PDA

View Full Version : 'Redwall' on the Big Screen?



Martin the Warrior
October 11th, 2003, 02:19 PM
What are your thoughts about the news that Redwall looks to be headed for the big screen with Andrew Marlowe (Hollow Man, Air Force One, End of Days) writing the script? (http://forums.longpatrolclub.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=918)

Is this good news or bad news?

Will it surpass the animated series or be worse?

Do you want to see Redwall on the big screen?

Discuss!

Slagar the Cruel
October 11th, 2003, 03:07 PM
When I first saw "'Redwall': Coming soon to a theatre near you?" in the "Headlines" box, my immediate reaction was "whoah". Which I continued to say as I read more of the article, realizing how concrete this news is.

Andrew Marlowe is writing the screenplay? Wow, that is a surprise. Quite a deviation for him, I believe. Of course, the only movie of his I've seen is Air Force One. (Can anyone else imagine Matthias saying to Cluny, "get off of MY Abbey"? ;)) It's good to know someone with experience and talent (I know that's debateable, and like I said I haven't seen much of his work... but Air Force One, Hollow Man, and End of Days were succesful, right?) is going to be behind the wheel, but I guess how good things turn out depends on how serious he'll take the project.

I wonder how deep Nelvana's involvement will go. Sure, they hold the rights, but something tells me that doesn't mean they'll have anything to do with the actual production of the movie.

Anyways, until I see something that makes me feel otherwise, I'm very excited about the movie, and I can't wait for it to be released.

So, which of the books does everyone think will be adapted? I think Mossflower would be great on the big screen, but if the connection with Nelvana is minimal enough, they'll probably just do Redwall. Also, while I'm sure they won't even consider adapting it (for now, anyways), I think "The Legend of Luke" would be perfect for a movie adaptation. Especially if they trimmed Book 1 & 2 into fairly minimal Prologues and Epilogues (respectively), perhaps starting the movie off with Martin arriving at the Northern caves, asking about his father.

Treerose
October 11th, 2003, 03:36 PM
Ee.... I don't know. It depends. <g>

Say they make the movie, and it's really popular:

On the bright side, this would bring Redwall to many more people. But would they then go read the books? The last thing we should want is a Redwall movie that ends up drowning out the books in commercialization and makes people think of "Redwall the movie" rather than "Redwall the book series."

On the dark side, a movie is a huge opportunity for them to mess up the plot and story as much as they have with LotR. ;) If they're going to make a movie of one of BJ's books, they've got to remain absolutely faithful to the original plot. There's no other way around it. You can't mess with what authors the stature of BJ have written, nor commercialize something like Redwall, nor package it for mass entertainment, which is what movies do best. Now, movies like the Harry Potter ones have been pretty faithful, but only because JK Rowling was heavily involved. Making sure his story isn't mutilated would take a tremendous amount of policing on Brian's part... something, IMHO, that I don't think he would like doing, and which would take him away from his other writing projects - as well as from relaxing and keeping himself healthy, which is the most important thing of all.

End result: would it be worth it? At this point, until we hear more about it, I'll have to say no. The TV series - that's different. I think the medium of a TV series was such that they were able to stay closer to the books and were able to keep the tone of the series better than a big commercialized movie could. Plus, there were writers on the show who had a true affinity for the characters, and composers that were outstanding in terms of talent and making the Redwall world come to life musically. The book and TV show were never separated very far from each other, yet we all know the many, many lightyears that can separate a book from its movie.

I know one thing for sure, though - we need Jack and Daniel to be the film's composers!! :D Then, no matter what happens plot-wise, we'll be assured of good music (and finally a soundtrack). :)

Tree

~~~~

"It has sometimes been said that I don't sing very well. But where would I be if I did!"

~Maurice Chevalier~

Airemia
October 11th, 2003, 04:28 PM
I don't know... I don't really like the idea of it as a movie. I think they'd dumb it down too much for the little kids. Besides, which one would they do? I don't know, we'll see, I guess. At least it's about animals, so hopefully there won't be too many Matthias fangirls corrupting fanfiction.net. :p

Darkhood_343
October 11th, 2003, 04:48 PM
I think it's awesome. To start, I'd like to say that I hope they do it in computer animation. I can just imagine the way it'd look. Second, I've seen one of his movies, same one Slags did. It would be funny to hear Matthias say that though. Third, if they do do this, they better be ready to do 'em all, cause Lord Brocktree would be awesome!

granola woodsworth
October 11th, 2003, 05:54 PM
I think it would be great as a movie, as long as they don't make it only for kid's. I don't think it will be, though, because of what this guy has done before, I don't think that will happen.
I don't know about it surpassing the animated series... it might and it might not, I'm not sure right now...
With Andrew Marlowe writing the script, I'm interested as to how he'll do it. I was definitely surprised when I read that the same guy who did Air Force One is doing the script for a Redwall movie. I think it will turn out okay. :)

So, overall, I want to see it on the big screen, as I'm interested as to how it will turn out.

Lord Servone
October 11th, 2003, 08:31 PM
I don't know really what to think yet. As an advocate for 2D animation, I hope it is made that way... 2D is not dead...it doesn't matter what kind of animation it is, its the story (Redwall does have a great story that would make either movie good). If my book is ever made into a movie, I'd like it to be 2D...

The screenwriter's an interesting choice, seeing as how most of the stuff he's done is action. I've seen End of Days and Air Force One...both pretty good, but not really great. It'd be interesting to see what he does, to say the least...

I don't know what decision I have made on the idea yet, to be truthful...

Madd The Sane
October 11th, 2003, 08:32 PM
Wow! Redwall on the big screen! I wonder how much money Nelvana will get for selling the rights? :lol:
I wonder what they will use to make the picture? Either way, it's the story that matters, isn't it? No doubt it will be better than Nelvana; the writer might actually "correct" Redwall and make it more accurate with the other books.

Glenner
October 11th, 2003, 10:32 PM
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! I think they could do a great job on it if they wanted to. And I wouldnt worry about over-commercialization. This is BJ we're talking about here. He'd never let his books be over commercialed with action figs and whatnot.
I think its an excellent idea; full steam ahead I say.:)

Gonff
October 12th, 2003, 11:47 AM
The movie could be a big hit, But what if it wasn't. If they had done a horrible job on it than people might not be encouraged to read his books.:(

Or if it's such a big hit, they might decide to make a series, in which no one would want to read the books.

It could be a big hit and people would want to read the series.:D

-Gonff

Keyla
October 12th, 2003, 11:58 AM
I am, I have to say, intrigued by the idea and if it came out I would most definately go and see it.
However, there are, in opinion, many potential downsides, not just how faithfully they translate the story, but in the budget. I guess it's because of what I'm used to from the children's films I've seen, but if the animation wasn't that great it would really take the life out of it for me. I worry that it might not have the same high resolution of realism I have in my minds eye. I guess the same things were potentially true of the TV series, which I have not yet been able to see, unfortunately. I just can't imagine the richness of the landscape I get from the books appearing in two, or even three, dimentional animation.
I'm also a little unsure about the writer. I get the impression he has only writen action film scripts, which doesn't seem to make any real garrentee in regard to his ability to write dialogue and develop characters. Of course I'm being a bit judgemental here. I guess I just don't like the idea of Redwall becoming a cheap supposedly "epic" failure. Okay, so that was a little over negative.
In regard to it bringing more fans to the series I would be a little wary, but then maybe that's because I'm probably too old for the series anyway and tend to be very surprised when I find a ten year old reading the books, (for whom the series was first intended). I like the fanbase how it is, I guess: made up book readers. If the film was successful and of a high proffesional standard, then I can imagine the ROC becoming swamped with people who have never read the books and only really care about it as a passing fad.
Of course there's the merchandise too. Brian is against selling out, but if the film is being done with good animation and such then I would guess it would require that extra financial help. Besides, if Nevada have the rights, then who knows.
Listen to me: I sound like some enbittered oldby. In spite of all that I've said above, I think this could be great. Put me down as cautiously optimistic.

Treerose
October 12th, 2003, 01:39 PM
I'm probably too old for the series anyway

Nobody is ever too old for the Redwall series, Keyla. ;) Sadly, we do grow out of some books as we get older, but Redwall's timeless in more ways than one. It just goes to show how wonderful the books are, that they can be read by ten year olds or fifty year olds.

We've all been saying what we feel about this, but what does BJ think? I'd love to hear what his opinion on Redwall as a movie. IMHO, I can't see him being too thrilled about it...

Tree

~~~~

"I make good resolutions every day - and always break them by the evening."

~Sir Thomas Beecham, conductor~

Chesk Otter
October 12th, 2003, 02:37 PM
The Harry Potter movies have NOT been as exact to the books as they could be.

How are they going to make the movie different from the tv series? I assume that they're going to make it of the book Redwall.

CLAYMATION! CLAYMATION! Of course, it would be detailed claymation, nothing like Chicken Run. If they make it 3D animation I am gonna be sick. Nothing could be worse. No wait, undetailed unrealistic or otherwise cartoonish or simplified 3D animation could be even worse. Just, NO 3D ANIMATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A lot of things could go wrong with this movie. If it's bad, then people will naturally assume that the books are bad. Another problem is getting people to go see the movie or take it seriously. It's not that hard to get people to see a Harry Potter movie or a Lord of the Rings movie, but Redwall has a relatively much smaller amount of fans and most people either do not read, or do not like reading.

The movie should definately stay true to the books. Nothing watered down, no half-rations. It should not be overly violent (although, that would get most people to see it or take it seriously :( ) but it's kinda annoying how in the tv show you only see the shadow of Matthias killing Asmodeus. The movie should not be rated G. One also wonders how they are going to advertise this and to what extent.

I myself do not think a Redwall movie is a good idea.
The idea is so unheard of that no one's quite sure how it will go. I think most people don't expect much of it, but it could turn out to be one of those things that don't look like they're going to turn out good, and then turn out brilliant.

(I'm obviously hoping that it's the latter.)


EDIT: http://forums.longpatrolclub.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68&perpage=15&pagenumber=1 Here's another topic that I remembered about that's similar.

Keyla
October 12th, 2003, 03:29 PM
Nobody is ever too old for the Redwall series, Keyla. Sadly, we do grow out of some books as we get older, but Redwall's timeless in more ways than one. It just goes to show how wonderful the books are, that they can be read by ten year olds or fifty year olds.
Yes, I think my Dad's influence has subtly grown in me. How else can I explaining my taking Double Maths and finding that I enjoy it.


We've all been saying what we feel about this, but what does BJ think? I'd love to hear what his opinion on Redwall as a movie. IMHO, I can't see him being too thrilled about it...
I'd be quite outraged if they are doing it against his will, even if legally they might be able to. It would just show a lack of respect. If it is so then I will make a point not to go and see it.
Of course it is quite possible that it is going ahead with his full backing, in which case I think it is quite likely that he will be quite involved in the scripting and such to the point that he was for the TV series, approving what has been done, thus hopefully keeping it true to the book.


How are they going to make the movie different from the tv series?
This is a very good point. It seems slightly odd telling the same story twice. Perhaps this means that we will get to see a different tale. Perhaps Book Two of "The Legend of Luke" would work well, with Martin somehow woven into it. "Mariel of Redwall" would be a good choice in my opinion, as would "The Pearls of Lutra". The latter has a very resonant message at the ending that I can really imagine of the silver screen.

Senav
October 12th, 2003, 07:14 PM
Mixed emotion, mos' definately.
I'd love to see Redwall on the big screen, it promises decent animation. I'm one of those people who think 2D animation is an art form;) . I'd also love it if the original composers and director(s) worked on the movie. Andrew Marlowe writing... I think I saw Air Force One. Nice movie, but I dunno how he'd treat Redwall (not that I doubt his skills).
Watching the movie isn't much fun if the story's been mutilated. I don't think the TV series messed anything badly, HP and LOTR got good treatments as far as I'm concerned, but I can't decide anything if I haven't seen a trailer...and who knows how long that'll be.

On a side note, who would be terrifed if they turned it into a Disney? Lots of singing and crud...

Nora the Rover
October 12th, 2003, 11:09 PM
I think it's a fairly interesting idea. I'm only hoping the movie will turn out well. I'd feel terrible if it was full of kiddie stuff, or didn't stay true to the plot.
I'd like to see Redwall in computer animation, somewhat like Stuart Little, Shrek, or Finding Nemo. (Though not as geared towards a younger audience.)
That would be awesome, although it would require money and alot of work.
Another thing I'm worried about is the voices of the actors. I hope they get some decent British accents in there, I'd hate to think of the characters running around with Californian accents...

rowanoak
October 13th, 2003, 12:29 PM
I am not sure what to think about the movie now, I will have to wait until when/if the movie comes out(assuming it does). What I do know is that I would probably perfer Nelvana being involved doing the animation and the movie being 2D. My favorite type of animation is still old-fasioned, pencil drawn, 2D. As for which book should be adapted for the movie, I would go wih "Mossflower." I rather a book that has not been done in the TV series, be done for the movie.

Chesk Otter
October 13th, 2003, 04:04 PM
I SAID NO 3D ANIMATION! Especially undetailed or cartoonish 3d animation as in the movies you just mentioned like Shrek. Ugh, can you just imagine that? Think what you're saying. Realistic 3D animation would be better, but still bad. We need more information on this movie quick, how they're going to make it, how much violence it has in it, whether they're actually going to do it, etc. I still do not think a Redwall movie is a good idea.

Senav
October 13th, 2003, 05:05 PM
Hey, I thought Shrek was pretty good. The people's clothes and hair were animated realistically (it actually moved when they did). Plus the human's foreheads did bulge out all freakishly like they did in Toy Story.
I still say 2D is the way to go.

Chesk Otter
October 14th, 2003, 04:05 PM
You misunderstood. What I meant was, that if you look at Shrek in the movie, he's obviously not real.

I will end with the words NO 3D!

No I won't actually.

I still think the Redwall movie is not a good idea.

Chelki Sureshot
October 14th, 2003, 05:51 PM
I would like 3D. I mean, the 2D is so flat. :rolleyes: 3D actually has body to it, if you know what I mean. I only hope it's exactly like the book. It could either promote Redwall, or totally ruin it's rep. I really hope Jack and Daniel do the music. It wouldn't be the same without it. Do you think the voices will be different? I can't imagine Basil's voice different. Wouldn't it be awsome to see Redwall on the big screen, though?

Chesk Otter
October 15th, 2003, 04:35 PM
Just because 2D isn't as high-tech doesn't mean it's not good. (NES Rocks). 3D just doesn't look good. NO 3D! I didn't like Basil's voice.

Er, is that not a typo or should your last name be sureshot?

I still think the Redwall movie is not a good idea.

Nora the Rover
October 15th, 2003, 04:35 PM
Sheesh, don't freak out...
I was only suggesting that 3D would probably look cool. If Nelvana is involved with it I'm fairly sure it will be in just plain old-fashioned 2D animation. I hope it's a little better quality than the t.v. series, though...

Chesk Otter
October 15th, 2003, 04:42 PM
I'm not freaking out. I just really would not like 3D animation. It is one of the worst things that could happen to the movie. A lot of things could go wrong with this movie. It could be bad, on the other hand, it could be brilliant (ahem, not with 3D though).

(Now I bet you're expecting me to say):

I still think the Redwall movie is not a good idea.

Chelki Sureshot
October 15th, 2003, 11:04 PM
**Looks exasperated** Yes but why not 3D? :confused:Like I said, 2D is just so flat! Think how real 3D would make it look! The sword on the shows is just a bunch of color. It doesn't really shine or anything. It looks like any other sword. Now, if it was 3D, it would really look like a warrioirs sword. . .WHY NOT 3D? I really don't understand why you want it to be expressionless, flat, dull, ordinary old 3D.

Senav
October 16th, 2003, 04:39 PM
What I meant was, that if you look at Shrek in the movie, he's obviously not real.
Duh, he's an ogre. Last time I checked ogres weren't real. By the way, what is it about 3D that makes you so..uh...irritated? Most of the time its very detailed, which you seem to like.
I'm still for 2D, just so you'd know.

Martin the Warrior
October 16th, 2003, 06:50 PM
Lots of great posts to respond to, so I'll dive right in. ;)


Slagar
I wonder how deep Nelvana's involvement will go. Sure, they hold the rights, but something tells me that doesn't mean they'll have anything to do with the actual production of the movie.

My gut feeling is that Nelvana is doing little more than green-lighting Gotham. I'm still trying to find out more, though, so that could change. Nevertheless, the article seemed to make it clear that Gotham was making the movie, not Nelvana.


So, which of the books does everyone think will be adapted?

Again, my gut feeling is that they'd start off with Redwall. As far as establishing the series goes, it's the best choice and I can't say I'm against it. It is ideally suited for being a movie.


granola
I think it would be great as a movie, as long as they don't make it only for kid's.

While I'd hope it would be a more universal movie as far as appeal is concerned (such as The Lion King was), I think it would be a mistake not to make it with the kids in mind. Children are the lifeblood of animated movies and without them, you're left with a flop. A Redwall movie would have to be something parents would want to take their kids to, otherwise it will fail and Redwall's marketability would be severely damaged (as much as we'd like to keep Redwall to ourselves, that would not be a good thing).


Madd
the writer might actually "correct" Redwall and make it more accurate with the other books.

"Correct"... the book? I don't think it needs to be corrected, personally. ;)


Keyla
If the film was successful and of a high proffesional standard, then I can imagine the ROC becoming swamped with people who have never read the books and only really care about it as a passing fad.

While that would have a high annoyance factor, on the flipside it would be nice to see a higher concentration of people in the ROC who actively like some part of the current Redwall releases. However, I think we, as fans, put Redwall's chances of becoming the latest fad a little too high.


Tree
We've all been saying what we feel about this, but what does BJ think? I'd love to hear what his opinion on Redwall as a movie. IMHO, I can't see him being too thrilled about it...

Actually, I think the opposite is true. He's been open to Redwall being produced theatrically for years now, to the point of almost writing the script himself. I think he'd be thrilled to see it on the big screen-- provided the core of his story remained intact.


Chesk
How are they going to make the movie different from the tv series?

It wouldn't be hard-- how did Peter Jackson make his Lord of the Rings different from Ralph Bakshi's? It's all in how you make the movie.


CLAYMATION! CLAYMATION!

Ugh. I'd actually prefer CG animation to claymation. ;) My first choice will always be 2D cel animation, however.


but it's kinda annoying how in the tv show you only see the shadow of Matthias killing Asmodeus.

I was quite impressed with Asmodeus' death on the small screen, actually, and was surprised they went so far as to show that shadow getting its head cut off.


The movie should not be rated G.

Again, I disagree. Redwall needs to be accessible for youngsters if they want it to succeed and a G rating would go a long ways towards accomplishing this.


Vanessa
On a side note, who would be terrifed if they turned it into a Disney? Lots of singing and crud...

While that was true at one point, Disney hasn't made their animated movies musicals in quite awhile. Off the top of my head, Tarzan, Atlantis, Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet-- not musicals. Brother Bear also doesn't look to be a musical. While background music has been present in these movies, the characters themselves haven't broken out in song. On the other hand, BJ writes a ton of songs in his books-- what would be wrong with putting those to music? ;)

While I don't necessarily want Redwall to be made by Disney, I would at least know that the animation would be in capable hands (very few, if any, of the other animation studios can match Disney's work on the big screen, IMO). If the script was handled by BJ and Disney animated it, I'd be behind the project 100%.


Chelki
I really hope Jack and Daniel do the music. It wouldn't be the same without it.

Hear hear! At least this way we'd get a soundtrack. ;)

Slagar the Cruel
October 16th, 2003, 09:52 PM
the writer might actually "correct" Redwall and make it more accurate with the other books.
Oh yeah? Well, you know what I think the writer should do? Throw in some more horses. And make the beaver a main character. And the town dog that the Abbeybeasts heard from? Forget that... how about a whole horde of town dogs? But seriously, I agree with Martin - it's fine the way it is.

CLAYMATION! CLAYMATION!I think I speak for most Redwall fans ("most" meaning "me") in saying that, in the case of a claymation Redwall movie, I would turn to arsony in order to exact vengance upon those who made the decision to produce the movie with Claymation, and to destroy all theaters that dare show the movie. In other words, I'd much prefer traditional animation.

I would like 3D. I mean, the 2D is so flat.That was either a very clever pun, or a very ironic choice of words. ;)

I really don't understand why you want it to be expressionless, flat, dull, ordinary old 3D.
Well, I know I don't. I want expressive, appealing, colorful, extraordinary old 2D. :p

While that would have a high annoyance factor, on the flipside it would be nice to see a higher concentration of people in the ROC who actively like some part of the current Redwall releases.:lol:

Chelki Sureshot
October 16th, 2003, 10:01 PM
Well, 2D or 3D, i hope that they make it. I just hope it will be as close as possible to the book. Without adding totally unrealistic stuff like Wild Ivy. That, I thought, was pathetic. I think they just did it so it would be short enough for a episode. When (if) they make the movie, it will probbably be a lot better just becasue of the fact that it is a movie.

I still thnk 3D.

LordTBT
October 17th, 2003, 02:00 PM
I'd like to note that it said "a big-screen adaptation of Brian Jacques's Redwall series " SERIES. so it may not start with redwall, or may involve several tales.

secondly, i hate that HP is more popular than Redwall. Redwall has been around longer, and has over 3x as many novels (angry face)

Senav
October 17th, 2003, 05:20 PM
I didn't mean I disliked all Disney movies. Tarzan and Lilo and Stitch...I loved those. Brother Bear looks neat too.
I just meant all the recent sequels (from other companies, but mostly Disney) that took about ten minutes to write.
Movie rating? I'd put 'er at PG, at the most. Lion King was G and it made me cry my eyes out the first time I saw it (poor Mufasa...). Gimme a break, I was seven. I still love watching movies like Beauty and the Beast, and so on.

Still say 2D is the way to go. For some reason it gives me the carefully crafted, simple-yet-complicated-designs, nostalgia feelings. Gnarr.

nevadacow
October 17th, 2003, 06:17 PM
This is going to be a flop... The market simply isn't there.

Or worse, they could dum it down, much the same Nalvida did with the origional serise, and make a really bad picture.

Chelki Sureshot
October 17th, 2003, 09:13 PM
[I]They had better not dumb it down!!!!!:mad:It would make me so mad! Redwall is Redwall, and it should stay that way! Not turn into some Bob the Builder reprise. If they do Redwall, I hope they do Mattimeo. I mean, 'Redwall' by itself sorta leaves people hanging. But then again if they didn't do Mattimeo, people might read the books. . .

Slagar the Cruel
October 17th, 2003, 09:53 PM
This is going to be a flop... The market simply isn't there.On the contrary, I think if the movie is handled right, it could be marketed towards a great number of audiences - children, of course (almost all animated movies are created with the consideration of children, especially when based on a primarally children-targeted book series), but also perhaps fantasy fans, animation fans, people interested in watching an epic, yet fun, story unfold... and so on. I mean, the books have done well, right? Then wouldn't a movie, handled in the right way, do about as well?

Or worse, they could dum it down, much the same Nalvida did with the origional serise, and make a really bad picture....I don't see your point. How did Nelvana "dum it down"? They made a lot of really unnecessary changed in the first season, which sort of failed as an adaptation... but that doesn't equate to dumbing it down. I can't recall any point in the Redwall TV series that had characters talking down to the viewers, or making things overly simplistic. I'm not going to defend every choice Nelvana made with the adaptation of "Redwall", even though I thought it was an overall good show. (Though I would adamantly defend the second season, "Mattimeo", and probably the third season if I had seen more of it.) But handling certain things wrong is a different thing than dumbing everything down.

If this Redwall movie is made with the same quality as the television adaptation of "Mattimeo", I will be more than satisfied... but hey, that's just me. :cool:

Er... and with that, let's try to get back to the point of the topic. :o

Senav
October 18th, 2003, 05:03 PM
No market? Heh, unless you go to a movie soley on what company produced it, or soley on what actors will be in it, then there is a market.
Perhaps you think that a movie about talking animals wouldn't attract attention. Look at the Lion King, Balto, or the not so popular but still cool Watership Down movie. Some reviewers buzzed 'em, others praised 'em.

...and if they put in lotsa violence, hoo-ray, because for some reason a lot of kids (yes KIDS) think a movie is wimpy because some character doesn't die a gory death.

LadyBeelze
October 19th, 2003, 07:29 PM
I should check the rwtv forum more often..
Anyway

When i seen the title for this post i felt a rush of joy. I've been waiting for a movie or something. Redwall, TLOR, Harry Potter, Holes and a-lot of other books have been adapted. Why not redwall? I think the redwall tv series was a excellent prometer, after all thats how i found out about redwall and started reading the books. But the channel its on isn't that popular of a channel so i don't think it hits too many people. A movie would gain a much bigger audiance.
And i agree that i don't want it G. I could settle for PG and would be really suprised if they did PG-13

I'm supporting 2D animation. Because 3D could just be wrong in many ways. If it was claymation like chicken run i'd personally kill myself. All the characters in chicken run look simply comical. I don't want the redwall characters to look comical. I want cluny to look evil and proper and matthias a little mouse. If they do it 3D like shrek/toy story i might watch it simply to watch. But it'd still look funny. Or if its like finding nemo that'd be great but that'd probably take time and effort and money. Or they could do it real life, shoot mice and rats running around waving taped on swords lmao..okay that would just be weird..*coughs* ..i think about the stupidest things


I really hope Jack and Daniel do the music. It wouldn't be the same without it.

I agree! The redwall tv theme song was just awsome. I could just see the beggining of the redwall movie starting showing shots of mossflower and redwall abbey and cluny on the hay-cart with the theme song goin'
And the background music is good too
I wish composer guy was here




I didn't mean I disliked all Disney movies. Tarzan and Lilo and Stitch...I loved those. Brother Bear looks neat too.
I just meant all the recent sequels (from other companies, but mostly Disney) that took about ten minutes to write.


I agre their sequels are simply dreadful. Cinderella 2, Lady And The Tramp 2, Tarzan And Jane, etc are examples of the disgrace. I personally like disney movies. When i go to the theaters to watch a disney movie i can say that i would be fairly satisfied. A nice flic

Nora the Rover
October 28th, 2003, 05:14 PM
Which actors should do the voices for the characters?
I'm not really quite sure myself, but I'd like to hear some other opinions and ideas...

Madd The Sane
October 29th, 2003, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by Martin the Warrior
"Correct"... the book? I don't think it needs to be corrected, personally. ;)

What I mean is the fact that many points in Redwall conflict with the other books. :eek: It may be possible if the person is trying to make the whole series into movies, they wouldn't want any of the information conflicting.

Lord Servone
November 2nd, 2003, 02:34 AM
I just hope Haley Joel Osment isn't the voice of Matthias... xP.

Here's some ideas for a "famous" cast for Redwall (I'm dipping into the "dream cast" list for my "Ivan" movie for some of these, btw ;P). I put "(???)" over decisions I'm unsure of...:

Tim Roth-Cluny
John Cleese- Basil Stag Hare
Michael Gambon- Abbot Mortimer
Jonathan Pryce- Abbot Alf
James Earl Jones- Asmodeus (you see him as a badger lord, I see him as Asmodeus)
Alan Cumming- Kilconey
Tony Jay- Shadow
Rob Paulson (???)-Cheesethief
Michael Palin-Redtooth
Jim Cummings(???)- Log-a-Log

If only Richard Harris were still alive...he would have been my choice for Methseluh (forgive spelling....explanation for it later in post)


Other Books:
David Thewlis- Slagar the Cruel
Christian Bale- Martin (this is a hard one for me but Bale's very versitile..)
Alan Rickman- Ulbaz Madeyes
Brian Blessed- Clogg
Robbie Coletrain- Orlando the Axe
Gerard Butler- Gonff (I have my reasons...)
Guy Pierce - Ferrangho (Its 2:30 so forgive my spelling...looks more like the name of the guy from the Hulk show)

What do you think of that list?

Keyla
November 2nd, 2003, 10:03 AM
There's an editorial on the main site in regards to such a thing, although I believe it was written about a year ago.
It's not by me so this is not shameless plugging, though while you're there...*cough*

Senav
November 2nd, 2003, 04:14 PM
*thinks* I've seen/heard some of those actors. John Cleese, everybody loves him, don't they?
Who is Tim Roth? What movies has he been in? I'm annoying because I don't know any of these actors, aren't I?

Lord Servone
November 2nd, 2003, 05:37 PM
Tim Roth is a good villain actor (though he was the good guy in one of my favorites, Resevoir Dogs). He's in such movies as Rob Roy (the "main" bad guy, this role nominated him for an Oscar) , Planet of the Apes (the bad chimp), The Musketeer (man in black)...that's just to name a quick few... He was also the original choice to play Snape in Harry Potter...

Senav
November 3rd, 2003, 04:47 PM
Should it alarm you that I've heard of these movies but never seen them? *is tarred and feathered* I'll just take your word for it.

t@gg :)
November 6th, 2003, 01:29 PM
I will still go see the movie even if people say it sucks!

t@gg :)
November 7th, 2003, 02:36 PM
redwall rules and i dont care what people say about it.

LordTBT
November 7th, 2003, 04:14 PM
You dont know WHO JOHN CLEESE IS????????????????????????

Please go to your local Blockbuster. Please go to comedy.
Please go to Monty Python. Please take every movie off the shelf.
Then go rent them all. seriously im not joking. If you have to ask who John Cleese is, go rent every single Monty Python movie.

Senav
November 7th, 2003, 05:37 PM
Who're you talking to? Not me, I know Sir Cleese.
Would you believe that our local video rental doesn't have Monty Python and the Holy Grail? For shame...

Chelki Sureshot
November 18th, 2003, 05:59 PM
Ha! I love those movies! But that's getting off topic. I wish that the would who played Constance on the tapes would do the movie. But maybe she'd be a better Mellus. Hmmmm. . .

3D3D3D3D3D3D3D3D!!!!!!!!

Chesk Otter
December 3rd, 2003, 09:44 PM
I will read all those 4 pages I skipped later. I think to make the movie different they will either do one of the earlier (chronologically) books that they haven't done for the t.v. show or just plain make the animation waaaaaaaay better (not that it's bad, just better for the big screen).

LordTBT
December 4th, 2003, 12:28 AM
OK well if you can see rated R movies, rent 'A Fish Called Wanda'

John Cleese is also the new Q in the James Bond movies.

Lord Sarkin
December 22nd, 2003, 09:13 AM
a little off subject but anyway you want to make the movie cartoon or graphicly animate it it still uses computers.I asked Brain in person if he would make a redwall VG and he said never in his life.I am confused!

Senav
December 22nd, 2003, 05:42 PM
Yeah, you use computers for traditional animation. Is that an oxymoron?
3D animation is what it sounds like, the imagers are computer generated, traditional animation just uses computers to make the job go quicker, I think.
No 3D! No 3D! No 3D! *starts a protest*

Lord Sarkin
December 22nd, 2003, 11:35 PM
now,now Senav, theirs no need for a riot,i am not boycotting or rioting computers at all.my life revolves around computers,i know its sad but it serves a purpose.i am just a tad bit confused thats all.

LordTBT
December 23rd, 2003, 01:47 AM
while computer animation is extremely cool and i like it(pixar type stuff), I think Disney needs to get back to basics and do something like Bambi or Fantasia, where they used real cartoonists/artists. If you go back and watch those, you'll see the real mastery of the craft. It's impressive.

The Red Badger
December 23rd, 2003, 11:45 AM
Never gonna happen while Michael Eisner is in charge. The Florida animation studio (responsible for Mulan, Lilo & Stitch, and Brother Bear) is in "limbo" until next year, when Eisner decides whether it'll be shut down or not. . . but the other divisions down there are ALREADY fighting over the animators' parking spots.

Lord Servone
December 23rd, 2003, 02:39 PM
Eisner's a fool... its not the animation that's the problem...its the story. 2-D animated movies have just as much potenial as 3-D...Finding Nemo would have done just as well if it were 2-D...because it had a good story and was done well. However, Disney makes a couple of movies that don't do too well (IE Treasure Planet) and its all "2-D animation has gone the way of the passenger pigeon"...those idiots should look and see how well Lilo & Stitch did...and Brother Bear didn't do too bad itself. Treasure Planet looked like a terrible idea and wasn't really marketed too well, if I remember right. What Disney needs to do is get the writing spark that they had with their masterpieces (do they even call their new movies that?) like the Lion King, Aladdin, and Beauty and the Beast...Eisner needs to be smacked upside the head....or resign, the fool.

There's my spiel...I am done.


I asked Brain in person if he would make a redwall VG and he said never in his life.I am confused!

I don't know why you would be confused...BJ doesn't like video games (I believe he uses the term "dispise"). He probably sees them as mindnumbing and timewasting, etc. It has nothing to do with the animation being done on computer....I hope that makes sense xP

Glenner
December 27th, 2003, 01:55 PM
I think what is an absolute must for this film is a great score. It doesn't necessarily have to be done by Jack an Daniel, as there are probably other composers capable of doing a beautiful score as well.

I don't think that the movie has to be a G to draw children. Plenty of movies that are aimed toward kids are rated PG. Look at all the kids that swamped theatres to see the Harry Potter films, which are rated PG.

One other thing though- I wonder what BJ is going to do with the commericalism that inevitably follows an animated film? Will he be able to have control on what they put on the market? I hope so.

LordTBT
December 29th, 2003, 09:15 PM
Ironically, the new MAD magazine has a comic about what would happen if Walt Disney came back and saw what's happened to Disney in the current times. He talks with Eisner and it's quite hilarious.


The Florida animation studio (responsible for Mulan, Lilo & Stitch, and Brother Bear)

Isnt there some computer animation done in these films too though?

Senav
December 30th, 2003, 04:47 PM
Isnt there some computer animation done in these films too though?
Of course. People can't do anything without computers now, even people who can't use the blasted things. But yes, for the most part they were animated traditionally...

Because traditional animation ROCKS.

LordTBT
December 30th, 2003, 05:50 PM
sure as heck fooled me. everything looks computer drawn and colored, even in those films

Martin the Warrior
December 31st, 2003, 08:01 PM
I'm curious to learn whether you mean that as a compliment or a criticism, TBT. ;)

Computers may be used for coloring and some special effects shots (similar to how The Lion King used computers for the wildebeest stampede), but the animation is all done by hand.

I do recall that the (Earth) backgrounds for Lilo & Stitch were done with watercolors, though.

LordTBT
December 31st, 2003, 08:14 PM
i meant it as criticism. the classics, like fantasia, bambi, pinnochio, snow white, etc. were all hand drawn, and drawn extremely well. I dont think that kind of talent exists anymore, which is why we dont see too many films like that, plus the consumer demand for computer animation.

Martin the Warrior
January 1st, 2004, 02:40 PM
That's a rather unfair criticism, then. While the artistic style of the older movies may be preferable, the actual animation (which is the technical side of the craft) of the newer films is far superior.

Virtually all of Disney's animated films are hand drawn, from Snow White to Brother Bear (Disney's only foray into computer-animation was Dinosaur). You can't (fairly) praise the early movies for it while withholding that praise from the later ones.

Stories are what makes or breaks a film. With regards to the Florida studio, they've pretty much delivered on that count.

LordTBT
January 1st, 2004, 04:43 PM
the later movies are good, yes, but you dont see the real skill in animation. Not to say computer animators arent good at what they do, i just mean the all out drawing everything.

Martin the Warrior
January 1st, 2004, 07:36 PM
As I said, all the current movies are drawn by hand, frame by frame. They are not "computer animators".

LordTBT
January 2nd, 2004, 12:49 AM
well they are doing crazy camera angles and coloring with computers at least

Madd The Sane
January 2nd, 2004, 10:30 AM
would everyone please, PLEASE get back to the main topic?!

People are always making 3D animation better. They can possibly do Shrek much better now than it was a few years ago. It isn't always bad-looking.

Nora the Rover
January 2nd, 2004, 05:03 PM
I suppose what people are trying to say, is that hand-drawn animation is considered 'classic', as it's been around for almost a century, and it seems the better option. Computer animation and 3D effects have only been around for a shorter amount of time, and with the constant, (and fast), movement of technology, it improves every year or so, making earlier computer animated films look ridiculous. If Redwall is made into that sort of film, alot of people might not want to watch it in later years because of the advancements in computer animation.
I hope this doesn't sound like a load of useless jumble...

Chelki Sureshot
January 3rd, 2004, 01:44 PM
Classic? **laughs** I'm not trying to be rude, Nora, and your post wasn't a lot of useless jumble. It made a lot of sense. But anyone who has seen the TV shows knows how bad the animation is. I mean, it's better than a Pokemon show or something, but hinestly. IT's horrible. I could go on forever and ever about the animation. I think people will enjoy the 3D more because it looks realer.

3D! 3D! 3D! 3D! 3D! 3D! 3D!

Senav
January 3rd, 2004, 03:45 PM
3D doesn't have to be "realer". I could probably find a bunch of CG TV shows that use cartoony animation. The Watership Down movie uses 2D and has pretty realistic animals (at least , the rabbits were...). Not that I don't like 3D.

And the TV show's animation wasn't THAT bad. For some reason, more popular shows have the exact same animation, quality-wise.

Slagar the Cruel
January 3rd, 2004, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Senav
And the TV show's animation wasn't THAT bad. For some reason, more popular shows have the exact same animation, quality-wise. On the contrary, I'd say that the TV show's animation was excellent. The design of the characters walked the balance of animal and human quite nicely, the coloring (which nicely implemented shading) ranged from vibrant and cheerful hues to dark and ominous ones, and overall I think the atmosphere of the books was captured very well. While I think the animation would have to be tuned up a bit for the movie, I think the animation was perfect for the medium.

LordTBT
January 3rd, 2004, 06:31 PM
i'll take fantasia over toy story any day of the week

Glenner
January 5th, 2004, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Slagar the Cruel
On the contrary, I'd say that the TV show's animation was excellent. The design of the characters walked the balance of animal and human quite nicely, the coloring (which nicely implemented shading) ranged from vibrant and cheerful hues to dark and ominous ones, and overall I think the atmosphere of the books was captured very well. While I think the animation would have to be tuned up a bit for the movie, I think the animation was perfect for the medium.

Yes, for a television series the animation was nice, but for a movie I would expect much better attention to detail.

Lord Sarkin
January 6th, 2004, 04:08 PM
my imagination is much better then the tv show, if they make the movie it better not be made in the same style of the show.i dont think the tv show is all that great,mostly because its aimed at kids but,oh well there nothing i can do.

Chesk Otter
January 22nd, 2004, 04:30 PM
So what's happening with this?

Chelki Sureshot
January 22nd, 2004, 09:03 PM
**shrugs** I don't think so. Anyway, On my billionth time watching the first 6 episodes of Redwall, I noticed a lot (well maybe not a lot) of mistakes. #6, it shows an otter cheering at the very end when Matthias brings back the apestry. In that shot his eyes are purple. Then the next shot it shows the abbot with thte otter standing behing. You can see the otter's eyes change from purple to red. I mean, come on. They could've done way better then that. 3D all the way!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, and I hated how Matthias went and rescued the tapestry with Basil and Jess. It totally takes away their glory. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Martin the Warrior
January 24th, 2004, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by Chesk Otter
So what's happening with this?

At the moment, nothing. News is likely to be slow in coming-- two years is the earliest we could expect a release, but that would not bode well for the quality of the film. In this case, slow news is good news. ;)

I'm keeping my ears open, so as soon as I know anything it'll be on the Newsline. For now, though, we wait.

Madd The Sane
February 13th, 2004, 04:38 PM
Still, it would be promising to know if the movie is going to be recorded and made.

skipperofotterswot
May 17th, 2004, 03:08 PM
REDWALL IS BEING MADE A MOVIE?! WITCH BOOK?!
:confused:

Martin the Warrior
May 17th, 2004, 03:54 PM
Presumably Redwall itself.

Cheesethief
May 18th, 2004, 06:09 AM
if a movie is in the pipeline ill assume it is in its preliminary stages.

Madd The Sane
June 24th, 2004, 05:08 PM
Does anyone have any guess as to what style it is going to be? Or are people just dreaming right now? It probably won't be live action film, and if it is then it's not going to be too good.

So what voice actors are they going to be?

Senav
June 24th, 2004, 07:15 PM
I would bet that it's going to be in a style similar to the TV show. Which makes sense.

Jandura
June 25th, 2004, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Nora the Rover

I'd like to see Redwall in computer animation, somewhat like Stuart Little, Shrek, or Finding Nemo. (Though not as geared towards a younger audience.)


Gearing to the right audience, is kind of easy for this situation. Of course, in other situations its harder.

Cheesethief
June 25th, 2004, 12:37 PM
perhaps it could be a 12a, which means if youre under 12 you go with an adult. it would be cool to be computer animated, but disney would snap it up, and ruin it. i wouldnt like a big screen-film to be animation, as in the tv show, not that i dont like it, but it would look all grainy probably.

Lord Servone
June 25th, 2004, 01:47 PM
I don't know if I said this earlier or not, but I think 2D animation would be the best for a Redwall movie. I just think its a movie that 3D wouldn't be the best for... maybe a combination of both styles would be good (if done well, of course).


Originally posted by Cheesethief
but disney would snap it up, and ruin it. .

I prefer if they didn't touch it, but maybe Disney would finally be able to make a good cartoon movie again if they did Redwall...as I said at Blank Page Productions, Disney has a problem with getting good stories, its not the animation's fault that its failing. Home on the Range was a terrible movie. If they did Redwall and had a good script, it would be good.
I doubt Disney would do it (unless it was a division company that produced it)...its not a thing like it but they may see it as being too similar to Robin Hood...it might (and I emphasize might) be too violent for Disney.
Anyway, again, I doubt Disney will touch Redwall.

Felldoh
June 25th, 2004, 03:25 PM
I don't have much faith in Disney... I'd like the people who did the Watership Down movie to do a Redwall movie. 2D animation would be the best form of it too in my opinion. I'd just hope they wouldn't try and cut down the violence.

Trowbaggs
June 29th, 2004, 08:42 PM
I think the characters should be computer animated and have the background be real. Like what they did in The Lord Of The Rings with Gollum. Just film a spot and add the computer animated characters in. p.s, I hope it's rated PG-13. ;)

Cheesethief
July 2nd, 2004, 03:23 PM
good idea trows. and welcome to the forums. im cheese.*holds out hand* welcome!

Trowbaggs
July 2nd, 2004, 04:32 PM
Thanks for the introduction cheese. How many posts do you have to make to become a patroller?

LadyBeelze
July 2nd, 2004, 06:44 PM
You need 100 posts to become a patroller but please don't try to spam to get it. Okay?

Firerunner
July 8th, 2004, 09:21 AM
I think it should be like LOTR,too.If they do make the movie I hope there is blood! ;)

LadyBeelze
July 8th, 2004, 02:01 PM
Yeah but blood isn't everything. It doesn't matter if there's blood or not as long as it's well done. *hopes that there will be a redall movie*

Firerunner
July 8th, 2004, 02:22 PM
Tis' True!!!!!!!!!!

Cinnabarr Rivershell
July 8th, 2004, 07:47 PM
The movie in my eyes should be 2D animated. It would look better for Redwall. 3D is too modern looking for something classic and rustic as Redwall is. Anyways, I've never been fond of 3D things, except for Beast Wars That show was awsome!

Cheesethief
July 9th, 2004, 12:09 PM
sure trow, dont spam. keep making good comments.
hi firerunner. wow nly five days or so and its changed here!
and 2d was the cartoons, i dont dislike them but...again?

Chelki Sureshot
July 14th, 2004, 05:40 PM
The sword looks so pathetic in 2D. Do you really want it to look like that in a movie where a lot more people will watch it than in the shows?

Cinnabarr Rivershell
July 14th, 2004, 06:22 PM
A 3D sword might be a little frightening for a five year old, don't ya think Chelki?
After all, you must remember that Redwall targets all ages, including children under the age of 9.

Trowbaggs
July 14th, 2004, 06:45 PM
If it targets all ages it should appeal to the older people to. Not just some little baby movie for 5 year olds to watch.

Slagar the Cruel
July 14th, 2004, 06:46 PM
The sword looks so pathetic in 2D.
No, a 2D sword looks no more pathetic than a 3D sword.

Trowbaggs
July 14th, 2004, 06:49 PM
If done right a 3D sword could look just as real as an actual sword.

Martin the Warrior
July 14th, 2004, 08:47 PM
And done right a 2D sword could surpass a 3D sword. It's hardly worth mentioning. ;)


If it targets all ages it should appeal to the older people to. Not just some little baby movie for 5 year olds to watch.

The key word is "older people too". You cannot choose to appeal to an older demographic at the expense of the younger one, as a "PG-13" rating would. It needs to be okay for both audiences, which also means you can't have a ton of blood and graphic violence (which shouldn't matter to fans of the book).

Trowbaggs
July 14th, 2004, 08:55 PM
yah, I guess your right. PG would be pretty good. Like watership down. I loved that movie. Watched it a long time ago. I thought it had considerable bloodshed. Not to much but just right

Cinnabarr Rivershell
July 15th, 2004, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by Trowbaggs

thought it had considerable bloodshed. Not to much but just right
Dude, what's your whole craving for blood thing? Not to much but just right. A truely genuine, good movie doesn't have to have even one ounce of blood spilt. Plot depth, character development, motives. These and more make a good movie, and if Redwall were to be made into a movie, it would be a genuine, good movie, judging on the man who created Redwall.

Trowbaggs
July 15th, 2004, 07:54 AM
Do you know something, your right. I was being a stupid blood thirsty maniac. Lord Of The Rings had hardly any blood and I thought it was the best battle movie of all time. I didnt really give any thought to it. But I beleive some non fiction movies have to have alot of blood to show how horrible the event really was. (I am Roman Catholic so this is my opinion) Like in the Passion Of The Christ. Mel wanted to show the horrible sufferings Jesus went through just to show how much he loved us. In this kind of movie I think you need sickening blood.

Sagebrush
July 15th, 2004, 09:49 AM
I somewhat agree with Trowbaggs. I am a Christian, and the Passion was a good example. I think it should have blood, but I didn't see it. I knew I couldn't.
With Redwall, I don't want fake looking blood...
well, here's an example. If anyone has seen Ralph Bakshi's adaptation of The Lord of the Rings, take a look at that.
I think Redwall has to have some blood, in a sense, to make it believable. But I don't think it needs to be gory. Nothing extravagant. I couldn't see LotR until I read the books, it was too scary. But Redwall, I do want anyone to be able to see..
let's just say I am really scared. I have been reading the Redwall books for the longest time, and I'm a bit of a purist! If it looks cheesy...I will be so upset.

Firerunner
July 15th, 2004, 10:30 AM
Dude, I'm Catholic too.I just gotta say this: "Rocky" is one of the best movies ever.

Chelki Sureshot
July 15th, 2004, 10:51 AM
A 3D sword might be a little frightening for a five year old, don't ya think Chelki?

No.

Martin, if I see it, I'll believe it. Nelvana did it horribly, and I really don't want to take that chance again. (Even though I will have nothing to do with the movie.:rolleyes:)

Martin the Warrior
July 17th, 2004, 10:27 PM
The only thing Nelvana did wrong with the sword (in my opinion) was having "I Am That Is" engraved upon it. It was a fairly well animated broadsword aside from that. That aside, the production value of a theatrical motion picture would far exceed a half-hour television series and the animators would be able to make virtually everything look better. 2D swords are done well all the time-- quite a few examples can be cited from anime series (Cowboy Bebop, Rurouni Kenshin, Escaflowne, even Dragon Ball Z, to name a few). The important thing, I think, is ensuring that the sword looks like a part of the movie's world and not, say, some 3D monstrosity standing out in-front of 2D animation.

::cough2Dallthewaycough::

;)

Mariel StormRider
July 18th, 2004, 01:27 AM
I think the characters should be computer animated and have the background be real. Like what they did in The Lord Of The Rings with Gollum. Just film a spot and add the computer animated characters in. p.s, I hope it's rated PG-13. ;)

That would be awesome, just maybe too expensive for their budget. But hey, we can always dream:) I really hope they don't try to tone down the violence and make it look all cheesy. I know it's a kid's book, but for a Redwall movie to be serious enough to do the book justice, it should have some intense fighting scenes, like for example as much as Lord of the Rings has

Cheesethief
July 18th, 2004, 06:08 AM
hi sagebrush. i saw bashki's lotr and it was...rubbish.
stop saying cheesy, i think youre talking to me!
and the 2d series had blood. when asmodeus was killed.

Felldoh
July 18th, 2004, 07:37 PM
Hey, it had some when Cheesethief was killed, or at least in the tapestry shot.

Cheesethief
July 19th, 2004, 01:19 PM
i really dont like to talk about that. :o
;)

Aleisou Swiftpounce
July 30th, 2004, 10:13 AM
Did it have some when Felldoh was killed? I didn't see MtW... even though I'd like to.
Felldoh.
Badrang.
Martin.
Why can't I just see it? WHY?

Ahem. Anyway, my opinions on this... I'd have to agree with Trowbaggs. A real background, and well animated characters with real people actually behind their movement would be great, only too expensive. Bloodshed does not have to be that much, but I think a little bit will do it good. Like on the tapestry when in Series 1 it showed

Matthias standing over the dead Asmodeous

Firerunner
July 30th, 2004, 10:21 AM
ya need a spoiler around the Felldoh thing ;) I think

Aleisou Swiftpounce
July 30th, 2004, 11:39 AM
Eep... Can you edit your posts?

Firerunner
July 30th, 2004, 11:58 AM
I think but I don't know how.

Lord Servone
July 30th, 2004, 01:08 PM
There was no blood...Badrang's army just dispersed and his limp body was lying there.

(This isn't a spoiler because I didn't say WHO I was talking about! Muah ha ha ha! I'm evil in that way.)

Felldoh
July 30th, 2004, 02:53 PM
I was dissapointed majorly by Felldoh's death. I knew they were not going to show much (if any) blood, but I was hoping they would have left in his going berserk and killing nearly 30 foes with a piece of wood before getting killed himself.

Aleisou Swiftpounce
July 30th, 2004, 03:11 PM
Hmm, I bet Badrang's death was rather pathetic too. Grr... why does this have to be a spoiler? It's obvious that the evil warlord always dies!

Felldoh
July 30th, 2004, 03:18 PM
Actually, I thought they did good on his death. No blood of course, but... dang... I didn't know they could show him getting impaled like that on PBS.

Firerunner
July 30th, 2004, 03:37 PM
I forgot how he died.Can someone refresh my memory?

Cheesethief
July 30th, 2004, 04:30 PM
martin just...wasted him with the sword. if you want to edit posts, click on "edit" in the bottom right within an hour, otherwise, get a scribe.
why you have to use a spoiler tag? cos. *looks pleased with self*. cinnabarr, when he comes back, he'll tell ya.
al, you are so right about the tapestry thing.

Aleisou Swiftpounce
July 31st, 2004, 06:58 AM
Err, Ok...
Some scribe come over here!

Chelki Sureshot
August 10th, 2004, 01:26 PM
I didn't know they could show him getting impaled like that on PBS. That's probably why they don't show it on the Spokane PBS.

Felldoh
August 10th, 2004, 06:12 PM
I watched it over and I guess it wasn't that bad really... but still. I know that one scence wouldn't be enough to not air the show, they could just edit it out afterall.

Cinnabarr Rivershell
August 10th, 2004, 07:14 PM
why you have to use a spoiler tag? cos. *looks pleased with self*. cinnabarr, when he comes back, he'll tell ya.

Oh, how I would like to, but my heart still feels pain when the spoiler arguements arise. I would love to tell everyone hear my views on spoilers, but it will not be so. Not after several people asked me to stop. Unfortunelty I must be considerate and keep my spoiler views to myslef. But... If you really want to know, I supose you could always PM me and I'll gladdly PM you back with my views on spoilers. That will be okay, as it will not be seen to the public on the forums.

Goddess of Darkness
August 11th, 2004, 03:04 AM
On the topic of blood(you guys are making me hungry), I have to say that if they had no blood, it would ruin it for me AND NOT JUST BECAUSE I'M A PSYCOTIC KILLER! To make it look real THERE HAS TO BE BLOOD!!! IT'S A WAR, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! *breathing heavily and glaring**clears throat* Ahem, now that that's out of my system, I can continue. Seriously, there should be a realistic amount of blood. When they have violence, they should stop and think "Okay, so what would be the result of this injury gore-wise?" and animate accordingly(Sorry, this is the way I speak when I'm ranting). Of course, it would be at least equally as awful if they had unrealistic blood in unrealisticly vast amounts(like in the "Black Night" scene in the Holy Grail, or in Kill Bill). I'm sorry, but in a story about a war, one simply CANNOT have NO BLOOD. I mean who here has seen Saving Private Ryan? Would it have been nearly as good if the gore was done like the "Black Night" losing his limbs? NO! And Kill Bill would have been much better had it had realistic blood. I cannot stress enough that it must be done right. End rant.

P.S. What? Me watching the gory parts of Saving Private Ryan in slow motion, rewind, and then slow motion rewind? I should say not! And going in rewind to watch people that had been blown up reassemble? What an accusation! *shifty eyes*

Madd The Sane
August 11th, 2004, 09:36 AM
If you havae too much blood, or even realistic ammounts of blood, it will end up being not sutible for a younger audience. Not to mention that it will gross some people out if you have too much blood :(

Lord Servone
August 11th, 2004, 11:58 AM
The unreal amount of blood was part of the humor of Kill Bill...it was paying homage to the Japanese Samurai movies. Also, it was supposed to be funny. If it had realistic gore, it would've not been so much.

And Redwall would be a cartoon! Why would you put lots of blood in a cartoon? Sure, a little bit wouldn't hurt (like the amount in Secret of Nimh or Watership Down, or maybe Princess Monoke (though that's an anime and animes are very bad examples as they exagerate it very much)) but not excessive blood, like actually showing Kilconey getting cleaved in half and blood spurting out. Why do people want a Redwall cartoon to get an R rating so badly when BJ's target audience was children? Geesh...sickos. xP.
True, Redwall shouldn't get a G rating, but it shouldn't get anything worse than a PG or, maybe even a mild PG-13...huh...that comment sounds familiar.

Oh, and to make my point about not all CGI looking good from earlier in either this topic or another? Take a look at the upcoming movie Shark Tale...pitiful! Ugly! Awful! Just thought I'd take the time to bash that movie and emphasize a point at the same time.

Goddess of Darkness
August 16th, 2004, 02:41 AM
About Kill Bill, I liked it how it was, I just think that it would have been better as a good action film with funny parts than just an okay comedy action movie. That's just my opinion, though.

((Did that post even make sense? And if it did, did it have anything to do with the topic? I don't think so...oh well...))

Lonna Bowstripe
August 16th, 2004, 01:25 PM
The key word is "older people too". You cannot choose to appeal to an older demographic at the expense of the younger one, as a "PG-13" rating would. It needs to be okay for both audiences, which also means you can't have a ton of blood and graphic violence (which shouldn't matter to fans of the book).

I totally agree with Martin. It has to be appealing to younger kids too. (I first read Redwall when I was 7.) Why don't they make it a PG rating, and have about as much blood as Chamber of Secrets. (I haven't seen HP3 yet, and I've heard it's so bad I don't want to. :p )

As to the 2D cartoon, that would be perfect. It wouldn't seem right if it was like Shrek, and actors, no way.

Madd The Sane
August 17th, 2004, 09:29 AM
Oh, and to make my point about not all CGI looking good from earlier in either this topic or another? Take a look at the upcoming movie Shark Tale...pitiful! Ugly! Awful! Just thought I'd take the time to bash that movie and emphasize a point at the same time.
Some of the CGI's from Disney have a stylized look. Shrek also had a stylized look, but I really didn't notice it that much. I just know that they could make it look realistic and/or really bad and/or stylized and/or really good. The main thing is the story, though, isn't it?

Lord Servone
August 17th, 2004, 09:14 PM
That's exactly my point, Madd ;)

Arrowtail
July 21st, 2005, 03:19 PM
Phew, old topic...

So was there ever anymore news on this "Redwall Movie"? Or was it just an idea stuck in a magazine?

Martin the Warrior
July 22nd, 2005, 02:28 PM
There haven't been any details since the initial announcement, no.