Tintin Forums

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

More Faithful Screen Adaptations: Would they be possible?

Page  Page 2 of 3:  « Previous  1  2  3  Next » 

Tintinrulz
Member
#11 · Posted: 13 Sep 2004 11:37
I would think it would be more plausible to do Cigars of the Pharaoh and The Blue Lotus together as a movie.
OJG
Member
#12 · Posted: 13 Sep 2004 12:27
I can't see why they'd put Tibet and Lotus together. They are 2 completely different stories. The only connection is Chang, and they are set many years apart. I think that if they were to combine The Blue Lotus with another story, it should be Cigars of the Pharaoh, as Lotus is a continuation of Cigars.

Besides, Tibet is such a unique story to the other adventures that to put it together with an adventure of a completely different nature wouldn't make any sense and would spoil the story.

A director who makes these two stories into one is the wrong director.
Harrock n roll
Moderator
#13 · Posted: 13 Sep 2004 12:59
Would Cigars make for a good movie? Not in my opinion, but I think they should do Tibet with a short prologue (or even flashback) to put Tintin's friendship with Chang into context.
OJG
Member
#14 · Posted: 13 Sep 2004 15:32 · Edited by: OJG
Yeah, that could work. Either that or they could make a Lotus film first, and then a Tibet one (Which I personally think would be better).

I'm not sure if I agree whether Cigars would make a good movie or not, but in any case, to have Cigars and Lotus as one film would be way too long unless large parts were cut out and that would spoil it.

I think just The Blue Lotus on its own would make a very good film.
Tintinrulz
Member
#15 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 00:51
Yes, but wouldn't it be too short for a movie. It went for 44 mins in Nelvana's adaption, I suppose it could be stretched to an hour. Where as Cigars and Lotus together for me would make a great 2 hour movie.
OJG
Member
#16 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 12:08 · Edited by: OJG
I reckon that if we're talking about a movie which sticks exactly to the book, then it would be long enough-i.e. if they included absolutely everything from the book rather than cutting certain parts out.

Though, depending on the length, I think that putting Cigars and Lotus together would work very well.
jockosjungle
Member
#17 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 16:02
To be honest I don't think they've planned three movies, they may do a second depending on the success of the first.

However I can see them doing Tibet and Lotus together. Well it'd basically be Tintin in Tibet, but with a shorter Lotus showing how Tintin knows Chang and how he saved his life.

Besides what exactly are they gonna call the third movie anyway.

The Adventures of Tintin: The Blue Lotus and Tintin in Tibet?
TINTIN III: The Tibetan Lotus?

Rik
jock123
Moderator
#18 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 17:16 · Edited by: jock123
jockosjungle:
To be honest I don't think they've planned three movies, they may do a second depending on the success of the first.

(This is at a tangent to the thread, but here goes...) It will be a lot cheaper of them to plan for three movies, and hope the first one succeeds, than to wait and see.

If you plan for three, your development costs are spread out. You can also save further money by shooting sequel material at the same time as the first movie (as they did for “Superman” I & II, “Lord of the Rings”, “Kill Bill” etc.)

If the first one flops, you have to bite the bullet anyway; if the first one is a smash and you haven’t got the sequel deals in place, you run the risk of having to pay far more for rights etc.

My guess is Spielberg will deal with this as a franchise, and be well aware of the potential for three (or more!) movies.

Meanwhile, back at the thread topic: The idea of translating the books faithfully is an interesting one, and the question of how much time would be needed to do that has come up in several posts.

We all seem to be assuming that the stories are different lengths. Yet each book runs 62 pages. Why do we all feel that they will make different length movies? Or that some would need to be combined? Is it because that is the way Nelvana handled them, or are some of the stories “shorter” than others? [Please assume that I know some albums are half a story - but is “Shooting Star” really half the “length” of “Explorers on the Moon”?]
edcharlesadams
Trivia Challenge Score Keeper
#19 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 20:14
Probably a useful exercise would be to read a Tintin book but really engross yourself in it, taking care to read all the dialogue and take in all of the pictures, as if you were reading it for the first time - and see how long it takes to get from cover to cover. That would give you an indication as to whether the story would need expanding or contracting to fill a two-hour film. I have a hunch that it may take longer to read than you might think - the trick is to try and forget the story as if it were new to you, like the majority of a cinema audience.

Ed
jockosjungle
Member
#20 · Posted: 14 Sep 2004 22:09
I think each album could be two hours easily, like Ed said try reading a book in depth, speaking dialogue takes much longer than reading it. Also when you see Tintin in a car or on a boat and its a single frame or two then on screen thats going to be five minutes right there.

They may also want to keep the films to a shorter 90 minute length as well.

Rik

Page  Page 2 of 3:  « Previous  1  2  3  Next » 

Please be sure to familiarize yourself with the Forum Posting Guidelines.

Disclaimer: Tintinologist.org assumes no responsibility for any content you post to the forums/web site. Staff reserve the right to remove any submitted content which they deem in breach of Tintinologist.org's Terms of Use. If you spot anything on Tintinologist.org that you think is inappropriate, please alert the moderation team. Sometimes things slip through, but we will always act swiftly to remove unauthorised material.

Reply



  Forgot your password?
Please sign in to post. New here? Sign up!