Commenting Rules: Keep the conversation civil and on topic. If your comment does not add to the conversation, it will be removed. Debate intelligently. Insulting the author, /Film, or other commenters will result in comment removal and possible ban. If you want to point out a typo, correction, suggestion or criticism for /Film, please email us instead. Please use your name or nickname and not your business name (ie Discount Car Parts) as we might confuse and mark it as spam. If you would like to have your own Avatar show up with your comment, sign-up for a free Disqus account. Any Links will go into moderation before being approved. Anything we deem as spam will not be approved.

Disney Leaves Narnia Franchise

Posted on Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008 by Peter Sciretta

chronicles3long1.jpgDisney will not be financing the next Chronicles of Narnia film adaptation. This shouldn’t be a huge shock to most of you, as the writing has been in the sand for a while now. The shocking news is that Walden Media still plans to make The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader without Disney. As far as I can tell, all the key players from Prince Caspian have signed to return for the third installment, which Michael Apted  (The World is Not Enough) is set to helm. Principal photography set for Spring 2009 with a planned May 2010 theatrical release.

The first two films cost around $200 million, and the third film will probably be no different. I couldn’t see it costing less than $150 million. Walden has partnered with 20th Century Fox in the past, which leads me to believe that Fox might come aboard to co-finance this production as well.

Walden has produced 15 films in the last three years, and I’m not sure many of them could be considered profitable. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe seems to be the only film to substantially surpass the film’s budget domestically. Disney had committed to the third Narnia film but had made numerous public statements leading fans to believe that it could be the end of the line.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader was originally published in 1952. It’s the third book in the series but the fifth in chronological order. The book follows Lucy, Edmund, and their dreadful cousin Eustace on a magical sea journey aboard the Dawn Trader. The children are pulled into a painting of a ship at sea. On board is Caspian, King of Narnia and his companions, who are in search for seven lost lords of Narnia. The voyage will take them to the edge of the world (sound familiar? Yeah, Pirates stole this idea).

source: THR

Comments 

Related Posts

Tags

Action/Adventure, Adaptation, Disney/Pixar, Fantasy, Fox/Walden, Sequels, 

  • joshi38
    Honestly, if Walden can get themselves another partner for these films, I don't see them doing any better. Disney did fairly well in marketing the last film... not, perhaps, as much as the bigger films of the year, but then Disney had a number of movies out this year, not one of which, they decided to put any particular weight behind (except, perhaps High School Musical 3).

    Granted, a new partner might treat them better marketing-wise (because the success of a movie generally just comes down to how well it's marketed), but I don't see it happening.
  • we better hope it won't be the next Golden Compass
  • joshi38
    In terms of film quality, I think as long as they get the money and whatever studio they get doesn't try to control things too much, they may get a movie that runs on par with the previous two, which in all honesty weren't as bad as people say they were. One should hope that no movie with that huge a budget given to it should ever be as bad as The Golden Compass was.
  • Mark
    The Golden Compass was not as good as it should have been and not on par with the book. But I liked it nevertheless => 8/10.
  • joshi38
    I didn't much like it at all, it had some decent bits, but the girls acting annoyed me and the ending really ruined it for me.
  • They will still make these and I will continue to see them.
  • I REALLY love Prince Caspian and thought it was a very good movie. I don't understand what's with the backlash against Walden Media? I have enjoyed some of their other films (How to eat Fried Worms, the Water Horse, etc)
  • B33
    Meh. Good riddance. I'm not fond of the books and the films weren't any better.
  • Seth
    The sequel completely misunderstood its audience from the first film. The first film was a family movie. The second film took the franchise in a darker and more violent direction.

    I have no idea what they were thinking.
  • JPL
    Maybe it's because the second book was much darker and more violent than the first book?

    They might've been thinking it's a good idea to stick to the books.
  • Seth
    That's interesting. Sounds like that could be what happened.
  • alittler
    and this is why I am worried about Fox getting on board, I doubt they would think that stance a good idea
  • I actually enjoyed Prince Caspian, though I knew a summer release spelled doom for it right off the bat. Had it come out now, around the holidays, it probably would have performed just as well as the first film.

    The movies are good, though the casting has always left me a little confused, none of the children are spectacular actors or especially appealing.
  • vincentvega
    Maybe they could cut the budget by doing a different book adaptation. I seem to remember "A Horse and His Boy" having less epic battles and effects-heavy scenes. Then again, it has been eight years since I read it, so I could be entirely wrong. Anyone else recall anything similar?
  • They might as well just wrap up the Pevensie children's story while the actors are at a realistic age, because they don't appear in "The Horse and His Boy". Its also the only book that lacks some of the more key Narnia-esque elements (children from the real world being sucked into the fantasy world, etc.)
  • Ariah
    Susan, Edmund and I think maybe Lucy do appear in HHB, but as adults. HHB is the story that takes place during their rule, before they come back in PC.
  • Joe
    The summer release schedule killed this franchise. A sandwich between the first big superhero movie of the year and the return of the Indiana Jones franchise? Anyone with half a brain could see that coming.
  • Watanabex
    Prince Caspian was awesome i really really enjoyed it and i thought peter Dinklage was brilliant as Trumpkin
  • thank god.
  • Did anyone really have any affection towards this retarded franchise anyway?
  • Did anyone really have any affection towards this retarded franchise anyway?

    Didnt think so
  • Did anyone really have any affection towards this retarded franchise anyway?

    ...didnt think so
  • i do
  • sorry, I already answered the question for you
  • Joseph Kastner
    Just when I thought things were turning around at Disney, Iger does something stupid like this. This is the equivalent of WB dumping the Harry Potter franchise after the third film underperformed. Remember after its second weekend when the film dropped 60-70 percent after its $93 million weekend and there was question whether the franchise was still viable? Granted, Narnia was no where near as profitable as Harry Potter, but to dump the entire franchise because one film underperformed, mostly due to bad timing - what idiot decided 'Hey, let's open the film six days before Indiana Jones'? - is stupid. I am seriously pissed off at Disney. They'll blame the economy, most likely, and yet they are shilling another $300 million for a fourth Pirates movie. Don't get me wrong, I loved the Pirates franchise, but even I think a fourth film is a bit reaching, especially since At World's End didn't perform nearly as well as Dead Man's Chest.
  • Nothing was turning around at Disney, nor has it ever been. People have a strange concept of Disney, as if its some sort of lovable elderly grandfather who only churns out high-quality masterpieces.

    Its a multinational corporation that exists to make money.
  • Nothing was turning around at Disney, nor has it ever been. People have a strange concept of Disney, as if its some sort of lovable elderly grandfather who only churns out high-quality masterpieces.

    Its a multinational corporation that exists to make money. If they are not making money, they will find a new way to make money.
  • J. P.
    I'm amazed that Disney, the company that craps out sequels faster than they can get new movies out is abandoning a franchise after only one sequel, when there are already 5 more already in existence. I understand that Prince Caspian underperformed, but they've already admitted that most of that was due to poor placement in the box office. I don't understand why they're giving up already. Stick with it for one more and see how it does. I just hope that the next one does really well and they see that maybe they need to look at Walt's original ideologies and re-evaluate their business plan.

    Oh well. I really wanna see all 7, but it doesn't look too good, does it?
  • Prince Caspian didn't underperform because of when it was released. It underperformed because it was the worst movie of the year. It was bad. Razzie bad. The only reason that I'm glad that I was able to keep from walking out on it is that I got to see the single worst moment in cinema this decade: that awful montage at the end with the ear-piercingly bad music. That shit was Disneygay.
  • no way. I thought it was an excellent film
  • It reminded me a lot of the first two harry potter films. The movie was extremely dry and was almost like a Fantasy Film from the 70's rather than an updated approach to the genre. It wasn't terrible, but I do agree that it really wasn't that much different from the first one, which I think partly fed into the underperformed box office stats.
  • Guest
    I wonder if the new partner will be able to throw their weight around to get a rating the film clearly is too intense for like Disney did for the last one.
  • HUKI365
    I wanted to love the new Narnia movies (LOVED the books), and they are competant in their own ways, but I think that unfortunately I'll have to wait 20-30 years for remakes to be completely satisfied. Acting, editing and set designs need a LOT of work.
  • One could have predicted this before the first movie was out. Past "The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe"
  • It's about time. It was just a financial disaster waiting to happen. Good for Disney for being smarter than say...Fox.
  • The only reason Narnia movies got so much money in the first place was because of the Christian agenda. Had this movie not had religious undertones, it would not be as popular, and Disney would have dumped them much sooner!
  • yes, but give us non-Christians some credit-- we love the Narnia books too
  • It's about time Disney realized this is not the next Harry Potter.
  • I hope this still materializes. I really enjoyed Prince Caspian despite it's flaws.
  • I actually enjoyed Prince Caspian, though I knew a summer release spelled doom for it right off the bat. Had it come out now, around the holidays, it probably would have performed just as well as the first film.

    The movies are good (not great), though the casting has always left me a little confused, none of the children are spectacular actors or especially appealing.

    I've never understood the "christian undertone" complaint when it comes to the films as well. Its been so watered down to safely appease the masses, that its barely even present at this point. There's a few allegories, but nothing that Harry Potter and Star Wars haven't already covered.

    I hope we get a third film, but I'm not holding my breath. Making all seven would be pretty illogical though. If they do get picked up by another financier, a budget cut should definitely be in order. It might make them focus more on the characters and storyline, and less on the mediocre special effects. I understand they are necessary for a Narnia movie, but some of it was pretty exhausting in the last two movies.
  • What bugs me about the Christian undertone is the fact that its NOT an undertone. Its a novel written by a Christian author for Christian kids, if anything its an OVERtone.

    Why to people ignore the entire LOTR trilogy? JRR was the dude that CONVERTED Lewis to his faith, why is no one bitching about the Fellowship, Gandalf returning, the Ring and everything?
  • Like I said, I was talking about the films. I could understand somebody bringing it up when it comes to the novels themselves, but the movies have been religiously castrated for the most part.

    Lord of the Rings is not as heavy-handed with the Christianity as the Narnia books are, and Tolkien was even less out-spoken about it, while Lewis practically throat fucks you with it.
  • Like I said, I was talking about the films. I could understand somebody bringing it up when it comes to the novels themselves, but the movies have been religiously castrated for the most part.

    Lord of the Rings is not as heavy-handed with the Christianity as the Narnia books are, and Tolkien was even less out-spoken about it, while Lewis practically throat-fucks you with it.
  • rayofthejungle
    Hopefully the next installment will be darker without Disney's influence. There should be blood included this time around as well as genitalia. Seriously, none of the centaurs had any noticeable rendered schlongs - took me completely out of the picture. The lack of genitalia in the first film was forgivable as it mostly took place in a cold environment.
  • I was wondering how many they were going to try to squeeze out of the books. Looks like it is time to read them.
  • cruz u vargas
    por favor , en español
  • I am hoping they will make it darker and put some of the religious context in instead of watering it down for the masses.
  • WHY EVEN BASE THE SUCCESS OF A FILM ON DOMESTIC RECEIPTS? DO US COMPANIES ONLY "COUNT" THE MONEY THEY MAKE IN THE U.S.? NO, THEY DONT. THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION MONEY/ REVENUE GENERATED FROM GLOBAL SALES. WHY DO YOU EVEN MENTION THAT THE FILM DID NOT GENERATE REVENUE EQUAL TO RO GREATER THAN THE COST TO MAke it? IF YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION GLOBAL/ INTERNATIONAL RECEIPTS/ RVENUE, THE FILM MADE MONEY. MORE MONEY MADE THAN THE COST TO MAKE IT. IT WAS A PROFITABLE VENTURE. WHY EVEN MENTION DOMESTIC RECEIPTS, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
    DISNEY PULLED OUT BECAUSE THE SECOND MADE LESS THAN THE FIRST, AND THEY ARE BETTING THE THIRD WILL CONTINUE THAT TREND.

    THNAKS,

    ~g
  • Toryoom
    I remember Prince Caspian as being one of my least favorite books out of the series. While there's a lot of battle and whatnot, for some reason the "feel" of the book's story seemed staler and somehow leaning a bit closer to boring than the others. While I wholeheartedly agree with the decision to stick closely with the original story that the Narnia movie series has kept (Movie Studios: this is ALWAYS the right decision!), I felt from the beginning that the staleness of this particular story was bound to impact the Caspian movie's financial take. Voyage of the Dawn Treader was a much more interesting story, however, so coupled with a wise release date, I'm imagining/hoping it will do better at the box office. But with the mediocre press that this last movie garnered, who knows....
  • Well then it would make even less sense to do The Horse and His Boy.
blog comments powered by Disqus

gorilla nation

/Film

Copyright © 2010 /Film. Web design by Pro Blog Design. Logo Concept by: Illumination Ink

All names, trademarks and images are copyright their respective owners.