Disney says goodnight to 'Dawn Treader'

[3IAlienKid]

I'm a bit surprised, but I guess I understand the rationale, and perhaps another studio can revive it. As a big fan of the books, I was underwhelmed by the first, so truthfully I had little hope for the sequel which is probably why I haven't caught it yet. And at this point I'm admittely curious to see what the new director Michael Apted can do with the third.

[sailerm]

Walden Media, has the resources to produce the films on their own, and can do it as a negative pick up.

Then they can have any studio release it.

I for one would like to see all seven books completed.

I was not a fan of the BBC mini series, Beaver was twice as tall as Lucy for goodness sakes!

[Doopey1]

It's a terrible, horrible, ridicules decision, and I'm so disappointed by it that it's taken me this long to post on it. Disney greenlights crap like "G-Force" but there's no room for a quality tent-pole franchise like Narnia? Yes, it's expensive but 1) they had already cut the budget for "Dawn Treader" so it would not cost as much as "Caspian" and 2) they share the cost with Walden (I know they share the profit too but the risk is spread) and 3) they were already deep into pre-production, so money has already been spent.

Caspian disappointed but it still made money. And as already commented on, the studio flubbed the release. They marketed it very badly, and gave it a horrible release date. Honestly, I think they flubbed almost all their release dates from last year. Almost all of their big releases under-performed despite being good movies. "Prince Caspian" is a prime example. It was a very good film, arguably a better film than "LWW". Everyone I know who saw it thought it was great. And as Disney should know if they do their homework, "Dawn Treader" is a much more popular book than "Caspian" with Narnia fans. And further, they've never found a way to effectively utilize Narnia in the parks, and it looks like they never will (so many blown opportunities). Anyway, it's a lousy decision all around.

Edit- one last thought. Iger has made clear that one of his future strategies for WDC is built around franchises. As anyone who follows entertainment knows, franchises are hard to come by. Narnia may not have been a "platinum" franchise like Pirates or Cars, but it was solid. And perhaps more importantly, it was already established. It's hard to build a franchise from scratch. This one already has two successful movies released, the underlying books, and a fanbase -- a fanbase that includes the sometimes hard to market religious family audience. Again, I can't stress enough what a lost opportunity this is.

[Mac Daddy]

Wow....I missed this thread and the news last month. I was thinking that Dawn Treader would be the last in the series, but I was also thinking that it could have been the most successful of the three if it was filmed and marketed correctly. This film would have had it all. The potential was there to design an amazing ship, you had mermaids, bizarre creatures on different islands, a sea monster/Kracken type of thing, and finally, the end of the world. It had some similarities to POTC 3, but could have been more imaginative and colorful. It would have been far more visual than Caspian. The problem with Caspian was that it was really a 20 minute story that they tried to stretch into 90 minutes. There's a lot more to work with in Dawn Treader.

I really hope someone picks this film up, and really disappointed that Disney would drop it. I think there were big $$$ to be made here, and if someone else picks it up, it will be Disney's loss.

[Ride Warrior]

Originally Posted by twobluestripes

I agree with this. I think they should have done the first (published, not first chronologically) only, or committed to all seven. This way it looks kind of half-a**ed.

I think these books can be made into films on smaller budgets. They seem to be pouring a lot of money into them, and i'm really not sure where it all goes. There must be cheaper locations to shoot, special effects that can be cut. The books have always felt very intimate to me, and I think the movies would be better reviewed and more successful with the book lovers (adults generally) if they had that feeling too. Fantasy films can me made for a LOT cheaper and still look great. For example, Pan's Labyrinth cost only 19 million.

Yes. Invision the capital Disney could have saved by filming Prince Caspian in one country as opposed to two different continents and the island country of New Zealand, located near yet a third continent ..that of Austrailia.

[Baloo]

They could have saved evenmore if they had shot both the second and third movie together and then picked a better release date during the Holidays instead of the busy summer season. Supposedly they pushed it to a summer opening to accomodate Walden Medias "The Water Horse" which ended up bombing

[Ride Warrior]

Perhaps it's all for the better. As fantastic as the Potter series is, I feel Universal's Wizarding World "land" will not stand the test of time, due to the fact that it is based on one work (several films, yet still one brand).

Animal Kingdom sorely is in need of a land that features rides/shows centered on creatures of fantasy and myth. I'm not certain as to where the conjectured name Beastly Kingdom sprang from. Was it Disney itself, or was it a concocted in the blogosphere by some beastly blogger king? Neverthelesser, I feel BK sounds rather contrived, clumsy and uninteresting. Still. the thought of an originally named/themed land is much more inticing than one that is based on a singular monothematic idea.

One possibility I have conjured up is Animagica. What I am hoping is that Disney will search for a new fantasy/myth oriented films/writs as a basis for themed areas in the land. Perhaps a deal could be made with New Line Cinema over Lord of the Rings and Inkheart (should this movie based on a trilogy of books prove mega-successful). An interesting factoid about LOTR is that the movie/books feature fabulous fabled creatures ..and imaginative mythological plants. Disney's attention to plantlife is one element that Disney has over all other themeparks. This is especially true with respect to DAK.

The novel, Wild Magic is a riviting read. I find it somewhat similar to Harry Potter. It's about a 13 year old girl who's parents are killed by evil magical beings known as the Imortals. She becomes literally insane with grief over her loss and runs away, ultimately joining up with a pack of evil wolf-like supernatural creatures. The people of a nearby town are driven to spirit her far away. Things finally take a turn for the better when a charmed pony befiends her and causes the girl to become strong enough to fight off the insanity. From that point forward, she befriends magical human-like beings and various fantasy beastly creatures. The most interesting critter to me is a dragonet named Skysong. An endeavor like this would be far more cost effective than "buying in" to an existing popular franchised brand.

So, there you have it. There are brands for the much pondered DAK mythological domain that Disney could add to it. Plus, the company could add to the flavor by including a Fantasia Gardens scenic musical boat ride, and attractions based on it's films such as Hercules and Pete's Dragon

[Ride Warrior]

Originally Posted by Baloo

They could have saved evenmore if they had shot both the second and third movie together and then picked a better release date during the Holidays instead of the busy summer season. Supposedly they pushed it to a summer opening to accomodate Walden Medias "The Water Horse" which ended up bombing

Good to see you Baloo! As opposed to being a childrens film, "The Water Horse" is more of a thought evoking adult drama with a fantasy element added to it. I loved it. Perhaps, it will become a late bloomer in terms of popularity in a similar manner as did "It's A Wonderful Life".

I think that you are absolutely right about the Holiday period having a lot more marketabiliy/profitability potential than wedging it into the summer. Shooting two of the films together is another sage/economical point that of your's. Companies like Disney should always exercise frugality when and where possible. Now look at the bind that the tough economy has them in.

[Doopey1]

Ride Warrior-

Whatever they may or may not do with the area currently known as Camp Minnie-Mickey in DAK has nothing to do with their decision to abandon Narnia. Narnia is an established movie tentpole franchise that Disney has already invested in for the last 4 years. Whichever studio picks up "Dawn Treader" (Walden Media will eventually find another distributor) will get to reap the benefit of all the "brand identity" that Disney has already put into Narnia. It's really a huge waste. As far as the parks are concerned, I always thought Narnia would be a natural fit for DHS (where it's already had a presence) and I think there were already some early ideas for putting it in DCA. But again, it's an opportunity that will never be realized now.

[Doopey1]

Perhaps the way for Disney to find its way back on this is to strike a deal similar to the one Paramount has with Marvel and what Fox did with Lucasfilm for the SW prequels. That is to say, a pure distribution deal where Disney does not have to pay for any of the production costs. But Disney could also retain merchandising and theme park rights in addition to their distribution and marketing fee.

[sailerm]

^^^ Thats a negative pick-up, when a studio only releases a film solely produced by someone else

[Ride Warrior]

Originally Posted by Doopey1

Ride Warrior-

Whatever they may or may not do with the area currently known as Camp Minnie-Mickey in DAK has nothing to do with their decision to abandon Narnia. Narnia is an established movie tentpole franchise that Disney has already invested in for the last 4 years. Whichever studio picks up "Dawn Treader" (Walden Media will eventually find another distributor) will get to reap the benefit of all the "brand identity" that Disney has already put into Narnia. It's really a huge waste. As far as the parks are concerned, I always thought Narnia would be a natural fit for DHS (where it's already had a presence) and I think there were already some early ideas for putting it in DCA. But again, it's an opportunity that will never be realized now.

So sad that Disney has chosen to drop the franchise, Doopey. I certainly didn't mean to insinuate that DAK was the oly park being rumored as a possible locale for a Narnia themed area. I would have enjoyed a place of this nature regardless of which Disney park may have included it.

[Doopey1]

Originally Posted by sailerm

^^^ Thats a negative pick-up, when a studio only releases a film solely produced by someone else

I think a distribution deal is slightly different than a negative pick-up, because Walden would completely self-finance the production, but I'm a little rusty on my film business 101. Whatever it's called, a distribution deal that includes some ancillary rights would theoretically address Disney's concerns. Disney would have very limited financial exposure but would still reap some benefit if the franchise continues to be successful, particularly with regard to merchandising and theme parks.

[findingmickey]

seems like disney co. needs to start retaining production talent instead of pushing them out and promoting the yessirs & yessums.

[Gymfan15]

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm a big Narnia geek and I've closely followed the movie-making process since 2005.

Obviously this has been a huge deal in the Narnia fan community. We're all very disappointed that Disney felt the need to bow out just as the franchise was getting good. PC was the least popular and "worst" book of the series; we always knew that getting the film to be successful was going to be a tough ask. It wasn't helped by the ridiculous release date, however. And Disney and Walden could have been a lot more reasonable with production costs...they spent an insane amount of money on marketing, which could have been totally avoided if they'd put it in a better release date. PC had no chance against Indy, Iron Man and Dark Knight.

Really, VodT had so much pre-production work done already...people were cast, and they were originally going to start filming back in October. Once PC underperformed, that got pushed to January, then April, and then they canceled it altogether.

It has since come to our attention that it's possible there was a lot more to do with the split than meets the eye initially. Here is an article from the LATimes Blog that came out a few days ago that had some really interesting information in it. I have no idea how much of it is reliable, but it makes sense with what we've been hearing ever since Disney pulled out.

Either way, we're hopeful Narnia will be picked up by a new distributor soon. It has been reported that Warner Bros, Sony and Fox have expressed interest in taking over the series. Fox is most likely to get it, since it has ties with Walden already, but we're a bit worried about that because Fox has a horrible adaption record. Warner Bros. is the most desirable, given what success they've had with Harry Potter; they know how to handle a fantasy franchise. But nobody really knows at this point.

Anyway...you can't imagine how incredibly disappointed I was to hear that Disney had severed ties...I had been looking forward to seeing Narnia grow with them, and maybe even get a permanent presence in the parks. But now that's gone, and given the circumstances, can I say good riddance? Disney, you didn't know a good thing when you had it. Narnia deserves a whole lot more respect than that, and if you didn't have enough faith in it to green-light it's most popular book, I'm not sure I'd trust you to handle the rest of the series correctly.