Splinter Cell Media Convergence

You know, one thing I think that alot of people don't realize about entertainment media is that the point of view you have going into the project, will greatly affect how you perceive it.

Those of you who are regulars here know that Raymond Benson, whose evil twin David Michaels has written the Splinter Cell novels, is a BIG James Bond fan, which led to his writing several Bond novels, post Ian Fleming.

We were conversing once and I mentioned I had never seen any of the James Bond films. Well, after he kicked my ass then picked me up off the floor, he recommended a few. One of them, the 007 classic, Goldfinger.

So, I went out and purchased Goldfinger, and right from the start, didn't like it.

See, from James Bond I was expecting like...a spy. A REAL spy. For those who haven't seen the movie, in the very beginning, he is moving through the water with this fake duck on his head for cover. He takes off his "cover" then just throws it down, leaving it to possibly be discovered. Then two seconds later, he attacks a guard and leaves the body out in the light, where it might be found. Then later in the movie, he grabs this hotel maid and uses her keys to open the door to Goldfingers room, then smiles and thanks her. Hello?? What's to keep her from calling security and saying that some man just broke into the room of one of the hotels most distinguished guests? This just turned me off from the movie right off the bat. He wasn't covering his tracks. What kind of spy is he??

So, I finished the movie and emailed Raymond Benson and told him what I thought, to which he replied, "Bond isn't realism. He's a fantasy spy." Well, maybe, if I would have been expecting a "fantasy spy" going in, I would not have been so put off by what I saw. I would have been expecting it. Again, as I stated in the opening, my expectations going into the film largely influenced my final opinion.

But this blog isn't to discuss Bond, it's to discuss Fisher. So, here is how all this relates to Sam...

I recently read an absolutely ridiculous message from someone being very critical of the authenticity of the Splinter Cell novels. This person seemed to think that because he is an "aspiring writer", Benson was to take his opinion more seriously than any of ours. [I say that guy is wanna be writer, and Raymond Benson is a many times published professional author, so that other guy needs to just shut the hell up.] But, I read this message and saw something in it that I have seen in the discussions of the Splinter Cell movie. And since the movie hasn't been made yet, there is something I want to point out, so you will have this in mind when you go see it.

First of all, just like anyone can call themselves "aspiring writers", anyone can post their opinion on a blog, so why should you take my opinion over anyone elses? Well I study the media in college. Electronic Media specifically, but media convergence is a big part of that. [Media convergence is when one type of entertainment switches to another medium. For example Splinter Cell started as a video game, but converged into a book and movie. Charlies Angels was a TV show that converged into a film series..etc]

So, when you get right down to it, my opinion is no better than anyone else's at face value. I just ask you to consider the education from which I speak.

Splinter Cell, the video game, will always be different than the books and movie. Alot of those that didn't like the novels, felt that way because they went in expecting the books to be literary versions of the games. In the same vein, if you are expecting the movie to be exactly like the games, you will walk out of the theater disappointed, I promise you. In the games, the point is for there to be no action and no thrills. Don't be detected, infiltrate some place, grab the file, tap the phone..whatever, and extract as soon as possible. It's exciting in the games because the digital Sam Fisher is merely a tool that is used to make it seem like YOU are in that situation. That's why in the games there can be very little action but still be exciting, it's interactive.

Now I ask you, do you really want THAT in a movie or book? How interesting would that be? A movie with no excitement, no action, more or less...no plot? An hour and a half of Sam going into somewhere, doing something...then leaving without anything happening. Because, remember, assuming Sam did his job right, no one saw him. There has to be some action to hold the attention of the reader/movie goer. The author of the books knows that, the people who will be making the movie know that, but for some reason, alot of fans don't. They are not necessarily wrong in their opinions, but they are going in with the wrong expectations.

There is no interaction in the books or movies, so your attention is not necessarily glued to the screen anymore. The author of the books and the writer of the movie [JT Petty please God] does not have the interactive element that game developers have to keep your attention, so they have to turn to action to keep you interested. I mean we all love those exciting "stealthy" moments in the game where you are with your back to the wall and a guard walks literally inches from you, but how many of those can you put in a movie before it gets old?

Personally, I thought the books were awesome, and at this point, it's a bit of a toss up if the movie will even get made, but my point with this post was not to encourage you to feel my way about any possible future books or movies. I just want to point out that with every different medium, there is a different set of rules for what is acceptable. Video games, since they are the most interactive medium, can depend less on plot than books or film. So, before you sit down to read "Operation Barracuda" or buy that ticket to see "Splinter Cell: The Movie", just please take my words with you, and go in with an open mind.