Episode 83: Flaherty Gives Update on Narnia 4

Running time: 33:17
After an extended news blackout, Micheal Flaherty (Walden Media president) has revealed that no script exists for a fourth Narnia film, and no agreement has been reached on which book should be adapted next. He also talks about the darkness in Prince Caspian and The Silver Chair, and Dawn Treader‘s box office. Rilian and GlumPuddle share their thoughts. Read/listen to the interview here.

52 Responses

  1. wolfloversk says:

    Nice Podcast all!!! I'll admit I'm one of the ones who went with HHB, partly because it's my fave and partly because I foresee that one having the least amount of adaptation issues. I just really hope they make up their minds fast… and that it goesn't end up like JP4. Frankly the similarities between what happenned to the JP series and what happenned to CoN is enough to worry me…
    I also agree with you about rereading the books! I;m currently in the middle of LWW right now and they never get old, infact they only get better and better. (On a side note I'm also in the middle of That Hideous Strength for my first time which has proven to be rather thought provoking thus far πŸ˜€ )

  2. glumPuddle says:

    I agree that HHB has lots of potential as a film. But, it would be hard to take the franchise seriously if they made that next. Unless it was wildly successful, it's hard to see them making another film after that. How would you build on HHB?

    SC builds off of VDT. LB could build off of SC. MN is a card they could play at anytime. HHB is kind of tough.

  3. Louloudi the Centaur says:

    SC could be made to a family film as long as the filmmakers are careful not to push it to the extreme, meaning there be no blood or gore situations, as with the other Narnia films. I think the only book that could have potential problems is LB. SC does have dark moments(some of the Underworld, eating of Narnia deer, serpent death) but I don't understand what's in it that would be over the top. After all, the Narnia series has the message that the Light always overcomes darkness.

    While talking of darkness, I don't understand why MF thinks the "darkness" of PC caused it partially to gross less(I am aware there were other factors). Harry Potter is violent, but a lot of children read them, and the films are successful. When I was in fifth grade, I saw a lot of kids reading Twilight, and the films are overall successful. The Hunger Games as well, and they are about to be turned to a film series. Kids have to be exposed to the truth about life at some point that it's not all rainbows and butterflies. I honestly believe that nowadays,while I understand we all were afraid of things at one point, kids are just wimps sometimes. I remember parents complaining that Rango was too frightening and poor little Timmy would be traumatized for life of a CGI rattlesnake. Come on! My brothers watched Indiana Jones when they were under the age of ten! It seems that parents just want to shield their kids from every scary image!

    Back to Narnia. Or it could indeed be people just don't want to see a unique series after the first book. I don't see many kids at school read Narnia at all, causing them not to be interested in the films, maybe? OR it could be related to PC sandwiched between two summer blockbusters, then VDT with pathetic public marketing in the states, though the Christian marketing was pretty good.

    I hope we do hear some more news soon. We seem to be in another two week blackout of news. I also hope SC/MN and on(if made)keeps its uniqueness and does not run from what it is.

  4. Reepicheep775 says:

    Dang, I'm at school right now but I'll listen to it once I get home.

  5. glumPuddle says:

    "While talking of darkness, I don’t understand why MF thinks the "darkness" of PC caused it partially to gross less."

    He thinks that because he has heard that criticism A LOT. I have too. PC was so different from LWW, and the level of darkness is one of the most obvious examples. People went into PC wanting "LWW2," and that's just not what PC was. Nor should it have been.

    With HP, the darkness was established in the first film, and then they later built on it. So people didn't freak out when the series got darker.

  6. Louloudi the Centaur says:

    Oh okay. I get it now. Thanks.

  7. Twinimage says:

    I don't think the main problem with PC was the darkness. In retrospect, the darkness isn't that bad. The main issue I have with it now is the characters were changed so much. It made it so un-enjoyable. Most of the characters were angry and always fighting. They tried to modernize all the young characters, which didn't work and seemed to really hurt the film for me.

  8. Reepicheep775 says:

    Good podcast guys. This is a truly frustrating time to be a Narnia fan. It may bemonths or years until we get any real news about the next movie. VDT disappointed me and part of me might be relieved if they didn't make any more. However that would be the end of NarniaWeb and the end of anticipating Narnia movies period. πŸ™

  9. Princess Lucy says:

    Thanks guys!!!!!!!!
    hopefully a decision will be made soon!!!
    speaking about franchises……..which fantasy series would yous like to see adapted……..
    me I always wanted an adaptation of the chronicles of Prdain….my second favourite after Narnia!!!!!!!

  10. Ithilwen says:

    I think the filmmakers are doing too much to avoid "darkness" in the movies. I think the sensitivity of children are so built up in their minds and exaggerated, that they feel the only type of thing kids and families will be comfortable with is the sort of thing you see at the beginning of A Series of Unfortunate Events, with the "Littlest Elf" false beginning. I don't think children are half as afraid or sensitive as these filmmakers make them out to be. They try to change it so it will be more appealing to families. But really, the only way it's going to be appealing to families, or anyone, is if they have the magic – the dark and the light – which Lewis originally put into them.

  11. wolfloversk says:

    After rereading about the serpent death, and in the midst of studying zoology… I can see how that scene might be a bit "over the top" if done strictly to the book(and no I do not mean how they killed it… I mean what snakes do after you kill them… which is a fact that Lewis apparently knew) but that could be fixed and still closely adapted with some creative camera cropping. The only other possibility is the annihalation of the underworld. (Though depending on how they handle Rilian, there might be problems there.) On a violence level it's no where near LB or even PC… I mean there's no huge battles, there's no war going on… although the LotGK is planning a take over, but really what's dark about SC is the tone. The eerie winter night mood, the plot points dealing with insanity, and human's place on the food chain…among other things. I stated early on there might be problems with SC's darkness, but let me clarify now I don't think, nor did I ever think, the problem will be will be with the audience reaction per say, but the filmmakers worrying what that reaction would be…and them trying to turn SC into what it is not. That is the reason why I find Flaherty's quote about why MN over SC extremely disheartening.

    Personally I believe SC is much darker than PC (the books of course πŸ˜‰ ) However it is dark in tonality more than violence where as PC was the opposite. I have a feeling parents will be more accepting of "tone darkness" than they would be of violence. (Though I will admit the serpent death is one of the grossest, most violent moments in the series… really the only comparisions are Aslan's Sacrifice and The Last Battle on Stable Hill (or whatever it's refered too :P)

  12. stateofgreen says:

    That's exactly what I was thinking. Make MN and HHB as prequels after they're done with SC and LB.

  13. What doesn't add up to me is that they seem like they're trying to avoid darkness, but then they chuck a huge, ugly serpent battle and a whole lot of evil which wasn't in the book into VDT. Why?
    Oh, right. Because finding seven lords who set sail one day and never returned and reaching the end of the world isn't exciting enough. It seems to me like they were adding all those things to make the film more 'exciting', then, to balance all that dark and evil, they had to make other scenes in the movie *painfully* cotton-candy sweet so it would still be 'magical' or whatever.
    I don't think that in VDT they grasped the fact that although it is perhaps a more light-hearted adventure, it is this in a very solemn fashion. It isn't all jokes and arriving at 'Disney World', the joy they feel is at some places very serious. Take when they are nearing the end of the world, and all they are consuming to sustain them is the 'drinkable light'. It mentions that they were so happy they almost couldn't bear it, but it wasn't the sort of happiness to waste on jokes… or is that the Last Battle? I'm a bit confused, but I think that's what it says.
    ANYWAY, what I'm trying to say in all this is that the filmmakers need to make up their minds. They say they don't want a dark movie, but that's effectively what they turned VDT into. If they made MN (which, to my mind, is a bit episodic in itself), would they perhaps introduce a huge new master plot that turned it into a battle?
    I'd like to say they wouldn't, but I don't have a great deal of trust in the filmmakers at the moment.

  14. Twinimage,you've hit the nail on the head. I didn't mind so much the fact PC was thematically darkened (I actually thought that made it quite interesting), but being a person whose favourite part of a book or film is the characters, I found it really difficult to accept the changes made to the characters. Peter had 'I want to be in charge and I want it NOW' syndrome, Susan seemed to have dumped her 'gentle' title for 'warrior-princess-with-everlasting-eyeliner', and Caspian was replaced with a young Inigo Montoya. No wonder people didn't like it as much as LWW! I think that all the changes they made cinematically (such as showing Caspian fleeing from Miraz rather than having Trumpkin tell a long story about it) were very well done, but the changes to the characters made the movie far less enjoyable that it would have otherwise been.

  15. Twinimage says:

    Yeah, it took me a long time to realize it. The story really isn't that different from the book. Just the timeline is different. The major difference is the "faith walk" segment was cut out and sort of replaced with them waiting for Aslan to actually appear. Also the scene with Bachus & Silenus was not shown. πŸ™ And there was too many fighting scenes too, IMO.
    If it weren't for all the character changes and added character arcs which didn't fit them well, the movie would have been much better and closer to the book.

  16. Narnian Meerkat says:

    I REALLY hope they do NOT do a reboot on Narnia…Man, that would just ruin EVERYTHING. Reboot on Spider-Man I'm not to worried about, but Narnia? Tooootally different story. Silver Chair! They better do Silver Chair! I'll have to finish listening to this podcast later, due to the facts that I don't have the time right now.

  17. Narnian Meerkat says:

    But REALLY, the only way it's going to appeal families, is if the STICK TO THE ORIGINAL BOOKS!!!!! Haha, totally agree Ithilwen. πŸ™‚

  18. Narnian Meerkat says:

    DON'T SAY THAT!!!! You're name is Reepicheep775 right? Well the Reepicheep I know is hopeful and faithful! Not doubtful! Now, I know we're all just a little concerned if Narnia is going to be no more, but, I DO have to say that I have a little feeling that it's not what it seems. πŸ™‚ So, cheer up everyone. Besides, even if Narnia DIDN'T continue in movie makings, it's not like it's the end of the world. I mean, there's more to our lives then Narnia isn't their??? I know that their is for me! lol…

  19. Narnian Meerkat says:

    TOTALLY agree Louloudi The Centaur!!!!!!!!! The Narnia film makers are just in a deep sleep and need to WAKE UP to the REAL problem it is having! THE STORELINE. It was because they never STUCK to the orginal STORELINE from the BOOKS that made Narnia go downhill. Prince Caspian, they added all the "darker" and "actionyer" stuff to it cause they thought it would get more grosses then the first film. But, nope, didn't work. LWW was the BEST Narnia film they ever made so far 'cause the actually stuck to the original storline pretty well. Not to mention the visual effects. That could be why too. πŸ˜‰ So ya, Narnia filmmakers, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE AND NOTICE THAT KIDS THESE DAYS DON'T CARE ABOUT THE NICEY NICEY STUFF ANYMORE!!!!

  20. Megan says:

    I think it is stupid how Flaherty is saying that Prince Caspian was "Dark". Well, the people who made Prince Caspian Made it dark with all the fighting, that is not at all like the book had it. I love the book Prince Caspian, and I've read it five times,I've read the other books like three times!

  21. Louloudi the Centaur says:

    Er, I think you misunderstood my post, Narnian Meerkat. I was not ranting at all about the storyline being changed. The action scenes added to Prince Caspian were almost necessary because if there had been a "pure" adaption of the book, the movie would have been extremely boring. While I don't think the book was too dark for young children, it does have a few moments, like all the other books.

    However, a concern I do have is Walden seems to want to avoid the "darker" mood of SC for as long as possible. They seem to think people don't want to see the film because it's too dark for children, so they want to stick to the lightheartedness of MN. But to be honest, the first six books I believe are are the same level of darkness. I don't want the series to run from what it is. Narnia is not always a happy place. Foreign enemies, kidnapped people, or just a voyage through obstacles. But it is shown that the Light overcomes the darkness. If Walden is going to sugarcoat SC and LB as much as possible, heck, goodbye favorite book series as film adaptions.

    I don't think "darkness" always affects a movie at the box office. The first two Toy Story films were lighthearted, but Toy Story 3 took a drastic turn in tone, yet it made $1 billion world wide. Then again, it had a big marketing scheme. VDT didn't. Or sadly, the Narnia series has maybe lost interest…

  22. PuddleCheep says:

    Great podcast! I wish it wasn't so negative. Not that you guys are, the topics are. I hope we get some good news and have a nice, cheery podcast! πŸ˜€

  23. ernesto says:

    I think again read the Narnia books we read in addition to that also because this Plania going to be the nephew of maggo it agan and now with the confirmation of 20 centrory phlox and Walden Media and it's no big deal etc πŸ˜€

  24. Non-negotiable Comment says:

    I wonder if Mr. Flaherty accidentally let it slip that 'Caspian' was the "darkest" of the stories that they intend to PRODUCE. Perhaps it's an unconscious message conceding that 'The Last Battle' would have to be so brutally butchered into an unrecognizable abomination in order to meet their family friendly/PG-rated criteria, that they'll just pretend the book doesn't exist?

    [NOTE: I believe that 'The Last Battle' could be a tremendous film, and would love to see it done properly. I do not believe it could be a tremendous *PG* film. That would serve only to deny the story of its true nature.]

    Because, there's no rational basis to consider 'Caspian' "darker" than 'The Last Battle'. That's a rather troubling statement, otherwise. I would seriously have to question if the gentleman had ever read the books, if he really meant that.

  25. glumPuddle says:

    Totally with you on this one Reep. Anticipating and discussing the Narnia films has been a part of my daily life for over seven years now.

  26. glumPuddle says:

    I'm re-reading LB now. I agree that it is highly unlikely they could do LB justice and get a PG rating. If they take a "return to magic" approach with LB, it is sure to be an abomination.

    I didn't mention it in the podcast, but I'm not so sure I'd say SC is darker than MN. Not sure what Flaherty is getting at.

  27. Arvan says:

    I'm almost certain Narnia needs a reboot, but not now. Later. Like in twenty years. Let them try to finish the series first and we'll see how they do. They might make four more amazing films; miracles are possible, after all!

  28. Narnian_Archer says:

    Really nice podcast!! I enjoyed it immensely!! Very good insight.
    Personally, to me it seems that Flahertly is just trying to make silly excuses as to why VDT didn't do too well on it's opening weekend, and generally why the franchise seems to be going on the downgrade. He really seems to be digging at the bottom of the barrel for excuses, reasons, etc…trying to blame it on everything but what the real reasons could be. πŸ™‚

  29. Narnian_Archer says:

    Of course, it's understandable why…and I didn't mean to sound too offensive on that comment. I was just really whatever about a lot of things he said on the interview…but I still have some hope for Narnia. I'm sure they'll make some sort of movie sometime. Doesn't really matter what now, Magician's Nephew or Silver Chair, as long as they don't mess up.

  30. Rilian says:

    Indeed. I wish they would be sensitive to children's intelligence by making films that grew the mind and didn't shrink it.

  31. Not Of This World says:

    Great Podcast guys! I voted HHB on the poll and you're right (At least in my case) I would have voted SC if HHB wasn't apart of it πŸ™‚

  32. Roger says:

    Maybe one of the reasons that they have not decided which film to do next is maybe (hope, hope) that the estate is holding a tougher line of the script.

    SC is some ways is dark, but it has a lighter side. I enjoyed the dialog between the three main characters. They were almost always snipping at each other. This could make an interesting character film.

  33. Arvan says:

    They can't because then Polly Plummer and the Rings would make no sense in LB.

  34. High Queene Shelly Belly says:

    yeah, LWW and PC were like 2 different film series , they didnt match at all . unlike the BBC series, they did PC in the same tone as LWW. i t can be done , see? you don't make a family film and follow it up with a teen boy war movie and expect them to be compatible.

  35. High Queene Shelly Belly says:

    and what DO snakes do after you kill them?

  36. High Queene Shelly Belly says:

    yeah, i think people want to see the pevensies bonding AGAINST evil, not fighting amongst themselves.

  37. High Queene Shelly Belly says:

    it's all in the depiction. go watch alfred hitchcock movies and old twilight zone tv shows. back before 1970. it was all portrayed in tension, not onscreen bludgeoning.

  38. Non-negotiable Comment says:

    There is no way to depict Armageddon subtly, with only "tension". At best, it would ring hollow, and, at worst, it would look absolutely ridiculous. This isn't a single act of violence that forms the basis of a 22-minute television program, that a skillful writer like Rod Serling can refer to peripherally, and vaguely describe the details and the implications, as they relate to the more salient psychological drama unfolding. This is the end of all things. It's a once beautiful land being absolutely consumed and eviscerated by darkness. People die. Violently. And, it's not like an old war movie, where you can sort of accept that it's for a higher cause, and give the audience one or two antiseptic John Wayne-like death scenes. Here, the battle's lost. The world is dying, too. *THAT* has to be conveyed, clearly and dramatically, or the audience will not, for a moment, understand the true significance of what they are witnessing: the last battle.

    And, even putting the graphic nature of the action component aside for a moment, assuming that you could somehow clean up the more disturbing visual aspects of the story, and still present the themes faithfully with a PG rating, there are additional reasons that lead me to believe that we will never see a faithful adaptation of this book.

    Consider Mom and Pop America. They've never read the books, and probably aren't too familiar with Biblical prophecy, either. They HAVE, though, enjoyed bringing their families to see the Narnia film series (six relatively harmless, sanitized to varying degrees, adaptations at this hypothetical point), or watching them at home. They will NOT be expecting what they'll see in 'The Last Battle'. Can you imagine? Heh. Their heroes die in the twisted metal of a train wreck, their beloved world is burnt to the ground, and Susan…

    "MOMMMY! WHY ISN'T SUSAN IN HEAVEN??!?!?!?!?!?!"

    There is a large percentage of the audience that wants NOTHING to do with that question, because it would make them EXTREMELY uncomfortable, and open up many topics that they have, purposely, avoided discussing. The film, presented faithfully, would incite so much anger from overly protective, unsuspecting, parents, and from people who would object to any sort of overt presentation of the Christian perspective on the end of the world, you'd probably see a mass media campaign to boycott it. Not to say that most people wouldn't love the film, just that those who would hate it (and there'd be a LOT of them) would almost certainly outshout everyone else. I cannot see Walden having the courage (or motivation) to represent this story faithfully, in light of all that. Mr. Flaherty and his team have had varying degrees of success in terms of the cinematic product that they have produced. Unfortunately, they have, at the same time, failed miserably and consistently in representing Mr. Lewis' vision. Because 'The Last Battle' is the absolute pinnacle of everything that Lewis wanted to tell us with these stories, I shudder at the thought of the product they would give us, after their "sanitize by committee" approach is done wringing all the wonder and substance out of it.

    An adaptation? Possible.

    A faithful adaptation? Highly unlikely, and certainly not with a PG rating.

    Hitchcock, by the way, was not opposed to graphic, on-screen, violence. 'Frenzy' is replete with it.

  39. wolfloversk says:

    They can still move… at least in most situations. If you cut of a snake's head not only will its body continue to wriggle a little, but it's also still fully capable of biting you. I think it has something to do with the nerves. They'll be dead but partly mobile for a while.

    Apparently Lewis knew this too, but I found the quote…

    "With repeated blows they hacked off its head. The horrible thing went on coiling and moving like a bit of wire long after it had died; and the floor, as you may imagine, was a nasty mess." SC last page of Ch 12 (from the Harper Collins 7 in 1 edition with the WW on the cover.)

    My problem with this is that if they leave it the way it is well people will complain. If they just let the snake stay still… well it attributes to the problem and someone will end up killing a rattler without realizing the consequences and if they change it in some other way I'd hate to see the end result. I'm wondering if they can get away with killing the snake and not showing the body, or maybe just showing its tail moving a little…

  40. stateofgreen says:

    They can make a mini explanation when they talk about it and hope people are smart enough to read the rest of the books! The rings don't matter that much for LB because they really weren't used to get back into Narnia by Eustace and Jill the second time round.

  41. moonspinner says:

    Do people really complain that PC is darker than LWW? In LWW, Aslan was muzzled, shaved and murdered. Edmund was almost killed, after being tortured and selling out his siblings. How much darker can you get?

    The film!Prince Caspian was far darker than the book!Prince Caspian which ended with Aslan and co. winning the day by freeing school children and throwing a big party. The movie took that concept and turned it into a Bigger!Darker!faux-LWW-style!Battle than what happened in LWW. So if people complain that PC is darker… they are not comparing it to LWW (which book-wise, is probably the darkest in the series after LB) but to the book version of PC. People went to the theaters, not expecting LWW2 but something close to what they had read in the book. And got something completely different.

  42. Non-negotiable Comment says:

    "People went to the theaters, not expecting LWW2 but something close to what they had read in the book. And got something completely different."

    Except that people who had read the book made up a tiny fraction of the movie audience. glumpuddle is correct. The general public expected a sequel to the first film, in tone and content, not an entirely new chapter that was meant to show: "OK, this is different. Things have changed." The basis of comparison for the majority of the film audience was the previous film, not the source material. That's why they weren't prepared for what they saw, and that's why the general perception is that 'Caspian' is "dark". Is 'Wardrobe' dark, too? It approaches heart-breaking at some moments, and it's occasionally violent, but the sadness and violence seem purposeful at the same time. They are always accompanied by hope. Whereas, in 'Caspian', there's a real absence of hope for a considerable portion of the story. The happy ending is a lot more in doubt, and the "darkness", consequently, has more thematic weight to it. In fact, I'd say it's more "bleak" than "dark", but, regardless, the perception is very much there for a lot of people.

  43. moonspinner says:

    @Non-negotiable Comment: But that still comes down to people seeing something in the theatres that was darker than what they had to see. Prince Caspian is not thematically darker than the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. There's nothing in the book that reaches the level of Aslan's humiliation and murder or Edmund's betrayal in the Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe film adaptation. Ergo, there was no reason for the film of Prince Caspian to be as dark as it was… And like you said, the darkness didn't seem to have a purpose. There was a purpose in Aslan's sacrifice. But the sacrifice of the Narnians in the botched invasion of Miraz's castle was just to show that Peter was suffering an insecurity complex?

    The darkness in the film of Prince Caspian was not only unnecessary, and something that was "Added" to the source material, but it was something that even contradicted the source material. Adding a shot of the blitz at the start of the LWW film made sense. Adding Peter getting a bunch of warriors murdered did not.

    What is ultimately frustrating about the argument that Prince Caspian drove away audiences because it was darker… is that the film-makers are blaming the source material for being too dark for the audiences to cope… when it was their own changes that not only changed the tone of the story, but the "purpose" of the story. As you rightly explained, even something as dark and bleak as Aslan's death can be made watchable when a purpose is given to it.

    Now they are complaining that SC is un-filmmable because it is also a "dark" Narnia book… And they still cannot see that the problem is not the *purposeful* darkness of the source material… but the *pointless* darkness of the adaptations.

  44. Non-negotiable Comment says:

    moonspinner, you misunderstand me. I may not have made it perfectly clear, but I certainly do not agree that the "darkness" or bleakness of 'Prince Caspian' is purposeless. What I said, was that the suffering and conflicts in 'Wardrobe', conversely, APPEAR purposeFUL. That's why 'Caspian' is so different. It's unsettling, because both the children and the audience are expecting to find their familiar, beloved Narnia. Instead, they find suffering, despair, anger, neglect, and ruins. It's disorienting. Everyone feels lost, and there are no friendly guides like Mr. Tumnus or the Beavers to gently help the Pevensies acclimate themselves this time. The darkness is hiding the light. That's what it does. But, the light is there, ultimately.

    'Prince Caspian' is not a fantastic movie. It does, however, adequately fulfill its function: it provides a narrative bridge between two wonderful, much superior, stories, and if 'Dawn Treader' had fulfilled its own purpose, whatever the shortcomings of the second film, they would have been long-forgotten by now.

  45. moonspinner says:

    It's hard to pick favourites amongst the Narnia books, but I never saw Prince Caspian as merely a bridge between the better LWW and VDT. It was always a unique and compelling story on its own merit, to me, at least. I thought the resolve of the conflict – having it end with a big Party instead of a big Battle – was a unique take on the way stories like this usually go, and a nice contrast with the LWW that came before. By the way, this is part of the contradiction of the film-makers' insistence that Caspian is a "darker" story: it has the most non-violent conflict resolution of the entire series. There are many that would find Aslan's Romp as the resolution to the Narnia vs. Telmarine conflict even childish and I think that is part of the reason why the film-makers changed the story so drastically in the book-to-script conversion. Unfortunately, that just served to make the film what I call LWW v2.0 but without the same purpose or motivation. It is rather ironic because Aslan makes a point of stating that "it can't happen the same way twice" but the film-makers try to avert that… to unfortunate box office returns.

  46. Alexavia says:

    Yup, that'll do it. You have my appreciatoin.

  47. Not Of This World says:

    It's been a mounth. I'm ready for a new podcast!!!!!!!!

  48. wolfloversk says:

    I don't know… I still think Last Battle should be last… It's the only thing that chronological fans and publication fans agree on πŸ˜›

  49. BarnesFan#5 says:

    I agree, Not Of This World! Cool name, by the way!

  50. Not Of This World says:

    Thanks, BF#5!

  51. Arvan says:

    Agreed. No news? Time for character analyses!

  52. Not Of This World says: