RTT once again

Feb 18, 2006
92
0
76
Don't know if this has been suggested before, but what's the opinion if they ever made a new version of the film, one true to the facts as we now know them: the Titanic in pieces, etc?
With the current climate over National Security and the like, the film's plot of retrieving the "byzanium" or "upsy-daisyium" or whatever it was for national defense makes more sense now, but what of the idea of a remake?
One could even raise the sanctity of the wreck site versus the validity of such an undertaking, I'd love to see a cameo by the watchful ghosts of "Something's Alive on the Titanic". Hey, they could mention this Website and what we Titaniacs stand for!
(Not that it'll ever really happen, but we can dream.)
 

John Clifford

Member
Nov 12, 2000
1,686
0
166
56
Since we know that bringing the ship back up is now impossible we can suggest an idea of a salvage expedition to chart the areas and do a "Jake & Elmo" retrieval plot.

For plot purposes we can even think of a scenario with a submersible entangled, and the "running out of air" idea involved, if not the degrading deck idea.

Of course the Byzantium Shield has to be designed, like it was in the book.

Now the question: who can play who??
And "NO!!!!!", we don't include the "wormie on the hookie" line.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>And "NO!!!!!", we don't include the "wormie on the hookie" line.<<

Thanks for that small mercy!

Beyond that, I think if that if somebody wants to remake Raise The Titanic, they should do it in such a way that's actually faithful to the book. The original failed that litmus test in grand style.
 
I've always thought that it would be intriguing to remake it closer to the book (which is much more exciting than the book).

But, knowing what we know now, it would be impossible to use the Titanic.

Why not remake it remaining faithful to the book but using a fictional wreck? Just change the name of the ship and tweak the dates of the sinking. Thinly-veiled, of course.

Coming next spring, Raise the Gigantic!
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Why not remake it remaining faithful to the book but using a fictional wreck?<<

Because then it would be seen as a cheap rip off of RTT. (Even if the expence of the CGI would make Bill Gates wince.) Some things are just better left alone.
 
Well, Michael, I don't think the movie-going public or Bill Gates is in danger of this happening.

They could film a close-up of the book and someone flipping through every page...and Clive Cussler would *still* sue for the changes to the story.

It's understandable. I think after the horrors that they inflicted on us with the ham-fisted RTT adaptation and his anger over Sahara, Clive Cussler would rather see Valhalla Rising: The Musical than another film adaptation of one of his books.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
After the episode with RTT, I'm a bit surprised that Mr. Cussler could be talked into letting anybody do Sahara. I read the book a long time ago, but even with my dim memory, I could see that the ohnly thing the movie had in common with the book was the title.
 
Feb 18, 2006
92
0
76
Seems to be a debate here: Which would work better in the opinion of this Board:
1. A straightforward adaption of Cussler's book, with the ship being raised in one piece? (the original film left out a lot but did include that, and it would be very hard to top!) It would still be spectacular, but in effect a film of something that never happened and never could happen, like a Soviet moon landing.
2. A revision in line with the present facts about the wreck being pieces. You could have the political confrontations left out of the first film; indeed, they'd be obligatory to step up the plot, just substitute Korea (or the like) for Soviet Russia. John Clifford's idea about the submersible might work.
In neither case would the "wormie on the hookie" line be allowed!
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
I'd be inclined to go with Option One. It would be anachronistic in the light of subsequent historical findings but it seems to me that if one is going to make RTT, they should be faithful to the book itself.

As always, your milage may vary.
 
Nov 26, 2005
671
1
88
Adding to what has already been said, a remake RTT would not have the fantasy or sense of "mayyyybe it could happen" that the original did when it was released, and when the book was released.

Back then the general idea was that Titanic would be found in a similar condition to that of the movie Titanic. Simply because the impression was that with the ship being that deep and with the lack of oxygen there would be fewer destructive factors and that the ship would remain fairly sound. That added with the belief by most that she had gone to her grave in one piece.

Now that we know better, another RTT would most likely come off as an even bigger joke than the original movie did in the eyes of the general public (not Titaniacs like us). ;-) I'm sure most movie production companies realize this and wouldn't even take enough of a chance to make it into a cheap miniseries.
 
Nov 15, 2006
131
0
86
At the 2003 CANNES Film Festival, there was a rumour that RTT could be in the pipeline for a remake, but nothing came of it.

Personally, I would like to see a faithful version of the book made.
 
Apr 3, 2005
69
0
76
Actually, you COULD theoretically raise the Titanic even in the shape it's in now, but why would you?
We have the technology to do it, (even if it's in it's infancy) but the costs would be so high and the rewards so low it would be basically like throwing money away into a bottomless pit.
Now, if they made a movie based on "Ghost of the grand banks" then it may be worth watching.
For those wondering, Arthur C. Clarke (Think it was him) wrote this book about Titanic and two companies exploring and raising the 2 pieces. It involved ghosts and such stuff, but did offer some interesting ideas though. It's a decent read.
For RTT, i think to be modern it would have to be closer to the books imho BUT involve at least trying and/or possibly raising the piece/s.
Who knows, maybe we'll get lucky and some sort of remake will happen...
 
Nov 15, 2006
131
0
86
I seriously doubt a remake will be done. If Cussler can turn down a whopping $10 million for rights to one of his novels being turned into a film, and knowing how much Cussler hated the original 1980 'Raise The Titanic' movie (he even walked out half way through the premiere), RTT will not be made. Cussler wants all his fingers and toes in the pie, but the studios wont let him do that.
 
Feb 18, 2006
92
0
76
Jonathon's right, a remake probably never gonna happen. On the other hand, people do get creative with Youtube and the like, the "Titanic Two: Jack's Back" clips are rather clever. I guess if RTT were ever redone at all it would be thru a couple guys (or girls) and a computer, and a LOT of CGI and be bounced all over the Web. It'd still be fun to try.
 
Nov 15, 2006
131
0
86
I think if a production company did offer Cussler the chance to write the script & co-produce it, then we could end up with a superb remake. . . . Here's hoping.
 
Mar 15, 2001
710
0
146
Its been quite a while since I read Raise The Titanic but I was wondering what was different from the book to the movie? I happened to like Raise The Titanic. My favorite scene was where the Titanic reaches New York and passes by the Statue Of Liberty. Why did Cussler not like the film version?
 
Nov 15, 2006
131
0
86
There is a huge differance between the Cussler book and the finished film, too much to mention. Most notable was that of the Titanic herself. In Cussler book, the liner is merely a hull and superstructure with no funnels, hardly any deck vents, broken masts, and when raised, she breaks the surface stern first. Unlike the film where she is neraly intact (except the remains of the 2nd stack) and breaks the surface bow first.

Most people except that the film is nothing like the book because many don't realise how many drafts the script went through. The stories cold war era took it's toll on the film, so without wanting to upset the boat (excuse the pun), after some 12 changes, the film sadly now longer resembled anything like Cusslers classic novel. Even the final draft was considerably differant than what you see on the big screen.

Cussler did not like the film because of a handfull of reasons - 1/ his speaking part was removed during editing, 2/ he was promised his novel would be portrayed acurately on the screen, 3/ the film Dirk Pitt resembled nothing like Cussler had described and 4/ he didn't like the looks of the ship.
 
Feb 18, 2006
92
0
76
Would Cussler agree to a remake more faithful to his book? I still think it could be "fudged" a bit in updating, blur fiction and fact better: the Titanic's hull would be intact yet the ship would be basically a repaired hull; the technology of the present day (2007) would be advanced enough, yet the Cold War idea would not be completely wrong (think North Korea). I'd leave out the romance angle altogether, the emphasis should be on suspense and thrill. Cussler's original idea might actually work better these days, what say?
 
Nov 15, 2006
131
0
86
Cussler still seems to maintain that he doesn't want any of his books turned into a movie. The first book was RAISE THE TITANIC, he didn't like the final product, with him walking out of the premiere half way through. It took him until a couple of years ago with SAHARA to agree to another book to film, but even that film didn't come out how he wanted it too. I don't think he will be bitten 3 times in a row.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
380
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Would Cussler agree to a remake more faithful to his book?<<

As I understand it, that was the promise made with the two books that were adapted for the silver screen. The promise was never delivered on and I don't see that he has any reason to trust anyone in Hollywood to do so. In any event, RTT was very much a Cold War oriented tale so modifying it to fit the present day wouldn't be faithful to the book. I just don't see him going for it.