![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
HELEN MIRREN WITH A SNIPER RIFLE
I’ve mentioned before that when it comes to movie adaptations of novels and comics, it’s unrealistic to expect the film version to be 100% faithful to the source for a bunch of reasons, most of them related to the difference of storytelling language and techniques.
Warren Ellis offers some additional insight into the process in regards to the upcoming film version of his graphic novel Red:
RED, the book, is 66 pages long. If you were to film 66 pages of comics, you might, might just about get 40 minutes of film out of it. If you added a musical number. The comics-page to film-minute ratio is pretty bad. A straight adaptation of a 150-page graphic novel might, if you squint at it, get you a 100-minute film. But it’s unlikely, because comics and films use time so differently. One page with four lines of dialogue on it can be slowed to a crawl to the point where you have to spend several minutes digesting the information on it. In film, however, four lines of dialogue is four lines of dialogue, and you can’t just pronounce it very slowly for the same time consumption. Beyond filmic/dramatic effects like the pause or montage or whatever, film is timelocked.
This is why filmmakers sometimes invent new characters and subplots, which is okay provided they’re consistent with the root material, Ellis continues:
Roll camera,
This is dF
Warren Ellis offers some additional insight into the process in regards to the upcoming film version of his graphic novel Red:
RED, the book, is 66 pages long. If you were to film 66 pages of comics, you might, might just about get 40 minutes of film out of it. If you added a musical number. The comics-page to film-minute ratio is pretty bad. A straight adaptation of a 150-page graphic novel might, if you squint at it, get you a 100-minute film. But it’s unlikely, because comics and films use time so differently. One page with four lines of dialogue on it can be slowed to a crawl to the point where you have to spend several minutes digesting the information on it. In film, however, four lines of dialogue is four lines of dialogue, and you can’t just pronounce it very slowly for the same time consumption. Beyond filmic/dramatic effects like the pause or montage or whatever, film is timelocked.
This is why filmmakers sometimes invent new characters and subplots, which is okay provided they’re consistent with the root material, Ellis continues:
The film has the same DNA. It retains bits that are very clearly from the book, as well as, of course, the overall plotline. But it is, yes, lighter, and funnier. And if anyone has a real problem with that, I say to you once again:
Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle.
I mean, if you don’t want to see a film with Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle, I’m not sure I want to know you.
Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle.
I mean, if you don’t want to see a film with Helen Mirren with a sniper rifle, I’m not sure I want to know you.
Roll camera,
This is dF
no subject
Helen Mirren is a hit woman who has a contract to kill this guy and his wife. She carries out the contract and just before she caps the guy he makes Helen Mirren swear to take care of his infant son. She does so, raising him up as her own son and teaching him how to be a hitman. The kid grows up to be Cuba Gooding, Jr. and he becomes not only her partner but her lover as well.
There's at least two jaw-dropping graphic sex scenes with Helen Mirren and Cuba Gooding, Jr. as well as a good deal of violence. And oh yes, Helen Mirren uses a sniper rifle.