian, be any different when it comes to Christian mythology? One doesn't have to believe in the stories of Christianity to listen to then .. or does one have to believe everything Shakespear wrote was true to appreciate stories based on his works?

So I really can't understand calls for cutting out the "Christian" bits .. especially since if I recall correctly, they never truely advertise Christianity .. they're just based on Christian legends. Cutting that out would be the most pointless kind of political correctness .. and I'm saying this as quite a non-Christian.

 

[Bab5nutz]

I greatly enjoyed LOTR, and the films are among my favourites of all time. And the fact that Tolkien was a Catholic, and I am an atheist, has in no way stopped me from enjoying either the films or the book.
I think that in many cases, a lot of people today, won't see the religous symbolism in the Narnia Chronicles. This would be more the case outside America, perhaps. In my country, surveys have shown that most kids here have no idea about the stories behind Easter or Christmas. I doubt whether they would get the somewhat more subtle symbolism in the Narnia films.

 

[A_M_Swallow]

In the Narnia books everything is metaphor. Example 4 children = 4 gospel writers. Soap operas have taught viewers that modern drama does not contain metaphors so the public will do not look for second meanings.

Providing Disney does not do something silly like filling the screen with crucifixes the religious overt tones will just disappear. I would however advise Disney to check to see what Muslim and Buddhist censors cut out of the books.

Any religious leader (Christian, Muslim, Druid, Rabbi or what ever) wanting to show right from wrong can quote from the film, after it was watched as a fairy tale.

 

[colonyearth]

Wow, did I start a stink in here or what?

I never said they should remove anything. I do think they should and will be more subtle with the religious comparisons, which can be done and still retain everything that is good about the books.

The key to making any book into a film is to capture the spirit of the book. You cannot simply take a book and copy it directly to film, it doesn't work! They are two different mediums that work in very different ways. If you tried to exactly copy a book to film, it would be horrid and boring.

Bottom line is...they will not remove any religious allegory from the story, but they will most likely play it down to a more subtle level in order to make it reach the most people, while remaining true to the moralistic nature that Lewis was able to lay within the tale.

Again, think ET. It is a retelling of the Christ tale, but unless you looked for it, you didn't see it. That is what they will most likely do with this film. The books are a bit more obvious. The spirit of the book will hopefully be kept.

CE

 

[SwiftBiscuit]

Anyone remember the Box of Delights?

Oh man I loved that.
I don't remember much of it except the gorgeous crisp snow and that it felt innocently magical.

On a side note, my real name is Edmund, so i've always had a sympathy for that character and his mistakes.
Mmm, Turkish delight!!

I hated him! He wasn't worthy of having my favourite treat of Turkish Delight.

 

[KoshFan]

He gets better. A lot better.

 

[ARK1701]

With regards to TLTWATW, (hmm, catchy) I loved the BBC versions as well, they rocked. I remember all the xmas stuff the BBC used to do with great fondess. Anyone remember the Box of Delights?

I was in 6th grade when PBS put them on the air here in the States. They didn't work for me back then. Maybe now that I'm 25 I should give them a second try.

On a side note, my real name is Edmund,

Just be sure to stay clear of old style wardrobes and funny old Professors and you should be ok

 

[KoshFan]

Or, alternatively, seek them out.

 

[Chilli]

Have read TMN and TLTWATW now .. decided to go chronologically, already remembering some of the "basics" of the story and all that .. read the second when waiting at an appointment at my university's faculty dean for six hours yesterday to be given 25 seconds to correct one of his mistakes, woo ..

.. I must admit .. I haven't noticed much of the Christian "overtones" .. well .. noticed, yes, but only really because I was told to pay attention .. definitely not to a level that I would have been "bothered" .. and definitely weren't in a way that they could be taken out or toned down in any way. I guess one has to have been raised as a Christian to really notice most of them .. or are they more obvious in later books?

 

[ARK1701]

I guess one has to have been raised as a Christian to really notice most of them .. or are they more obvious in later books?

I think you may be right in about being a Christain makes you see *it* more then if you weren't.

I guess it's kinda' like how two "objective"(I don't believe ANYONE is 100% objective BTW) scientists (one being pro-creation, and the other being an evolutionist) can look at the same data and see two completely opposite worlds.

 

[Elenopa]

I guess one has to have been raised as a Christian to really notice most of them .. or are they more obvious in later books?

I have been raised a Christian, and I never noticed the imagery until our local Tolkien/Lewis expert talked about it in his sermons.

Basically, they are good reads.

 

[darth_librarian]

From an Agnostic point of view, they provide great mental stimulation, even at a younger age.

Oh, will stay clear of funny old Professores (although that sums up my Dad nicely..)

 

[Quagmire]

... scientists (one being pro-creation, and the other being an evolutionist) can look at the same data and see two completely opposite worlds.

A creation scientist, well as long as we're talking about fantasy worlds.

 

[ARK1701]

A creation scientist, well as long as we're talking about fantasy worlds.

Well, what about Einstein? It's well known he believed in God. He even had a saying against Quantum Mechanics "God doesn't throw dice!"

Now I'm not sure if he discounted evolution or not. But I do know for a fact that even hard core evolutionist Carl Sagan made it clear in the show Cosmos that even though he did not believe in a *personal* God, in no way did he imply belief in God is unscientific. If fact in one episode he talked about how our ancestors worshiped the sun, "...and they where far from foolish..."

What's my point you ask? Belief in God/creation doesn't make someone foolosh/ignorant, any more then being an evolutionist/atheist makes you wise/educated.

 

[SwiftBiscuit]

You are mixing the two together. There are many scientists who believe in God yet scorn claims that the world was created 6,000 years ago. Their approach is that God created this universe which complies to certain rules. They chose to become scientists and research God's rules so as to better understand him.

 

[hypatia]

And there are plenty of people who believe in both a Christian god and also evolution.

When did everyone turn so Fundie around here?

 

[ARK1701]

There are many scientists who believe in God yet scorn claims that the world was created 6,000 years ago.

As do I. It's man the Bible teaches was created 6,000 ago. Nor (just for the record) do not I believe Genesis 1:1-31 is talking about days in the context of 24 hours any more then referring "back in my fathers day" means a literal 24 hours, but instead six creative periods of times lasting for millions of years.