a movie would be awesome but it would be cool to if they made a video game of it. but not like those other crapy games they make from movie.

How do i get a part?

Yeah I have also read on the internet about a possible film but I'm not sure. If there will be a possible film it would probably only come out in 2009.

I think that new kids should play Nat and Kitty. Not only british but they should give also irish girls and boys, romanians( I have heard that they're very good at english and some even have an british/american accent).

I'm sure that we'll find out when the castings will be. Hopefully, they will start this year or the next one.

And about the Kitty actress, a girl in between 13-18 should do since in Golem's eye she's already 16 and it Ptomely's Gate she's 18-19.

P.S: I'm new here. ;)

In GE she's fifteen.

Welcome to the fourms.

I think that it should be 12-14, as even though there's space between the books in a couple of years kids do grow up.

But they would probably make a movie every year. They wouldn't want to build up so much hype for them, and then just drop it. So, the actors should be a bit older.

Eh, it's that way with Harry Potter.

Plus the time added in for pre-production and premieres.

Narnia came out in 2005 and the next will be in 2007.

What? I could've sworn Kitty was sixteen in GE.

Nope.

Two years have passed. She was thirteen in AoS.

Though, of course, her birthday might be early.

However, in PG Bartimaeus asumes she's 18. PG takes place three years after GE.

But Narnia has a way bigger fan-following than BT. The producers will want to be really careful. Like what if, one of the actors gets a better job?

Luciene wrote: But Narnia has a way bigger fan-following than BT.

Boggles the mind.

Bartimaeus is new, Narnia is as venerable as Tolkien.

Well Tolkien and Lewis were friends.

there's going to be a second Narnia movie? do tell.

I think it would be great to see the movies and have them made, but as bloodythorns said, only if they're made well because yes, do look at the Harry potter movies. And lord of the rings wasn't that good either. And if the movie were made the BT would get a lot more popular, hoever, if the movies were bad some people might get the wrong idea about the books and what happened, or they might even change the ending. So basically I'm in two minds about this.

LotRs wasn't good? They could not have made it better, source matiriel and all.

Miramax, of Too Fast too Furoius fame, is making it...

JoannaMandrake wrote: And lord of the rings wasn't that good either.

BLASPHEMY!
What makes you say that?

Sentynel wrote:

JoannaMandrake wrote: And lord of the rings wasn't that good either.

BLASPHEMY!

*Gladstone prepares the wood, oil, and of course the stake.

Holy Crusade? Where do I sign up?

What was so bad about the LOTR movies? I thought they were good and pretty true to the books too. Anyway...

*Grabs lit torches!*

THE LotR fan is here. There's some witch-burning to be done, heretic. :)
And Artemis, some things weren't true, but I think I talked about this in another thread.

*sigh* You scared away the victim