Animation vs Live Action

[fantasia]

This is something I've been thinking about for future Narnia movies and I was curious how everybody else feels about the topic.

One of the frustrating things about the current situation is that whenever another Narnia movie is greenlit, and should it just happen to be The Silver Chair, there's really no way at this point Will Poulter can reprise his role because he'll be an adult by then.

Now, I have no idea if they plan to reboot the series or pick up where they left off, but either way, do you think they should consider a full animation of some type? Or continue with their mix of live action and animation when necessary?

IMHO, should they choose to reboot the series, I feel they should seriously consider some kind of animation because so much of it has to be animated anyways. Plus it would solve so many of the problems like Narnia aging at a different rate than Earth, characters and locations aging within the storyline, as well as the actors aging in between films.

Should they choose to pick up where they left off, I'm kind of torn cause I really did love the live action of the first three films, but maybe by then the CGI will be so awesome they can animate Eustace to look exactly like Will Poulter at the time of filming VDT.

What does everybody else think? And if you're for animation, what kind of animation would you like to see?

[MountainFireflower]

I'm a bit on the fence, but I voted for live action films. Animation would be a nice option, but live action is what truly made Narnia seem more real to me. If they used animation, it would be a lot harder for me to feel like Narnia was real. There's a definite difference in how I perceive animated characters vs. live action ones.

Then again, I'm being ridiculously optimistic in hoping that they can still find a way to use Will Poulter. (William Moseley and Anna Popplewell were a lot older in PC than the ages that Peter and Susan were in the book. So was Caspian. It still could work, you never know.) I would rather have Will Poulter be in the movies, regardless of how old he is, than have them use a completely different actor.

On the other hand, if they did animation, there would be a chance that everyone could still reprise their roles, just through voice acting. But I digress.

The nice part about the previous live-action films was that they were designed to appeal to the whole family, rather than just children. I think that if the movies were animated, it might detract from that a little. I'm reminded of the quote by none other than C.S. Lewis, “No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally – and often far more – worth reading at the age of fifty and beyond.” That, I think, is one of the things that makes Narnia so memorable.

I certainly won't boycott the films if they're animated. However, I would love it if Narnia was still able to be live-action, no matter what happens in the coming years.

[starkat]

I'm on the fence as well. I would think that animation Tangled style would work. But not something Pixar style. But I would rather them go for a full reboot in animation then a half and half.

I've been watching the Mandie movies and they switched Mandie actresses for the third movie and it came off seamlessly. I think the trick will be finding actors and writers who can bring about that change for a new slate of actors. I will however sorely miss getting to see Poulter in The Silver Chair and The Last Battle. It'll be rough, but I do think it can be done.

The main reason I vote for Tangled style animation over the Pixar style is clothing. The clothing in Tangled flows far better than it seems to in the Pixar movies I've seen. Though we don't see much human style clothing since it's usually non human or toys/cars as the main characters. Hair also seems to work better in the Tangled style. I'm not that crazy about Andy's hair in Toy Story 3.

[Louloudi the Centaur]

I myself would much prefer live action, but I haven't voted yet.

Narnia in live action has always seemed like a much better idea to me. The battles are much more realistic than they would be in complete animation. And the human characters show better emotion that any animated characters. (One problem with CGI I have is that with human characters, they all look rather non-human.) I find it vital that there be human faces for our characters in Narnia so that they can connect with the audience. I have always found it easier to connect with actual people and their feelings that with animation.

However, animation has its pluses. Beautiful scenery alone can draw an audience in. As pointed out in a previous thread, some of the concept art of Narnia could look very amazing if done in animation. And yes, their is the aging process in the live action Narnia series we have, so hiring voice actors could help the situation.

I think if Narnia were to be done in animation, I think it would be excellent to have it done Pauline Baynes illustration style. The iconic Tumnus and Lucy walking through the woods, the departure of Reepicheep, and entering of Aslan's Country come to mind in this style.

Ah yes, this is thought provoking, but I'm waiting a few years until we get more news.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I would love to see Studio Ghibli's take on Narnia. The only issue is someone would have to explain the underlying Christian messages to the Japanese cast and crew.

[waggawerewolf27]

I doubt that Studio Ghibli would find the Christian messages in Narnia too much of a problem. Howl's Moving Castle, one of their animated movies, still looked distinctly late 19th or early 20th century European in style, despite the Japanese cast and crew and the fantastical story line.

I agree that animation would solve a lot of problems with timing, ageing and casting of the films. I'd love to see animation based on Pauline Baynes' own illustrations.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

You might be right. As for Studio Ghibli, yes, they can absolutely convey European stylings (Hayao Miyazaki is well-known for doing so).

Here's a LWW trailer parody.
The Chronicles of Ghibli:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6puey ... shortfilms

[Balin]

I think the combination between live action and animation reflects the two world essence of Narnia. The idea is that you have very real kids in a pretty unearthly world (not many centaurs walking around here). Filming live action (and on film too) limits the director to a more traditional and realistic cinematic style. I would hate to see the style become overly romanticized by having complete freedom of composition. I would also have to disagree with the idea that animation could ever equal the quality of a live action performance. In action scenes, yes, but not a whole film.

Assuming they do not reboot, which would be worse: switching actors or switching mediums entirely?

[Elanor]

I am totally, totally against animation. Totally. Nuff said.

[Skilletdude]

Changing from live-action to full computer animation in the middle of the series would be very tacky and probably a huge box-office disaster, alienating even more of the general public and further embarrassing the fan base who are loyal to the original stories. I know if SC or MN was turned into a pure CGI fest, I would not want to be associated with the series anymore.

I also don't feel this is even remotely a realistic choice filmmakers would consider (and if they would, that frightens me). But I guess when NarniaWeb has no news to speak of, I won't hold it against fantasia_kitty for this thread.

Walden and the distributors failed to sustain momentum and profit for the first three films and for now, the only realistic thing to do would be to call it a day. Of course, we could see a completely fresh take on things and a new company to purchase the rights and bring quality and faithfulness to the franchise but that will be a daunting task and I wouldn't hold my breath for it.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I'm thinking it would work in an ideal world, not as a viable option for the Narnia franchise as it exists today.

[Lion's Emblem]

I'm open for either direction. The method of filmmaking, in a sense, doesn't matter. What's really important is that whatever method is used, whether it be animation or live action, is that the film stays true to what C.S. Lewis intended and that it stays true to Narnia. However, I wouldn't want to see them work in animation just for the sake of something different from the Walden Media films. If you're going to animate a film, you'd best have a reason for doing so.

If the series were to pick up where they left off, of course I would want to see live action and CGI as it was in the previous films. I can't say much for a reboot though. I'm not sure I could do with a different live action cast (it just wouldn't be the same at this time- I miss our Pevensies already).

[Melda Laure]

What's really important is that whatever method is used... is that the film stays true to what C.S. Lewis intended

A film is too short. I'll echo WFJ and WWF27 here, the Lewis foundation should have pitched it to Bones Studio. (yes, I know it was Walden who pitched the project to the foundation...) Moreover, the attitude of filmmakers is just all wrong.

Remember, A FILM is 2.5 hours, 3.5 hours tops.

A Japanese Anime series is 26 bi-weekly episodes of 25 minutes MINIMUM. Even though the individual books are quite short, there's too much detail for a 2 hour film. But stuffing two books into a single Anime season would fit easily, it would actually be MORE work to WATCH the whole series than actually READ the silly things. Sacre Bleu!

Oh, and then we can have Yoko Kanno do the music. Lemme see, I'll just ring up Keiko Nobumoto and see if she's really busy or what...

[Balin]

Actually, Lion's Emblem, I think it does make a difference what medium they use. There were a lot of bigger issues, but some people (like me) really didn't like the camera choice for VDT. It makes a big deal, because it does affect how you look at every other aspect of the film.

[Anfinwen]

I kind of agree with Lion's Emblem, but the problem is that if any Narnia movie is made completely animated it won't remain true to the spirit of Narnia.

When I went to see the motion capture animated "A Christmas Carol" I was quite disappointed. The parts of the story I was really looking forward two (the ones with real appeal and meaning) were short or nonexistent; they were replaced by scenes with more 3D appeal, including a prolonged chase of a tiny Ebenezer by a giant hearse. I was reminded of that part by the overly long sea serpent attack in VDT.

All that said, when a movie is animated it is quite frequently 3D as well; and the characters, meaning, and even the plot seem to fall prey to scenes that are supposedly more exciting.

The only Narnia movie I wouldn't oppose being animated is SC. The reason being, SC doesn't have quite as many deep but subtle moments that would end up getting left out (if they weren't there in the first place it is hard to miss them). Also, there are a lot of dramatic parts that could be animated very well and would look really cool in 3D. Add to that the fact that Eustace could still look like Will Poulter.

I agree with Skilletdude too, though, and I think it wouldn't work to just switch in the middle and then switch back.

[wild rose]

I'm would really rather they didn't make an animation of Narnia, I prefer live action, I don't really have a reason, and it's not like I dislike cartoons or animation, just not for Narnia, Narnia is something real, I guess that's way I prefer live action