100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie

On 23 Dec 2005 10:20:01 -0800, "Eric Tolle" <ericthetolle.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>westprog wrote:
>> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:W9ydnWwd7u6z5jfenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> ...
>> > > 1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
>> beavers
>> > > who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats that the
>> > > children wear."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > > 2) Does all this really need spoiler space?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No.
>>
>> > Animals kill each other for food and shelter, why would they react to the
>> > humans killing animals?
>>
>> Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If a
>> talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
>> beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking animals,
>> which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to find
>> they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
>> Narnia-accustomed they are).
>
>I have to imagine that that situation makes things difficult for
>predators, especially the big hunting cats.
>
>*pounce* "Uh, scuse me- can you talk? Hello? Ouch! Can you- hang on
>a second- can you understand me?"
>

The talking animals were generally larger than their dumb cousins and
the only predator I remember from the books was Aslan anyway. Letting
yourself get eaten by Aslan is a holy duty.
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

"Eric Tolle" <ericthetolle.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135362001.683368.310010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
....
> > Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If
a
> > talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
> > beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking
animals,
> > which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to
find
> > they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
> > Narnia-accustomed they are).

> I have to imagine that that situation makes things difficult for
> predators, especially the big hunting cats.

> *pounce* "Uh, scuse me- can you talk? Hello? Ouch! Can you- hang on
> a second- can you understand me?"

I think that talking animals can tell each other from non-talking as well as
humans can distinguish men from women. There might be a few embarassing
mistakes, of course.

J/
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

David Johnston wrote:

> On 23 Dec 2005 10:20:01 -0800, "Eric Tolle" <ericthetolle.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >westprog wrote:
> >> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> news:W9ydnWwd7u6z5jfenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> ...
> >> > > 1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
> >> beavers
> >> > > who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats that the
> >> > > children wear."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > > 2) Does all this really need spoiler space?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> No.
> >>
> >> > Animals kill each other for food and shelter, why would they react to the
> >> > humans killing animals?
> >>
> >> Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If a
> >> talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
> >> beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking animals,
> >> which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to find
> >> they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
> >> Narnia-accustomed they are).
> >
> >I have to imagine that that situation makes things difficult for
> >predators, especially the big hunting cats.
> >
> >*pounce* "Uh, scuse me- can you talk? Hello? Ouch! Can you- hang on
> >a second- can you understand me?"
> >
>
> The talking animals were generally larger than their dumb cousins and
> the only predator I remember from the books was Aslan anyway. Letting
> yourself get eaten by Aslan is a holy duty.

There was a Talking Lion statue at the Witch's castle. I assume that once he was
unstoned, he would eat animals.
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

> In article <40u1k2F1bosd2U2 DeleteThis @individual.net>,
> Sean O'Hara <seanohara DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> >In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful Christopher J.
> >Henrich declared:
> >>
> >> And (in the book - I don't remember it from the movie) Mrs. Beaver
> >> frets about leaving behind her sewing machine. Sewing machines are
> >> complicated manufactured goods. The first ones were made in the 19th
> >> century, and I bet they would have been impossible earlier. Where in
> >> Narnia is the industrial base needed for such high technology?
> >>
> >
> >Don't the Beavers live fairly close to the wardrobe? Obviously
> >Wossisname, the guy the children were staying with, had a thriving
> >import/export business going.
>
> Professor Digory Kirke. Who had, of course, been there before
> himself.

But he had buried the Rings he and his girlfriend had used to visit Narnia,
and I didn't get the impression that he had known about the magic portal in
his wardrobe before the kids went through.
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

westprog wrote:

> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam.DeleteThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:W9ydnWwd7u6z5jfenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> ...
> > > 1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
> beavers
> > > who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats that the
> > > children wear."
>
> > > 2) Does all this really need spoiler space?
>
> No.
>
> > Animals kill each other for food and shelter, why would they react to the
> > humans killing animals?
>
> Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If a
> talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
> beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking animals,
> which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to find
> they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
> Narnia-accustomed they are).
>
> Talking animals tend to approximate to human size. A beaver in Narnia would
> be much larger than a regular beaver. (Horses, OTOH would be about the same
> size).

The talking horse I saw in the movie was as large as a normal horse.
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

lclough wrote:

> Leebehr wrote:
>
> > IIRC some of the talking animals were slightly larger than the
> > nonspeaking ones. At least as far as the smaller creatures were
> > concerned. that _might_ make them easier to identify...
> >
>
> There is also the fact that talking animals tend to be carrying
> artifacts (swords, armor), tools (sewing machines) or to be
> talking constantly. How annoying it must be to be a Talking Cat
> or Fox, and have to search for the -right- prey.

The existence of sewing machines in Narnia indicates a technology
equivalent to at least the 19th century (I understand that sewing
machines were invented in the 19th century). Why don't the Narnians
have guns (invented long before the 19th century)?
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

Paul Ciszek wrote:

> In article <NRcqf.3200$DM5.511@fe08.lga>,
> Evelyn C. Leeper <eleeper.TakeThisOut@optonline.net> wrote:
> >
> >1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
> >beavers who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats
> >that the children wear."
>
> There are ordinary as well as talking animals in Narnia, and the people
> and many of the beasts are not vegetarians. Decent Narnians, human and
> otherwise, find the idea of eating a *talking* animal repugnant, while
> not having a problem with meat in general. The same should go for fur
> and leather.

I expect that the ordinary animals would have had severe difficulties
surviving that 100 year winter!
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

In article <2005122315045850073-kurtbusiek@aolcomics>,
Kurt Busiek <kurtbusiek.DeleteThis@aol.comics> wrote:
>On 2005-12-23 14:16:41 -0800, rgorman.DeleteThis@block.net (David Johnston) said:
>
>> The talking animals were generally larger than their dumb cousins and
>> the only predator I remember from the books was Aslan anyway. Letting
>> yourself get eaten by Aslan is a holy duty.
>
>There are wolves, bears, at least one other lion -- plenty of predators
>to be had among the Talking Beasts.

Yep, ordinary lions AND the talking lion in tLtWatW, who was one of
the "good guys" at least in that he was an enemy of the witch who
was depetrified and recruited for the big battle. Althought he
seemed to attache great importance to the fact that he was a lion,
it was pretty clear that he was no one special.

--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

Tim Bruening wrote:

> At that time, there were already guns in Europe and in the Americas. Why
> doesn't the Narnia of Peter's time have guns?

No easy access to sulphur ?
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 00:32:15 -0800, Tim Bruening
<tsbrueni DeleteThis @pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:

>
>
>lclough wrote:
>
>> Leebehr wrote:
>>
>> > IIRC some of the talking animals were slightly larger than the
>> > nonspeaking ones. At least as far as the smaller creatures were
>> > concerned. that _might_ make them easier to identify...
>> >
>>
>> There is also the fact that talking animals tend to be carrying
>> artifacts (swords, armor), tools (sewing machines) or to be
>> talking constantly. How annoying it must be to be a Talking Cat
>> or Fox, and have to search for the -right- prey.
>
>The existence of sewing machines in Narnia indicates a technology
>equivalent to at least the 19th century (I understand that sewing
>machines were invented in the 19th century). Why don't the Narnians
>have guns (invented long before the 19th century)?

Just because you have fine mechanical engineering on the order of the
19th century doesn't mean you have mastered chemicals that go boom.

>
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:55:17 -0800, Tim Bruening
<tsbrueni.RemoveThis@pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:

>
>
>David Johnston wrote:
>
>> On 23 Dec 2005 10:20:01 -0800, "Eric Tolle" <ericthetolle.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >westprog wrote:
>> >> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam.RemoveThis@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:W9ydnWwd7u6z5jfenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> >> ...
>> >> > > 1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
>> >> beavers
>> >> > > who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats that the
>> >> > > children wear."
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > > 2) Does all this really need spoiler space?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> No.
>> >>
>> >> > Animals kill each other for food and shelter, why would they react to the
>> >> > humans killing animals?
>> >>
>> >> Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If a
>> >> talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
>> >> beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking animals,
>> >> which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to find
>> >> they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
>> >> Narnia-accustomed they are).
>> >
>> >I have to imagine that that situation makes things difficult for
>> >predators, especially the big hunting cats.
>> >
>> >*pounce* "Uh, scuse me- can you talk? Hello? Ouch! Can you- hang on
>> >a second- can you understand me?"
>> >
>>
>> The talking animals were generally larger than their dumb cousins and
>> the only predator I remember from the books was Aslan anyway. Letting
>> yourself get eaten by Aslan is a holy duty.
>
>There was a Talking Lion statue at the Witch's castle. I assume that once he was
>unstoned, he would eat animals.

Probably not, now that I think about it. Predators were herbivores in
the garden of Eden.


>
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

David Johnston wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:55:17 -0800, Tim Bruening
> <tsbrueni DeleteThis @pop.dcn.davis.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >David Johnston wrote:
> >
> >> On 23 Dec 2005 10:20:01 -0800, "Eric Tolle" <ericthetolle DeleteThis @hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >westprog wrote:
> >> >> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:W9ydnWwd7u6z5jfenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > > 1) And as Mark noted in his review, "Mr. and Mrs. Beaver [are] two
> >> >> beavers
> >> >> > > who talk but never say their reaction to the enormous fur coats that the
> >> >> > > children wear."
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > > 2) Does all this really need spoiler space?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> No.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Animals kill each other for food and shelter, why would they react to the
> >> >> > humans killing animals?
> >> >>
> >> >> Talking animals are regarded in Narnia as being equivalent to human. If a
> >> >> talking animal or a human kills a talking animal, that is murder. The
> >> >> beavers would assume that the fur coats were taken from non-talking animals,
> >> >> which is almost certainly true. In TSC, the characters are horrified to find
> >> >> they are eating a talking animal. (To varying degrees, depending on how
> >> >> Narnia-accustomed they are).
> >> >
> >> >I have to imagine that that situation makes things difficult for
> >> >predators, especially the big hunting cats.
> >> >
> >> >*pounce* "Uh, scuse me- can you talk? Hello? Ouch! Can you- hang on
> >> >a second- can you understand me?"
> >> >
> >>
> >> The talking animals were generally larger than their dumb cousins and
> >> the only predator I remember from the books was Aslan anyway. Letting
> >> yourself get eaten by Aslan is a holy duty.
> >
> >There was a Talking Lion statue at the Witch's castle. I assume that once he was
> >unstoned, he would eat animals.
>
> Probably not, now that I think about it. Predators were herbivores in
> the garden of Eden.

With all that snow, Narnia didn't look like the Garden of Eden to me!
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie 

Tim Bruening wrote:

> The existence of sewing machines in Narnia indicates a technology
> equivalent to at least the 19th century (I understand that sewing
> machines were invented in the 19th century). Why don't the Narnians
> have guns (invented long before the 19th century)?

I'll humor you by discussing this fantasy movie as if it's science fiction:

Civilizations don't all progress at the same rates, nor do they make the
same technological advances in the same order:

Why didn't the Mayans invent the wheel when it had already been invented
elsewhere? They had a better calendar than other civilizations, but no
wheel.


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email: sdlitvin.RemoveThis@earthlinkNOSPAM.net

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
 >> Stay informed about: 100 Year Winter: Narnia Movie