what shouldn't be made into a film?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

I'm interested, is there any book, TV show, play, game, anything else, that to you should never have a place on the big screen?
I don't mean because they are really bad. I mean because you think that for whatever reason it could not be given justice if turned into a film.

Personaly i don't think the Zelda series should get a film. Mostly because of the fact that the best thing about Hyrule is the many different areas and people that live ther, and two or so hours could never give the gorrens, zoras ect ect the development that they deserve.

The Lord of the Rings.

Either it'd have to be made into 5 films (books 5 and 6 could be combined to the same movie), or they'd have to cut SO much of the main story out to boil it down to be only 3 movies that there would be so many plot holes as to make its director seem to be a retarded illiterate chimp.

Captcha: otsyTR $1.00 One dollar oysters? nom nom nom

madwarper:
The Lord of the Rings.

Either it'd have to be made into 5 films (books 5 and 6 could be combined to the same movie), or they'd have to cut SO much of the main story out to boil it down to be only 3 movies that there would be so many plot holes as to make its director seem to be a retarded illiterate chimp.

Ahoy there squire, are you from the past? Because I hate to break it to you, but that has totally already been done:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_film_trilogy

And it was awesome!

On topic, most board games like Ludo, Monopoly, Battleships etc. (I am aware that the last two are being made, but lets face it, they're going to suck) Although apparently the rock em sock em robots movie with Robert Downey Jr. was quite good, but that man craps excellence. I think it comes down to anything can make a great movie if you find the right angle to focus on, but most of the time Hollywood is just trying to quickly cash in on a big name, so mediocrity reigns supreme

Hero in a half shell:

Ahoy there squire, are you from the past? Because I hate to break it to you, but that has totally already been done:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings_film_trilogy

And it was awesome!

Are you missing a point? Cause I think I found it over here....

"My Idea of Fun" by Will Self, Mainly because it would unlikely to work in that medium.

I was going to say Lord of The Rings as well...

Jo Nesbo's Harry Hole -books. I don't think any of them could work in a medium like film.

Calvin and Hobbes. I'm terrified that once Bill Watterson dies and the copyright falls into someone else's hands that we're gonna be a bunch of stuff that will literally punch us right in the childhood.

Zelda is the big one that comes to mind, mostly because Link would have to speak (and we all know how well that turns out *coughphillipsCDicough*) Also NO SEQUELS TO "THE LAST AIRBENDER!" The show told its story over 3 20 episode seasons, something you can't contain into an hour and a half without clunky, awkward expository dialog.

Battleship.

It's a FUCKING BOARD GAME!!!

/rages.

madwarper:
The Lord of the Rings.

Either it'd have to be made into 5 films (books 5 and 6 could be combined to the same movie), or they'd have to cut SO much of the main story out to boil it down to be only 3 movies that there would be so many plot holes as to make its director seem to be a retarded illiterate chimp.

Captcha: otsyTR $1.00 One dollar oysters? nom nom nom

I don't understand... LOTR was brilliant on the big screen... :(
Honestly, the only thing that I really missed in the films was Tom Bombadil.

Minecraft

ScoopMeister:

Honestly, the only thing that I really missed in the films was Tom Bombadil.

You liked Tom Bombadil?

image

I found him to be the worst part of the book. It's about 1/4 of all the pages and nothing happens.

Honestly? Most things.

I think that if Hollywood (going with Hollywood because I'm in the U.S.) would worry more about quality than quantity, our entertainment industry would be a lot more.. entertaining.. for me. While I realize that the goal is to make money and by doing it the way they are now a lot of your promotion is already done for you, the thought that every video game, cartoon, game, comic and book needs to be turned into movie form is absurd. Some things work, but most don't. In my opinion, of course. I feel the same way about the endless fucking sequels and prequels.

Also, LEAVE MY CHILDHOOD ALONE! *shakes cane*

Well... Twilight... but since thats a bit late Im going to go ahead and say any Bioware game. Heard some places about people asking for Mass Effect movies or Dragon age ones and frankly I think that would be one hell of a bad idea.

Bioware games are about letting you make choises and not having any one choise being the "right" one (ignoring a few retcons like Leliana but you get the idea), putting it in movie format means that anyone who didnt do what Shepard/the warden/revan/whatever do in the movie essentialy gets told that they did the wrong thing. Also it would take the whole "MY character" feeling away from the games.

Bioware make awesome games, but I doubt they would be as revered if they started making movies out of said games.

Now... a movie set in the world or universe whit a story that is unrelated to the games... now THATS a different story!

Sarah Kerrigan:
Battleship.

It's a FUCKING BOARD GAME!!!

/rages.

thank you.

although giant alien spacecraft and alien weapons could liven up the board game

Sarah Kerrigan:
Battleship.

It's a FUCKING BOARD GAME!!!

/rages.

Agreed. And then they are going to make an FPS based off the film based off the strategy board game.

Anyway, Min-

MeXR:
Minecraft

image

Don't make a Call of Duty movie. That's my last thought <.<

Well, I tend to agree with Moviebob that "You can make a good movie out of anything". But I do acknowledge that some material doesn't work no matter how much you try. I say this, if you can't come up with a (around)2-hour story that's self-contained and has interesting visuals that people might wanna watch all with the material you have, don't make a movie out of it.

Matthew94:

ScoopMeister:

Honestly, the only thing that I really missed in the films was Tom Bombadil.

You liked Tom Bombadil?

image

I found him to be the worst part of the book. It's about 1/4 of all the pages and nothing happens.

You serious bitch? ARE YOU SERIOUS???? MOTHERFUCKER IM ON THE WAY TO YOUR HOUSE RIGHT NOW AND IM GONNA

Honestly, Tom is one of the best parts of the books IMO, but im glad they left him out of the movies. They were better off for it.

Most comics/graphic novels... I know, I know, a shitload have been done, but why do the vast majority absolutely suck balls?!

That and most books, actually, largely because two hours of movie material can typically be written in about a hundred and fifty pages... so the content cut ruins it more often than not...

i hope this doesnt get me hate. But the elder scrolls series. i see people say theyd want it to be put into a movie but it wouldnt work! the elder scrolls games all have loads of content in it, its about the exploration and all the stuff you can do! it wouldnt work in movie form!

Video games in general. I haven't seen a decent video game movie yet and don't think I'll ever see one in my lifetime. Also the most recent "I Am Legend" did NOT, NOT NOT NOT NOT do the book any justice.

Hollywood, please do us a favor and stop trying.

More or less anything by Lovecraft.

You just can't put a new colour never before seen by humans on a TV screen, and good luck trying to get dimensions that can't exist in our universe, though you can hint at that.

You can put big monsters with tentacles and all, but that wasn't the appeal of Lovecraft. Any hack can do that, and half of them do. But to create a sense of dread...you need a good director et al to do that, and if you have that, you don't need to do a Lovecraft story.

Redlin5:

Don't make a Call of Duty movie. That's my last thought <.<

>.>

how would a CoD movie suck worse then the CoD games? /trolling

but imo: Shin Megami Tensei anything, mostly because it would probably be based on the Persona branch, which means high school, which means the characters would be whinny little shits I'd want the demons to eat ... -.-

The Dark Tower series by Steven King. They are superb books, but I don't think a movie could capture the characters, or the sense of scale that the books portray. Most of what makes the books so good is what is going on inside the characters, and that you couldn't put on the screen!

The other thing is that the book doesn't describe everything, allowing your imagination to plug the gaps and build the scenes... I cant see how they could accurately portray the thinny either, that is something that is described to a point, but the rest of it is up tou you how it really works, and looks. They keep talking about putting on the screen, but I don't think it will work if they do!

What shouldn't be made into a movie? All the games that are like movies. Bioshock, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, Uncharted.

Any video game. It just can't be done right. They're two different mediums altogether, and while occasionally a book can translate well into a film and vice versa, it's because those two require no interaction from the viewer and create the visuals all by themselves. Video games require a player in order to create atmosphere and immersion. They just look silly when made into films.

Oh, and it's always written by terrible writers.

The Hobbit. Why do you have to tarnish this too Peter?

The other thing I would say would've been the Terry Pratchett Discworld novels (my favourite set of books), however they actually did a fantastic job (The Hogfather, Going Postal and Colour of Magic/The Light Fantastic) of converting these to TV. So much so that I actually look forwards to them doing more. I think they captured the characters and some of the humour particularly well.

Elementary - Dear Watson:
The Dark Tower series by Steven King. They are superb books, but I don't think a movie could capture the characters, or the sense of scale that the books portray. Most of what makes the books so good is what is going on inside the characters, and that you couldn't put on the screen!

The other thing is that the book doesn't describe everything, allowing your imagination to plug the gaps and build the scenes... I cant see how they could accurately portray the thinny either, that is something that is described to a point, but the rest of it is up tou you how it really works, and looks. They keep talking about putting on the screen, but I don't think it will work if they do!

Last i read this was being filmed over 3 feature films and 2 television seasons... which SHOULD be enough time to tell a fairly good chunk of it. And it had Ron Howard at the helm, which could be hit and miss.

Javier Bardem was supposedly penned in to play roland (good choice) ... and i'm actually really looking forward to seeing if ole Ron can pull off something this epic.

Buuuut... yeah.. we'll see. One of my favourite serieseses of all time... If they fuck Oi... i'm going to hurt someone.

Mass Effect, as the choices you make are too crucial, unless they did it in a Sliding Doors format.

ALpha Protocol, on the other hand, would be good as a movie IF they decided beforehand how they were going to play Michael Thorton (maybe do a survey as to whether they want a suave/aggressive/professional Thorton that people can vote on, then play out the entire movie that way).

Soul Calibur would be a terrible movie simply because they'd choose the most douchebag action director and writers to do it. The story is not strong to start with and they need someone who can elevate it, not completely obliterate it.

Mass Effect and Bioshock are at the top of my list. Mass Effect because it's to deep to be three hours. Bioshock because it wouldn't be the same. I don't get to play that weird plumbing game or kill splicers, just, not as fun.

WWmelb:

Buuuut... yeah.. we'll see. One of my favourite serieseses of all time... If they fuck Oi... i'm going to hurt someone.

That's the thing I am woried about... there is a lot to try and pull off!

Who whole section with Susan and the backstory there... will that be done justice...

And I agree with the worry about Oi! I can see him just ending up as a bad CGI version of a poodle, rather than the honey-badger-esque version I have in my head! :/

thaluikhain:
More or less anything by Lovecraft.

You just can't put a new colour never before seen by humans on a TV screen, and good luck trying to get dimensions that can't exist in our universe, though you can hint at that.

You can put big monsters with tentacles and all, but that wasn't the appeal of Lovecraft. Any hack can do that, and half of them do. But to create a sense of dread...you need a good director et al to do that, and if you have that, you don't need to do a Lovecraft story.

Dagon (2001) and Dreams in the Witch House (2005) sat well with me and even 80's horror stock like Reanimator and From Beyond were enjoyable, despite a more schlocky presentation and tenuous relationship to the source material.

I agree though that making Godzilla with Cthulhu would just be pandering fan service and miss the point, though, and generally agree with you despite my fondness for the aforementioned Stuart Gordon movies that play out as conventional horror movies made as love letters to Lovecraft.

Pebblig:
The Hobbit. Why do you have to tarnish this too Peter?

The other thing I would say would've been the Terry Pratchett Discworld novels (my favourite set of books), however they actually did a fantastic job (The Hogfather, Going Postal and Colour of Magic/The Light Fantastic) of converting these to TV. So much so that I actually look forwards to them doing more. I think they captured the characters and some of the humour particularly well.

Very good news then... The Mob, the company who made the first three features, are already in the process of making a fourth, based on Unseen Academicals (following their break to make Skellig last year). Which I also greatly look forward too, though I still wish they'd do either Night Watch (one of my favourite Watch stories) or Monstrous Regiment (including the lesbian subtext between Lofty and Tonker - partly because I'm a perv, and partly because it genuinely was one of the really interesting aspects of the book)...

Anyway, I'd argue that most franchises either shouldn't be made into a film or TV show, or should but only if given the right director and crew/cast. Yes, I'm doging the question here, and doing so deliberately. Sue me. The thing is, I would argue against a lot of people and say that some games, for example, have been turned into films successfully. The only failure in them comes from diehard fans comparing them religiously to the source and refusing to see them as great films or whatever on their own grounds. Silent Hill, for example. I love the film, and the atmosphere and the style of filming really do pay great tribute to the feel of the games. The only things fans should really see as being 'bad' are the changes in character (replacing Harry Mason with a mother instead, i.e. Rose) and that kind of thing. The homages were nice to spot too. As a standlone film, it was a very nice, creepy horror, and I loved that.

I will go out on a limb here, and say that I'd like to see an Alan Wake TV series, not based on the games but instead detailing a seperate story within the same canon (already done quite well with the Bright Falls webseries, released online as a tie-in before the game's release). Also, a Halo film would be good, provided it was a new story within the universe and was done by the right crew (I'm still thinking Jackson/Blomkamp here...), a Half-Life film (again, different story in same universe, and done by the Purchase Brothers who did Escape From City 17 a couple of years ago), and a film series or TV series based on the Three Worlds Cycle (given the success of A Game Of Thrones). If you don't know what the Three Worlds Cycle is, look it up. It is seriously one of the best, and most underrated, fantasy series I have ever had the good fortune to read...

Final Fantasy ohhhhh wait.

OT: Films about celebrities, usually just after they die. I assume they're currently making one about Steve Jobs, and it just seems like a cheap cash-in. There are a few exceptions to this (like the social network), but for the main it doesn't work for me. Also most video games...they don't seem to translate well into films yet, compared to other media such as books.

deadpoolhulk:

Personaly i don't think the Zelda series should get a film. Mostly because of the fact that the best thing about Hyrule is the many different areas and people that live ther, and two or so hours could never give the gorrens, zoras ect ect the development that they deserve.

While I agree that a traditional Hollywood style Zelda movie is a horrible monstrosity that should never be allowed to see the light of day... ever, I actually do think that a Zelda movie done right could be really really good. Imagine if you will, something perhaps more akin to a feature-length (perhaps even longer) art film. We, as the camera, follow Link (a character who never speaks a word, even when others speak to him) on his journeys through Hyrule. While there would be some sort of a plot, the main focus would actually be capturing in film the beautiful and charming world the characters inhabit.

Of course not every area of the Zelda world could make it into this film, but the director could choose some of the most visually interesting places, use them to stitch together a plot (It really wouldn't be difficult at all to put together the kind of simple plot which Zelda games have), and throw in some great action sequences. I for one think that would make for one hell of a movie. Granted, a movie whose plot has been constructed primarily for the purpose of showing off gorgeous set pieces and linking various fight scenes might not be the most complex film, but it seems to me like the sort of thing which could be amazing just for the simple things it does right.

As for what I feel shouldn't be made into a film, I can't think of much that couldn't be made into a interesting film if done right. The big problem most of the time when people make movies out of books, comics, games, etc... is that they try to fit the various properties into the context of a traditional Hollywood film, when instead they should be breaking out of the confines of the Hollywood movie so that their film works to express some of the things the original property had.

Take for example the new Akira movie I keep hearing rumors about. Akira is already a great film, we know that there's a way to make an awesome movie out of Akira because it's already been done. All the things that make the new Akira movie sound so terrible have to do with various attempts to Westernize the plot and fit it into a more traditional Hollywood genre film. I would argue that you can make a good movie out of anything (except perhaps something like Pong or Tetris... which would probably make for a really stupid movie), the problem comes in when people try to take a property and fit it into a type of movie it shouldn't be.

Strain42:
Calvin and Hobbes. I'm terrified that once Bill Watterson dies and the copyright falls into someone else's hands that we're gonna be a bunch of stuff that will literally punch us right in the childhood.

[bursts into horrified tears]

Yeah, I'm gonna agree with this one. Impassable problem 1: Who would voice Hobbes?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked