Tintin Forums

Tintin Forums / Official Tintin film, stage and radio adaptations /

[Locked] Unicorn Movie: News and general discussion

Page  Page 5 of 67:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  67  Next » 

colombani
Member
#41 · Posted: 11 Sep 2005 23:19
Why do most of you babble on as if you truly think it's a good idea to represent Tintin et al in the form of real human actors, with real sounds, backdrops etc? Don't you realise that soon after the release of such a movie, it'll be slated by all and then soon forgotten, incuding by yourselves. Tintin must NEVER be defiled in the form of cinematic art.
Every person has inside their own mind their own idea of how each of these characters are and how things ahppen in the Tintin stories. How can we allow a person to bring their own interpretation of Tintin to the world and to do it in this way? I personally am dead against a Tintin movie; the original ones as well as the cartoon movies were all terrible.
Why can't you Tintin enthusiasts just accept that some things are better left in their original genres?
jock123
Moderator
#42 · Posted: 12 Sep 2005 00:13
colombani
Why do most of you babble on as if you truly think it's a good idea to represent Tintin et al in the form of real human actors, with real sounds, backdrops etc?

That’s not a particularly friendly way to take on your fellow forum members, is it? There’s no need to adopt such an aggressive approach, when all you need to say is that you yourself don’t think it is a good idea - there’s no need to denigrate the opinions of those who would like to see another movie. Our policy here is respect to fellow members, and it is best to set out opinions insuch a way that they won’t be mistaken for flame-baiting…

For one, I think it would be great to see it done again, having myself very much enjoyed the Golden Fleece live-action movie.

Don't you realise that soon after the release of such a movie, it'll be slated by all and then soon forgotten, incuding by yourselves.

No, there is no reason to say that - as I mentioned above, I still think that Golden Fleece is a good movie, and not forgotten after over 40 years. The second movie is not so highly regarded it is true, but that was as true at the time also - and it isn’t forgotten decades later either. I hope to see a new live-action film, and judge it on its merits. If we take the case of the recent Astérix films, it shows that the potential for bringing BD to the big screen is good, and I can’t see that Tintin will neccessarily suffer worse.

Why can't you Tintin enthusiasts just accept that some things are better left in their original genres?

Are you in that case saying that you are not a Tintin enthusiast? If so, why get so upset about it? Tintin has had a long history of adaptation into other media (from the arrival of the “real” Tintin back in Brussels after the Soviet jaunt, through the plays, records, radio, puppets, paper cut-outs and all the cartoons and films), and Hergé did nothing to stop such endeavours through his life, so apart from setting yourself over Hergé, you do seem to be getting into a lather un-necessarily.
Richard
UK Correspondent
#43 · Posted: 12 Sep 2005 00:48
jock123 :
For one, I think it would be great to see it done again, having myself very much enjoyed the Golden Fleece live-action movie.

I've got to second that, I thought they really captured the spirit of the books. Plus Hergé checked through the script before they filmed it, so he wasn't dead set against it ; he also seemed to get quite 'chummy' with Jean-Pierre Talbot, who played Tintin - there's plenty of photos of the two of them strolling around Brussels. I know I'd like to see another Tintin film - live action could definitely work with the right cast and crew behind it. I'd also like to see an animated film produced with a serious budget, like the forthcoming Asterix and the Vikings.

On another topic, I just came across something quite interesting. Apparently Benoît Peeters has a theory that Spielberg is finally acting on filming Tintin now because he wants to get back at Harry Potter at the box office, as Rowling denied him the use of her character. Spielberg seemingly got back at MGM for not letting him direct a James Bond film with the Indiana Jones series. I don't know whether I agree with it or not, but as a theory it's certainly an interesting one.
Muller
Member
#44 · Posted: 12 Sep 2005 02:11
why has speliberg gota make a tintin movie his gona ruin the tintin series like americans ruin everything"
So what if the movie won't be good. How can that ruin Tintin for any one. If you are a true fan, no movie, good or bad, can ruin anything. And no one knows the outcoming of this film, if there is a film. I personally am all for this film and I hope it'll be a reality.
jock123
Moderator
#45 · Posted: 12 Sep 2005 07:26 · Edited by: jock123
Richard
Apparently Benoît Peeters has a theory…
Hmm… sounds a little pat. Putting it that way, Spielberg did Raiders to “get back” at Hergé for not letting him do Tintin and the Lost City of Ivory, the script for which apparently contained the rolling boulder scene then used at the start of the first Indiana Jones. (Update: My apologies - now known to be not at all the right order: see here for a better timeline! - jock123)

I think the movie industry is full of these chains of events - George Lucas couldn’t get the rights to make Flash Gordon because Dino de Laurentis had them, but he didn’t make Star Wars to get at anyone, he just wanted to make an old style sci-fi serial style picture, and the rest is history.

It also has to be said that Spielberg did Raiders at a time when his name was mud with the studios for the flop which was 1941; if that was when he wanted to do James Bond, then it is far more likely that MGM/UA nixed it because he was thought to be unable to keep within budget. It was only when George Lucas offered him the job of directing the first Indy movie that he managed to get his career back on track. So he wasn’t getting back at anyone then - he was just keen to work on anything that would prove himself again.

Spielberg’s wrestling the rights to Tintin from Moulinsart have extended from long before Harry Potter was around, and if they come to fruition will hardly be a competitor to the Potter juggernaut which will be mostly over in terms of the books, and a good way through the movie series. So I think it’s a neat theory, M. Peeters, but wrong…
colombani
Member
#46 · Posted: 12 Sep 2005 14:47
Apologies, jock123. It wasn't my intention to offend anyone and I certainly didn't mean it to come out that way. I guess I was annoyed at the apparent hysteria over the rumours.
But you're right; I only need to express what I myself think, and that is that I don't think it's a good idea!
23duff
Member
#47 · Posted: 21 Sep 2005 00:30 · Edited by: Moderator
This from the website www.spielbergfilms.com…

During the 1980's Steven Spielberg had an option on Belgian artist Hergé's famous "Tintin" comic series and had hopes to produce a live-action film based on the voluminous adventures of the young boy journalist, his terrier Snowflake, and his quirky friends and acquaintances.

Nothing from the Amblin Entertainment camp ever came to fruition, and the option on the property lapsed, reverting back to Hergé's estate.

In late 2002, renegotiations began again almost 20 years after Spielberg first attempted to bring the popular Belgian comic characters to life in a big-budget American feature film, and this time, Spielberg's passion for the property, and the Hergé estates' high hopes to see their property hit the big time in largely untapped markets may make "Tintin's" beyond-belated U.S. screen debut a reality.

As of mid-December 2002, Steven Spielberg and Kathleen Kennedy are officially moving forward on bringing "Tintin" to life as a co-production between DreamWorks Pictures and Universal. DreamWorks currently has the rights to all 22 comic book albums, which shows great promise for a continuing franchise, if the eventual film proves successful.



not sure what i personally think, and i guess the jury is still out for a lot of people but i guess we should wait and see what kind of a job they do. to be honest though Spielberg is the best in the business so lets see.....
jock123
Moderator
#48 · Posted: 21 Sep 2005 14:28 · Edited by: jock123
Thanks for that, 23duff (although you would be easier to read if you used upper and lower case from now on, thanks!); it’s also handy that there is a link to some archive articles referencing the Spielberg/ Tintin Affair.

Personally I have my reservations about Spielberg as a film-maker: he’s a tad over-sentimental for my taste, and I think his output is patchy at best, with his glory days well behind him. I would like him to take a back-seat on this as a producer, and perhaps let a European director have a chance… I’m still rooting for Jean-Paul Rappeneau, director of “Bon Voyage” and writer of “The Man from Rio”, the faux-movie of Broken Ear
colombani
Member
#49 · Posted: 21 Sep 2005 16:24
As you know, I am against a movie being made; but one can't help imagining potential actors who could attempt the parts. I for one think James Gandolfini (Sopranos) could make a good Haddock, as long as he lost some weight. Haddock really is the most illustrious character of them all. On the other hand, I don't believe anyone famous would be an advantage for the part of Tintin himself. As a personality, Tintin himself is rather bland and featureless as compared to his peers. Thus, I think what we need from a Tintin actor is not to stand out too much in any character trait kind of way.
finlay
Member
#50 · Posted: 23 Sep 2005 11:27
So basically we don't really know what's going on, is that the deal?

We don't actually have any news of what they're really doing except that they will make one, is that right?

Page  Page 5 of 67:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  67  Next » 

This topic is closed.