Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News



Message


Empire Admin -> Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (24/12/2008 10:53:59 AM)

Post your comments on this article




nclowe -> *shakes head at Disney* (24/12/2008 10:53:59 AM)

No!!! Prince Caspian was one of the pleasent surprises for 2008 amist a durge of fairly crap films (I'm looking at you Indy). I really hope they get funding from somewhere!




Oli Monkey -> Maybe this is a good thing. (24/12/2008 11:06:08 AM)

With Disney no longer involved then we may get a darker more braver film.
As there's a few dark bits in the book such as the island of fog that i don't think they would have done justice too. I heard Peter Jackson is interested in directing.*
I'm sure another studio would love to come on board the ship with all the petty much guaranteed loot that they'll make.

*I may of made this up




horatio hornblower -> does not surprise me at all (24/12/2008 11:42:24 AM)

prince caspian and the lion the witch and the wardrobe were incredibly disapointing

if they can get a better director then it may improve
the old miniseries were better in every way
the CGI looks entirely fake in the new ones




JaiCSC -> You know why Caspian didn't rake in the money. (24/12/2008 11:56:43 AM)

It's cause they didn't release it at Christmas. Films like that do better at that time. The Harry Potter films that were released at Christmas usually did better than those that didn't.




nclowe -> RE: You know why Caspian didn't rake in the money. (24/12/2008 12:02:23 PM)

I totally agree JaiCSC. I bet if LOTR had been released in the summer it would't have done half as well as it did. Parents are much more likely to take the kiddies out to the cinema in winter as there isn't as much competition from other ativities, whether it be whatever sporting event is on tv, BBQs or general 'stick the kids in the garden all weekend'. I'd bet good money that Harry Potter doesn't do as well this summer as they hoped it would...they should have stuck with Christmas release for that too!




elab49 -> RE: You know why Caspian didn't rake in the money. (24/12/2008 12:09:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: nclowe

I totally agree JaiCSC. I bet if LOTR had been released in the summer it would't have done half as well as it did. Parents are much more likely to take the kiddies out to the cinema in winter as there isn't as much competition from other ativities, whether it be whatever sporting event is on tv, BBQs or general 'stick the kids in the garden all weekend'. I'd bet good money that Harry Potter doesn't do as well this summer as they hoped it would...they should have stuck with Christmas release for that too!


Fair enough Harry Potter - although given the money from summer blockbusters when they do bust blocks it seems a bit tenuous when parents are desparate to find something for the kiddies to do when they are on holiday.

But LOTR really didn't need to rely on the kiddie contingent for its audience.




Ethanial -> Great news for Christmas (24/12/2008 12:50:36 PM)

Crappy films can't get another terrible film in their cannon because people were smart enough not to see their awfulness.




LeChuck -> Potter grosses (24/12/2008 1:08:36 PM)

I dunno, it's kind of hard to state that there's any pattern as to which release window has worked better for Potter, from the grosses of the films so far:

Philosopher's Stone  (Winter 2001) - $976,475,550
Chamber of Secrets (Winter 2002) - $878,988,482
Prisoner of Azkaban (Summer 2004) - $795,541,069
Goblet of Fire (Winter 2005) - $896,016,159
Order of the Phoenix (Summer 2007) - $938,468,864

To be honest, I think the final grosses have had more to do with what competition they had at the box office than which time of year they were released. Either way, I don't think any of these numbers would be worrying WB too much.




jpt1976 -> Ha ha... (24/12/2008 1:09:38 PM)

...Disney jumping ship will surely mean the film doesn't get the 2010 release. Good news as the quality plummeted between 'LWW' and 'Caspian'. Which in itself was a surprise with 'LWW' being, if not awful, then poor.




Kazuya -> RE: Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (24/12/2008 1:16:54 PM)

Good.




KeithM -> RE: Great news for Christmas (24/12/2008 1:22:06 PM)

I liked Prince Caspian a lot more than I thought I would.  I hope someone continues adapting the series, you know, now they've started like.




Hughezy -> how can anyone be suprised?! (24/12/2008 2:28:36 PM)

it made $300 million LESS that the first. that's WAY too much of a gamble.

saying that, didn't the 3rd Potter film make alot less that the previous two films?




Ross 31 -> Don't make no more (24/12/2008 3:56:25 PM)

It's very unusual for Disney to drop out of making a movie, they usually carry on making films untill they ruin them . i.e Pirates 4 and 5 (when made), i hope that FOX don't bail out Walden Media and forget about making the Dawn Treader, the failings of Prince Caspian should tell them that.




angelic_face -> Budgetary and logistical? (24/12/2008 8:09:36 PM)

What, so a $200 million profit isn't enough??




Macavity -> RE: does not surprise me at all (24/12/2008 10:40:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: horatio hornblower

the old miniseries were better in every way


[image]http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000069CFD.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg[/image]

Yeah...there's no chance of that looking completely shit.





Pipkin3 -> (25/12/2008 12:39:58 PM)

Lets face it, the marketing and scheduling of the film was shite!! Fantasy films are best suited to the winter months, thats why Narnia 1 did so well.




mafyou -> RE: (26/12/2008 8:00:39 PM)

Well I am saddened. I like the first and Caspian was alright. The thing is as a kid I loved Voyage and let's be honest the two best child actors were going to be in it (forgetting Barnes). Oh well, Narnia will happen again at some point in the future.




freekedoutfish -> RE: Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (27/12/2008 1:32:27 AM)

I'm really astounded by Disney for doing this.

I liked the first Narnia film, but I thought the second one was a  HUGE improvement and far better then the first one. Less childish and more mature, better acting, better effects and better battle scenes. Just generally a far easier film to watch and a lot more fulfilling to do so.

This just shows that money really is more important then making films for these people, despite the fact they are meant to be the ones who are in the film business.

I expect the second film made less because the hype had died down slightly about them remaking Narnia films, and maybe it was because Disney failed to promote the second film was well as the first and didnt pull their thumb out. Just maybe!!

I personally loved the second one far better and I expect had more people gone to see it, they would think the same.




DazDaMan -> RE: Budgetary and logistical? (27/12/2008 1:55:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelic_face

What, so a $200 million profit isn't enough??


No.  A film of this type needs to make roughly 3 times its budget in order to financially break even. 




vineethchacko -> RE: Budgetary and logistical? (27/12/2008 4:49:33 AM)

Sure its disappointing but not entirely a bad thing. A new studio may take things further and make things even better. Shame about the talent though! I hope they stick around.




piccolo135 -> Awww shucks. (27/12/2008 10:29:19 AM)

What a shame. No really, what a shame.




harrypotter118118 -> (27/12/2008 1:03:46 PM)

I think that it shouldn't go ahead because it won't make any money. The first two were okay but I think they're pushing it with a third film. Sagas only work in certain cases one of them being Harry Potter which has made billions since its release.




lovegrove7196 -> wardrobe had strong legs, caspian broke them... (27/12/2008 6:18:34 PM)

There were so many missteps in Caspian that to me dragged it into the tent of 21st century blockbuster tragedies. Only a handful of blockbusters make it every year, this year, the titles of success went to Iron Man, Indy 4 and The Dark Knight, and rightly so...

The first trouble was attempting to ride the wave of the first film. 'Wardrobe' was popular because it had been done so many times before, people knew it's name. But Caspian was trying to ride that same wave and failed because not many people knew of this story.

What I dislike mainly is the disgraceful paradox between box office targetting and censorship. The novel is almost all a bloodlustful battle. There was not one drop of blood shown in this film, it took away from the realism of it. And the reason was so that it could appeal to a 'kids' audience.

I can guarantee... chuck a bit of blood in there and it would have taken an extra $100m!

Also... the film was just generally mishandled in every way.
Where in blue blazes was Aslan for the whole thing!? And why didn't the trees just uproot and attack earlier!? And why don't those kids care at all about their parents!? Why don't they look and feel more psychologically disturbed by being in a foreign environment of war and torture!? It just doesn't make sense.

The thing is, it makes sense in the book. Therefore, the direction and the writing of this film are both at fault.

Little do people know that the Narnia novels are closely sourced from Bible stories. (Aslan being the Jesus figure) There was an underlying significance hidden behind Aslan's absence, but it was not described for us!

This constitutes a massive failing on the part of the writing team and the director.

If Dawn Treader is going to be any good... bring in some decent writers and a decent director. Like Del Toro (unfortunately he's gonna be a little busy for the next few years), or Jackson or someone who takes care in their pictures at least.

Besides... who wants to see D




geodude1990 -> (27/12/2008 9:58:14 PM)

I never saw Prince Caspian and I didn't think that The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe was that great either. In my opinion the novel series has the potential to be adapted into a great series of movies just like Harry Potter, but they just need to start over.




Marty5 -> (28/12/2008 10:06:33 AM)

Probably the best thing that could happen. Prince caspian was terrible.




KeithM -> RE: wardrobe had strong legs, caspian broke them... (28/12/2008 7:17:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovegrove7196
... this year, the titles of success went to.. Indy 4 ... and rightly so...


Sorry, stopped there from laughing.  Couldn't take anything you said seriously after that.




KeithM -> RE: wardrobe had strong legs, caspian broke them... (28/12/2008 8:05:46 PM)

But, I'll try... [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovegrove7196
The first trouble was attempting to ride the wave of the first film. 'Wardrobe' was popular because it had been done so many times before, people knew it's name. But Caspian was trying to ride that same wave and failed because not many people knew of this story.


I can't think of a better reason to make the film than that.  Who wants to see the same crap over and over again?  The sheep maybe, but it's a sad state of affairs if we use that as the standard to which we aspire...

quote:

What I dislike mainly is the disgraceful paradox between box office targetting and censorship. The novel is almost all a bloodlustful battle. There was not one drop of blood shown in this film, it took away from the realism of it. And the reason was so that it could appeal to a 'kids' audience.


The movie was darker, certainly, but I agree with you to a point that they didn't go far enough.  But to address your previous point, they clearly felt they had to make some compromise in order to try to ensure a decent return.  Unfortunately they probably got it wrong and this probably compromised the movie's tone as you suggest, but it's easy to understand why this may have affected some of their decisions - these movies cost an awful lot of money after all...  And while it might seem obvious to you, if you were really that good at predicting ahead of time how to ensure a movie's success, you wouldn't be talking to us about it for nothing, you'd be getting paid a shitload to talk to the studios instead.  Hindsight's a wonderful thing...

quote:

I can guarantee... chuck a bit of blood in there and it would have taken an extra $100m!


I'll take that bet.  The amount of blood didn't make a huge bit of difference to the movie's lack of box office, imo - in fact, even though they didn't go as 'dark' as you or I might have liked, the movie's darker tone in comparison to the first probably hurt it with the people who enjoyed the first one.  The other main reasons why it didn't do so well, I suspect, is because a) they picked a bad year to release their movie - the competition this year was phenomenal - I personally saw more movies in the cinema this year than any in a very long time - Caspian not being one of them, however... partly down to the fact that the first was a bit too kiddy to make Caspian very high on my 'must see' list - again that falling between two stools hurting it in terms of 'demographic'.

quote:

Also... the film was just generally mishandled in every way.


In your opinion, but as I said, I enjoyed it more than I anticipated, so they can't really have mishandled it that badly.  Marketing yes.  The movie itself, not entirely.  It wasn't 'great', don't get me wrong, but nor was it awful either.

quote:

Where in blue blazes was Aslan for the whole thing!? And why didn't the trees just uproot and attack earlier!? And why don't those kids care at all about their parents!? Why don't they look and feel more psychologically disturbed by being in a foreign environment of war and torture!? It just doesn't make sense.

The thing is, it makes sense in the book. Therefore, the direction and the writing of this film are both at fault.


Again, I agree to an extent, but this is a bit nitpicky, imo.  I'm with you in general principle on plot holes - they're generally as suspension of disbelief shattering as continuity mistakes, but overall there was nothing so bad in the movie which killed the enjoyment for me, personally, so I guess it comes down to how much you analyse and how much you go with the flow.  If these flaws really did spoil it for you, then I won't try to defend them any further than that. :)

However, it shouldn't bear repeating, but apparently it does - a movie isn't the book and never will be - at best they're the abridged version and a certain amount of 'reading between the lines' is needed if you absolutely must compare the movie to the book. Also, for me I read the book over 30 years ago and the details are a bit vague, so I was less concerned about absolute faithfulness than just how much fun it was - and it was fun-ish, so I'm not as down on this as I might be otherwise.

quote:

Little do people know that the Narnia novels are closely sourced from Bible stories. (Aslan being the Jesus figure)


You don't say?!  [:D] I would say that's common knowledge, frankly.  It certainly is for anyone who knows anything at all about the books or C.S. Lewis.

quote:

There was an underlying significance hidden behind Aslan's absence, but it was not described for us!

This constitutes a massive failing on the part of the writing team and the director.


The movie gave me the impression that Aslan's absence and Lucy's behaviour was something about losing and regaining 'faith' or somesuch pseudo-religious nonsense.  Like I said, it's been a long time since I read the book, so you'll have to tell me if the movie actually got the correct message over to me or not.

quote:

If Dawn Treader is going to be any good... bring in some decent writers and a decent director. Like Del Toro (unfortunately he's gonna be a little busy for the next few years), or Jackson or someone who takes care in their pictures at least.


Holy crap!  Why didn't they think of that?!  Decent writers and a director who actually tries to do a good job!  Genius.  Give that man a job.  [:D]

Like the originality with your Director choices too btw. 

Sorry to take the piss a bit - I actually agree with many of your points on general principle, but I think you've been a little too overcritical of what was a very long way from the worst adaptation ever... or even this year.





Timmy_Brisby_05 -> RE: Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (28/12/2008 8:37:07 PM)

Oh no!




Jayseph -> RE: Disney Bails On Third Narnia Film (29/12/2008 12:26:51 PM)

I have to agree with freekedoutfish and KeithM in that Caspian miles better than the disappointing Wardrobe. after that initial misstep it looked as though the series had gotten back on track with the sequel so it's a real shame that Disney have bailed. I've heard rumours that Fox might step up to the plate so fingers crossed for that and I hope that they keep that cast as the kids who played Lucy and Edmond are by far the better actors.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.109375