Handling the changes they made to PC and their effects on Dawn Treader
- Thread starter ~Lava~
- Start date
Hm, i'm not sure what changes that they made in PC will effect Voyage that badly. I mean, Peter and Susan won't be 'bothering' us in that sense anymore. Caspian seemed like a good choice for a king in PC, Ed and Lucy were great, which is a good thing for the voyage, not to mention Reepicheep...
What is the big problem you see? If you would tell us that we might give serious suggestions
I, too, think they will ignore Susan/Caspian for most of it, after all, it was 'just' a kiss, it's not like they were engaged or something.
~Lava~
Well-known member
I hope they ignore Susaspian too, but Peter's behavior and, for that matter, Caspian's do kind of effect the storyline. How can they be so condemning of Eustace's brattiness if everybody took Peter's so sagely? I think they will have to address how Peter and Susan behaved somehow, for the sakes of the non-bookies. I think the best way would be to have the two Pevensies explain why Peter and Su weren't with them at Eustace's house (or why they were at Eustace's house in the first place) there they could say something about Peter's improvement and Susan's forgetfulness.
Oh, I am sure they will explain why Susan and Peter aren't at Eustace's house; that will only make sense. But no, I think that the director will believe no one will make any connection between Peter's brattiness and Eustace's. I don't think they will address behavioral issues in PC at all. That's my guess.
Copperfox
Well-known member
The Pharaohs of Egypt, having control over what passed for news media in their days, always covered up their failures. As long as a defeat or calamity was not so complete as to mean the Pharaoh was actually killed or forced off his throne, he could and would pretend that the defeat or calamity never happened. That's why Egyptian records don't admit to the plagues that God brought on them through Moses.
In a somewhat analogous way, I believe that the Walden crowd, when making VODT, will simply bury their mistreatment of Peter in silence. No mention at all will be made in any way of their having redefined Peter as a brat in PC; they'll pretend they never did it. In fact, I will be very surprised if even the name "Peter" is spoken more than once in the entire VODT movie.
In a somewhat analogous way, I believe that the Walden crowd, when making VODT, will simply bury their mistreatment of Peter in silence. No mention at all will be made in any way of their having redefined Peter as a brat in PC; they'll pretend they never did it. In fact, I will be very surprised if even the name "Peter" is spoken more than once in the entire VODT movie.
Copperfox
Well-known member
Yes, that will be the one and only time that Peter gets mentioned.
And since VODT makes Edmund a lame duck as PC made Peter a lame duck, I won't be surprised if they make _Edmund_ appear mostly to blame in the unpleasantness on Deathwater Island, so as to make the reformed Eustace look better, the same way they made Edmund look better than Peter in PC. That's pure Hollywood: throw away the old star to make room for the new.
And since VODT makes Edmund a lame duck as PC made Peter a lame duck, I won't be surprised if they make _Edmund_ appear mostly to blame in the unpleasantness on Deathwater Island, so as to make the reformed Eustace look better, the same way they made Edmund look better than Peter in PC. That's pure Hollywood: throw away the old star to make room for the new.
That would be too easy. First making Ed bad and the rest good, then making Peter bad and the rest good, then making Ed bad again? I'm not so sure.
What i would love if if they would show Peter and Susan saying goodbye to Lucy and Ed in the beginning, like: when Susan and their parents go to the States, leaving the rest of the children with their aunt and uncle, and Peter with the prof, that would be a neat moment, that still could fit in beautifully. But since both William and Anna are not at all performing in the next movie that's not going to happen i guess. But that would give them a chance to show that Peter has 'changed' again (it wouldn't make PC up, but save what's left perhaps ).
Probably wishfull thinking though...
What i would love if if they would show Peter and Susan saying goodbye to Lucy and Ed in the beginning, like: when Susan and their parents go to the States, leaving the rest of the children with their aunt and uncle, and Peter with the prof, that would be a neat moment, that still could fit in beautifully. But since both William and Anna are not at all performing in the next movie that's not going to happen i guess
. But that would give them a chance to show that Peter has 'changed' again (it wouldn't make PC up, but save what's left perhaps ).Probably wishfull thinking though...
Mrs. Pevensie
Active member
I actually didn't mind the changes they made to PC! I thought that Peter's new attitude was quite appropriate for the situation! You have to remember that for Peter it had only been a year since he had been High King over all of Narnia, so you have to understand that he felt threatened by Caspian!
And bringing up the subject of Will and Anna being in VotDT...that isn't going to happen! I'm just about 100% posotove that they will not be showing their faces in the new movie!
I think that no matter how they change Edmunds attitude for VotDT, Skandar will still shine as a brilliant actor! His rude and bratty behavior in LWW was amazing as well as his mighty loyalty and witty humor in PC! So any way you slice it I think that Skandar Keynes will perform in such a way that we will love him no matter what disposition he has as Edmund!
And bringing up the subject of Will and Anna being in VotDT...that isn't going to happen! I'm just about 100% posotove that they will not be showing their faces in the new movie!
I think that no matter how they change Edmunds attitude for VotDT, Skandar will still shine as a brilliant actor! His rude and bratty behavior in LWW was amazing as well as his mighty loyalty and witty humor in PC! So any way you slice it I think that Skandar Keynes will perform in such a way that we will love him no matter what disposition he has as Edmund!
Yah, I like Lieke's idea so much, but we are pretty cure it can't happen because no Will and no Anna.
We had talked in another thread about whether they would wreck Ed's character in VDT the way they did to Peter's in PC, but: we have the new director, Apted, who did the lovely Amazing Grace, and I think we can trust him to do better.
(Although Amazing Grace did key on the main character's fight against slavery and did not overly emphasize, or emphasize at all, that the man was also very active in many Christian charities including homes for unwed moms, lots of evangelism outreaches and other important stuff ... I know the theme was the anti-slavery, but the lead's true Christian nature could have been more forcefully portrayed.)
We had talked in another thread about whether they would wreck Ed's character in VDT the way they did to Peter's in PC, but: we have the new director, Apted, who did the lovely Amazing Grace, and I think we can trust him to do better.
(Although Amazing Grace did key on the main character's fight against slavery and did not overly emphasize, or emphasize at all, that the man was also very active in many Christian charities including homes for unwed moms, lots of evangelism outreaches and other important stuff ... I know the theme was the anti-slavery, but the lead's true Christian nature could have been more forcefully portrayed.)
Oh, very true Mrs. Pevensie, i'm pretty sure Skandar could nail any job they ask him to do, after all: i loved his performance in LWW too, and there he was the nasty one. I just don't hope that they will make him bad or something for Voyage, you know: we've seen him bad, but more important: we've seen him turning good, and it seems weird that when one turns from that bad to good, you go back to really bad again while you were perfectly fine the year before. And he is a good character in the book, and i think it would be really stupid for them to change it, because 1. Everyone loves Voyage's Edmund as described in the books, 2. They would do the same thing they did to Peter, that's too easy, 3. They already have a 'bad' character, Eustace. (The discussion about wether or not Peter's role was better or worse than in the books is i think not something for discussion here, and i don't think we'll figure it out completely either. You have your opinion about it, i have mine, and that's fine.)
But i'm pretty sure that Peter and Susan won't appear in Voyage either, i just think that it would be great. That could be a time to show Susan's turning away, and Peter's maturing since PC.
I don't know about directors, we'll see when it comes out
.)But i'm pretty sure that Peter and Susan won't appear in Voyage either, i just think that it would be great. That could be a time to show Susan's turning away, and Peter's maturing since PC.
I don't know about directors, we'll see when it comes out
Knight of Narnia
New member
I agree with Copperfox's statement on this on. PC drew strong reactions from the Narnia fanbase, most of them bad. If your fanbase doesn't believe in a movie, then it would be harder to get "peripheral" fans to go see it.
Walden/Disney will more than likely sweep the unpleasantries from PC under the proverbial carpet and bring the fans a movie that is more faithful to its source. Disney/Walden are interested in one thing: MONEY. PC disappointed them in this respect, LWW didn't. LWW stayed close to the book, PC didn't. So Disney/Walden should come to an understanding that by keeping close to the book they should make more money.
Walden/Disney will more than likely sweep the unpleasantries from PC under the proverbial carpet and bring the fans a movie that is more faithful to its source. Disney/Walden are interested in one thing: MONEY. PC disappointed them in this respect, LWW didn't. LWW stayed close to the book, PC didn't. So Disney/Walden should come to an understanding that by keeping close to the book they should make more money.
Elentari
New member
1.
I agree as well. I was not a part of this forum before PC (seeing others reactions and concern for future movies, as well as a desire to discuss the books brought me here), but it encouraged me that I was not the only fan to be disappointed. -->
I should hope they realize--as Del Toro seems to with the Hobbit movies--that pleasing the fan base is of the most importance...they're the ones who will see it multiple times, buy all the merchandise, and majorly promote. Right?
I sincerely hope that Voyage IS more like the book and that the writers/director SEE that continuing to make films that upset fans is NOT logical (what DO they teach them at these schools?) As for the original discussion--
2.
I'm sorry, Mrs. P, but I must disagree completely. Sure, if this was just a movie, I would agree that the changes were appropriate, but in this case if Peter's behavior was "appropriate", then Lewis would have WRITTEN his character that way. As it was, Lewis had a much more NOBLE plan for Peter and he did not seem to feel that making Peter "feel threatened" was of any upmost importance to the plot. Maybe it was an attempt to modernize, maybe it was--as Copperfox chooses to claim--more purposeful than that, the answer I do not know, but I DO know that his behavior--while "appropriate" maybe by today's "standards" was not in line with the character Lewis wrote, and therefore the character Lewis INTENDED Peter to be.
3.
Deathwater Island has nothing to do with Eustace, reformed or not. Deathwater is between Caspian and Edmund and any display of it should make BOTH look as stupid as they actually were. I understand your point in elevating Eustace, however, no matter how it is done and I hope they will not have to do much. Also, I'm forming a belief that Edmund is the "darling" of the movie people (or maybe just Skandar, though it's not his fault, poor dear), and his character may yet go out grandly, as Peter's ought to have. Also remember, Copperfox, that this is TECHNICALLY Caspian's last movie as well, with the exception of 2 very brief scenes in Silver Chair. Anything done to Edmund may be done to Caspian since he is not "technically" a returning main. I think Edmund/Caspian may be a source of conflict, but I am not so sure either of them will be promoted more than the other since neither are really returning.
I agree as well. I was not a part of this forum before PC (seeing others reactions and concern for future movies, as well as a desire to discuss the books brought me here), but it encouraged me that I was not the only fan to be disappointed. -->
I should hope they realize--as Del Toro seems to with the Hobbit movies--that pleasing the fan base is of the most importance...they're the ones who will see it multiple times, buy all the merchandise, and majorly promote. Right?
I sincerely hope that Voyage IS more like the book and that the writers/director SEE that continuing to make films that upset fans is NOT logical (what DO they teach them at these schools?) As for the original discussion--
2.
I'm sorry, Mrs. P, but I must disagree completely. Sure, if this was just a movie, I would agree that the changes were appropriate, but in this case if Peter's behavior was "appropriate", then Lewis would have WRITTEN his character that way. As it was, Lewis had a much more NOBLE plan for Peter and he did not seem to feel that making Peter "feel threatened" was of any upmost importance to the plot. Maybe it was an attempt to modernize, maybe it was--as Copperfox chooses to claim--more purposeful than that, the answer I do not know, but I DO know that his behavior--while "appropriate" maybe by today's "standards" was not in line with the character Lewis wrote, and therefore the character Lewis INTENDED Peter to be.
3.
Deathwater Island has nothing to do with Eustace, reformed or not. Deathwater is between Caspian and Edmund and any display of it should make BOTH look as stupid as they actually were. I understand your point in elevating Eustace, however, no matter how it is done and I hope they will not have to do much. Also, I'm forming a belief that Edmund is the "darling" of the movie people (or maybe just Skandar, though it's not his fault, poor dear), and his character may yet go out grandly, as Peter's ought to have. Also remember, Copperfox, that this is TECHNICALLY Caspian's last movie as well, with the exception of 2 very brief scenes in Silver Chair. Anything done to Edmund may be done to Caspian since he is not "technically" a returning main. I think Edmund/Caspian may be a source of conflict, but I am not so sure either of them will be promoted more than the other since neither are really returning.
Copperfox
Well-known member
That really agrees with my point! Caspian will be, as you say, nearly as much a lame duck to be discarded--his part in "Silver Chair" not being calculated to keep up the teen-idol image. So they can indeed make both Caspian and Edmund look even MORE stupid than the book depicts, while Eustace looks better even if only by default.
Mrs. Pevensie
Active member
Everyone has such great points! All I know is that I hope they don't change VotDT very much! If anything I would like them to keep Edmund as a nice guy...cuz he seems to be a bit of a sour puss and a meanie (to Eustace) in the book!
Elentari
New member
If it makes you feel better, Mrs. P, Edmund only acts grumpy with Eustace because Eustace is so incredibly difficult to be around. I think we can ALL sympathize with Ed being slightly annoyed.
And I don't think he was mean--that role belongs solely to Eustace! If anything, Ed was/is incredibly nice considering who he was dealing with--Caspian also, though he doesn't have the background on E that Lucy and Ed do being cousins.Glad we agree, CF.
I think (sadly)that we will probably have more luck with the "silly" changes proposed in another thread than with any serious plot line that is closer to the book. IMO nothing they attempt (unless it's from the "other" thread) will make up for the way they treated Peter in PC.
Copperfox
Well-known member
Well, one thing _might_ undo the damage.
Take the scene where Reepicheep gets the idea to push the ship clear of the sea-serpent before its coils close. Without taking anything away from the value of Reepicheep's quick thinking, let's say that the sea-serpent is a little smarter than in the book, and it begins to pursue the Dawn Treader. Suddenly, a huge framed photograph appears in the sky: a photograph of a British World War Two Hurricane heavy fighter plane. Suddenly the plane comes to life, swoops over the Dawn Treader, and cuts loose with guns and bombs at the sea-serpent, killing it. The plane does a wing-wagging flyover of the Dawn Treader, and we see that the pilot is Peter before he flies back out through the suspended picture frame.
This would be LESS of a violation of Mr. Lewis' Narnian concepts than what Walden intentionally chose to do to Peter in "Prince Caspian."
Take the scene where Reepicheep gets the idea to push the ship clear of the sea-serpent before its coils close. Without taking anything away from the value of Reepicheep's quick thinking, let's say that the sea-serpent is a little smarter than in the book, and it begins to pursue the Dawn Treader. Suddenly, a huge framed photograph appears in the sky: a photograph of a British World War Two Hurricane heavy fighter plane. Suddenly the plane comes to life, swoops over the Dawn Treader, and cuts loose with guns and bombs at the sea-serpent, killing it. The plane does a wing-wagging flyover of the Dawn Treader, and we see that the pilot is Peter before he flies back out through the suspended picture frame.
This would be LESS of a violation of Mr. Lewis' Narnian concepts than what Walden intentionally chose to do to Peter in "Prince Caspian."