The Musician’s Nephew? Deciphering New Comments From IMAX CEO | Talking Beasts
Podcast: Play in new window | Embed
Most fans assumed that Producer Amy Pascal was being flippant when she said Greta Gerwig’s upcoming Narnia movie would be “all about rock ‘n roll.” But now, new comments seem to suggest there is at least some substance here:
This is not your mother’s or your grandmother‘s Narnia. The music in it is unbelievably contemporary music, which IMAX fans like. I’m not gonna say specifically, but things like Pink Floyd and The Doors.
Rich Gelfond, IMAX CEO
What does all this mean for the film? Listen to our discussion and then post a comment below!
What I got about that coment is exactly some experimental and “psychedelic sounds” like Pink Floyd fits some scenes like the creation and the Woods between worlds… Mark Ronson also said something about experimenting things!
And probably releasing a soundtrack with that music style… like they did with barbie!
But the psychedelic music was Later Than 1955. It’s an anachronism to try to bring 1960s or 1970s music into England in 1955.
Music similar to the first few minutes of Pink Floyd’s 2014 album “The Endless River” could be great for the beginning of the creation of Narnia.
It might suit Charn, especially if they expand upon its demise.
I don’t necessarily think the music for Narnia should sound old fashioned. (I actually don’t really like the score for the BBC Narnia which a lot of fans do, even some who don’t like the BBC Narnia in general.) But I don’t think it should sound like Pink Floyd either. I think it should sound sort of timeless and, to use Glumpuddle’s term, John Williams-y.
I agree that burned out is a good way to describe how fans are feeling. I don’t want to rant against it because it feels like a lot of fans on the internet are ranting against it and I don’t want to join a mob. But I feel like giving the filmmakers the benefit of the doubt has been very unrewarding. When I first heard about the Meryl Streep thing, I assumed it was an April Fool’s joke. It wasn’t. When I first heard Pascal’s rock and roll comment, I assumed she didn’t literally mean they were going to use rock and roll music for the soundtrack (except perhaps for the credits.) My assumption was wrong. When I first saw sets from the 1950s, I thought maybe they were for some kind of framing device. They weren’t.
Of course, you should probably take my opinion with a grain of salt since I don’t really like rock and roll music that much just as a thing. Still, when Glumpuddle was listing his favorite scenes from The Magician’s Nephew in this episode, I tried to imagine each one with a rock soundtrack. It was not an encouraging exercise.
It’s true that these controversial statements are coming from producers and such people, not the director. But I’m scared that’s because the director is shrewd enough to know the fanbase wouldn’t like them, not because they don’t reflect her vision. After all, these producers have seen more than any of us have.
Man, I’m sorry this comment is so depressing! (It’s depressing to write anyway. Maybe it’s less depressing to read.) To end on a more positive note, let me reiterate what this episode said about how nice it’ll be when we know what this movie is really like, even if we don’t like it. With David Magee’s Silver Chair movie or Matthew Aldrich’s whatever-he-was-doing, we can never be sure whether pulling the plug on those projects was the right thing to do or not. When this Magician’s Nephew movie comes out, we’ll be able to say whether it would have been the right thing to do with it.
Also, the screenplay will probably be available to read online and when I read it, I can imagine a movie in my head with better music. That’s better than nothing.
Thanks for giving us one last Talking Beasts episode this year, guys!
I like how you guys summarized things that we know and don’t know about the Netflix Narnia. You make a good point that it could actually be a musical and I like your summary of your favorite memories from the book. I read it first when I was 8 and I can’t remember if I sided with Digory or Polly on striking the bell .
TMN is the book that is closest to Lewis’ childhood in a way. Digory would have been born around the same time as Lewis and also has a mom who is ill, but later he grows up to become a professor and take children in to protect them from the Blitz during WWII. It is the book that really shows the connection between Lewis and Narnia, so moving it to a different time changes this connection, and makes me really want to have the “grandmother’s version” on film also.
I don’t want to say that this Netflix version is hopeless and I think YouTube has too many channels deconstructing all fantasy series for profit and fame, so I don’t want to contribute to that by giving up on it, but I have an uneasy feeling about what we do know about the Netflix production that I didn’t have for the Walden/Fox Dawn Treader.
I just want to put this out there that is a probability but not likely the case. We know so far regarding the 1955 setting right and given the leaks of the sets that most/ majority of the story is set in this form right. What if this setting is a device used to draw on the imagination of “how the progress of the events of the book is going” with the the perspective of someone, like a child imagining in their time, like a meta-type of view point. It could be possible when the film begins and progress all the surrounding and events are contextualize in the 1955 (around 1940s to 1950s) but goes with the flow of the book, but when the film gets near the end and explains the origin of the wardrobe and you know how endings happen or ends it would shift to the perspective of like a child and then revealed that “oh so the reason for the 1940s to 1950s time period is because this child was listening to the story but reimagining how the events played out (like in the book) in the visual perspective of the clothings and settings from their own visual understanding of what they have encountered”. Which if you think about it could provide a different way of visual how the story is told like “a book within a book within a book” but like “a book of a different time told within a child perspective of what they experience as a kid living in a time period different from the book they can visually relate to within a film”. It checkbox the 1) a perspective that told in a very different way that “breaks the arc”, 2) having a meta reference intertwine with combine lewis and Digory as mirror images of the reality versus imaginary, and 3) refer to the work of the book like the year it publish to other factors or works Lewis did to make the story itself very full in addition to all the visual aspects that with be submerged on screen.
Anyway, that an observation that could be explained.
So like the book (MN) context could be around 1900s yet the visual understanding comprehend the book events is in the child perspective around 1940s to 1950s (and we the audience watching the film is in 2026). So basically the questions many people ask like so how do other books work out given this weird timeline, it could be possible after the film zoom out to show the events that we visually see happen was through the lens of a child perspective understanding in the context of their own experience and after the ending end with that reveal, another reveal could be hinting the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (or a different book) which is around 1940s-1950s so basically the film could end in a way the “actual” timeline did not change at all it was just the “supposed weird timeline” we saw in the film was just in the visual imagination of a child perspective trying to comprehend and listen to the book context told by someone and they visually dreaming out what it looks like with settings and surrounds align with what the child would see and experience in their everyday life.
Ok, I think we will all go see it and love or hate it in varying degrees. I fully expect to enjoy it. At the same time, I fully expect to be very disappointed, because I want to see a traditional adaptation of a great story I love, and I think we know enough to know that this won’t be that.
Perhaps someday we will get a traditional adaptation in animation.
Fantastic title for the episode!
If we’re taking Andrew Wyatt’s comment at face value, the film’s music has only just started being written for the film. If this featured characters singing, you’d expect Robson & Wyatt to have been involved from Day 1 so I think we’re safe from it being a musical
I agree with Rilian and want to add to Rilian’s stand on modernizing. Narnia has a Christian foundation. We see it EVERYWHERE in the Magician’s Nephew and we see it everywhere in the rest of the series. More often than not, when people want to modernize a story that has a very Christian foundation, they want to strip that away, water it down, or twist it because “the Bible (and by extention, the Christian Faith) doesn’t apply to modern day”. First movie that comes to mind is the Noah movie with the rock giants or even the “Jesus Superstar” movie. Modernization goes much deeper than just timelines (which is just another change I’m upset about). Core values and truths are in danger of being subverted and disregarded, and from what we hear (which isn’t much but is still more than concerning: ie Meryl Streep as Aslan, modernizing, etc.) and knowing that we live in a world where people believe that “truth is relative”, that could be a very likely fate for Narnia.
Not sure how to reconcile this, with music from the 60s and 70s with the year we know the movie is set. It’s all confusing.
What kind of out-of-touch boomer made this quote? This music is “contemporary” and this adaptation is “not your mothers or your grandmother’s” but then lists two examples of classic rock from my mother’s and grandmother’s era?
I don’t think Gelfond’s “not your grandmother’s Narnia” comment is referring to the book or even the previous movies, but just a general perception of the series (in his view). Back in September, he made a similar comment:
“But you know, Narnia, people know it’s a kid’s story, a Christmas story. She’s gonna do a much broader demographic in a much more modern way. I think the IMAX core audience is going to really like it a lot, so you know I’m really excited.”
Still, it’s just an awful way to talk about an upcoming movie, as it just comes across as disrespectful and dismissive.
@Impending Doom It’s very disrespectful, I agree! I’d also add “rude” and “snobbish”. Just like the trio said in the podcast (I forget who. Rilian, I think), it’s chronological snobbery, thinking that it being made different makes it better than the original source.
I’m done. I’m not done with Narnia Web I’m done with this production. I’m done with 15 years of hoping being disappointed and being lied to. I’m done hoping this is going to be a good adaptation. Gretta is a decent director but she is all about subverting expectations. If she was just doing LWW I could see that maybe working or at least having an argument that it should be changed or updated. You can’t do that with The Magician’s Nephew because there has never been an onscreen version of this story before. There are no expectations to subvert and yet they’re doing it anyway. I’ve been a Narnia fan my entire life I wanted to give this movie a chance. Not anymore. They can’t expect me to accept this after stringing me along for so long and then this is the best they can do? I love this community and I’m not leaving. However my hope for this movie is dead. The filmmakers have killed it.
I’m just wondering what they mean by “it’s going to change the world”. How? For what?
Sure Greta is a talented filmmaker, but will she use that gifting for good or for ill?