the main reason video game movie arent ever good is becuase you take the experience out the gamers hand. and expect to give the fans the same experince but failing to do so.
what the film people should do is make the good movie instead on trying to make it a video game.
Chronicles of riddick did an excellent job.
but im going to say look at the resident evil movies. first one was good(in my opinion) cause it made it a different formula then the games and paid tribute to the fans when it was necessary . but they ruined the 2nd resident evil movie because they tryed to make it a video game and made it a fan boy movie which it turned into shitty movie
I'm neither old, teenage, nor very dramatic. However I would say that plenty of people remember the movies of 1939 and the general consensus among film buffs is that Hollywood peaked at this time. (Actually 1999 was an unusually good year for Hollywood films too, but generally speaking it's been grim pickings for the last 40 years or so.)
Not sure what your point is about Transformers. I haven't seen it, but I've heard it's great.
Maybe '39 was the best year for movies in movie history but that doesn't mean that the general quality of movies has been spiraling generally downward since. Your "grim pickings" link basically just moans about little more than commercialization. I would argue that the desire to make money doesn't preclude good work.
The end of a golden age doesn't mean what comes after is worse (in most cases, such as the Golden Age of Exploration the activity after is in fact better) it just means there's less. The achievements of the present may be less impressive than those of the past but only because we're amazed such simple people could do those things (give it ~50 and people will wonder how the frack such idiots made things as great as we have).
My point with Transformers is that it's held to be a great movie despite it's rather poor and cliche plot.
Basically, we agree re: Hollywood.
The general consensus of the Transformers movie is that it is in fact pretty average when you take an aggregate of opinions. The problem with it is probably Michael Bay, who is not exactly known as a name associated with quality filmmaking. He's kind of like a A-list Uwe Boll if you ask me.
The problem with movies is that everything is subjective, and one mans shit is another mans fucking spectacular. So so so many times I watch a movie and love it only to hear the whole world and their dogs hate it.
And thats fine, I dont need the whole world to love something for me to like it. I haven't gotten around to seeing Max Payne yet but I gonna go out on a limb and say I bet I will like it.
Going slightly OT but take Equilibrium as an example. So many people I know hate it, its slated something aweful but people have to take it for what it is. Ok so the story is as basic as they come and has been done before, but it has some awesome action scenes and I personally really feel for John in the end. You can see his pain when he fails to stop that execution and its just full of awesome.
Why must people over analyse movies and then just say they suck??
List im looking at if anyone cares to browse it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_video_games
Looking down the list ill pick out a few I personally like dare I say love.
Both final fantasies though advent children I would list way higher and go as far to call it one of my fav movies.
All the resident evils I like alot. Degeneration was a little iffy and the animation is not on par with some of todays CGI but its still very decent.
Doom isnt too bad, doesnt deserve half the shit people throw at it.
Tomb Raiders are pretty cool (though i only seen the 2nd one once as of today)
Hitman is very watchable, some awesome fight scenes.
Yeah and mortal kombat is pretty good too.
I think we should start treating video game movies more like games and less like movies. If you see what im saying. Just allow your self to enjoy them. And dont let your love of the game cloud your view of the movie by thinking its tarnishing the games name somehow.
You know what we need to do? Pick a game that sucked; had an incredible story, but terrible game-play because of it's inherent focus on storytelling in a cinematic style. Indigo Prophecy. Mass Effect. Final Fantasy 9 (although I didn't completely hate Spirits Within, so what good is my opinion?).
In the hands of a good director, certain games that indulge in stylistic minimalism could be done well also. I'm thinking Portal, the newest Prince of Persia, or Shadow of the Colossus (did that just scream Miyazaki at the top of its lungs to anyone besides me?).
But of course the games which take risks and expand the art-form tend not to do well historically, and since the studios do the picking and all the good directors aren't interested in videogame adaptations, it tends to ensure that only the shlockiest, most action-packed, most sequel-heavy empty-industry-hype-fueled franchises will ever be adapted to the screen.
Although Assassin's Creed offers an interesting opportunity, by being narratively strong, stylistically minimalist, AND having been extremely commercially successful to boot.
And Sly Cooper. Come on. That practically BEGS to be made into a film-noir homage by Pixar.
i think if it hadn't been max payne and given us expectations of it, it would have actually been a half way decent film...
movies based on games will never be any good, although for some reason i am holding out hope that warcraft will be different because of how anal blizzaed is when it comes to their franchises, because studio execs are just business people. they dont get the average video game fan, they think hmmm this game sold a gabillion copies so lets just make a movie as cheap as we can and throw it into the marketplace and let the masses eat it up. it that kind of inane thinking that has watered down hollywood and it is stupid for us to think otherwise. until the studios are willing to throw down some serious cash and make a serious big budget movie that is based on a video game using the best directors, writers, actors etc then movies based on games will simply continue to suck sweaty donkey ass....the worst movie ever made that was based on a video game in my opinion was bloodrayne. i would rather have had an 18in unlubed dildo continually shoved in my ass then watch that god awful piece of shit.....alas being the video game dork that i am i will continue to watch movies based on games i'll just dl them instead of blowing my money to go see them.
Was Silent hill (the movie) mentioned ?
It wasn't half bad either, at least it was a step in the good direction.
Video Game movies are crap because the movie editors have to go through people like Warner Brothers and Paramount before their movie is finalized. You have assholes who have never touched a video game in their life tainting the storyline and making changes so "the movie has mass appeal."
I had some good expectations for Max Payne, and this article sums up my opinion well enough. Max Payne and PG-13 do NOT go well together. The editors, director and actors usually have a passion for the movies they make, but the people funding their movies do not. In the end it's the people who provide the funding that decide how a movie ends up and they are the assholes who ruin them for us.
A movie's first draft is almost always the best. It's when you have people who really shouldn't have any say in a movie get their hands on the script that shit goes downhill. Sure there are bad editors and directors but most of the time it's corporate dickheads that fuck up our movies.
No, I don't think our expectations are too high. As you pointed out the movies have only been "crappy" at best. And while I don't expect them do follow the gams story word for word, if you are going to make a Doom movie then I at least expect it to A) take place at some point in Hell B) fight actual demons instead of generic mutated monsters and C) actually hit something other than menacing walls with the BFG at least once. What they did wasn't some minor changes to the story, it was the removal of what makes Doom, Doom. It would be like making (for example) a Zelda movie without Link, replaced the triforce with generic magic stones or something, and not take place in hyrule.
i have one movie for movie based games that suck , it's ET ever since then all movie based games suck
I don't want to start up a new thread, and since I just finished watching the Max Payne movie, I wanted to go on a little rant. So here it goes:
Max Payne is a 90-ish minuet checklist of why games should NEVER, NEVER EVER be subject matter for a movie. The key here is shouldn't. It's not that it cannot be done. It most certainly could, since video games are a visual and auditory medium, and even as far back as Metal Gear Solid on the original playstation, characters have been able to convey actual emotion, coming off as real life actors (hell sometimes even better then real life actors.)
If Hollywood were to actually make a good movie based off a game, it' so simple. Keep the story in its entirety alone, the breakdown the gameplay segments into bite-sized chunks to keep the movie a watchable length without an intermission. That's it, that is all you have to do, why is that so hard? Why do writers and directors feel the need to add more to an already complete story? It's like when you ask for a drink at a bar, and the bartender makes it 'off', and your face makes weird contortions trying to come to terms with what you are actually drinking. "Artistic license" they'll say when you question it. "It's my own style, do you like it?" FUCK NO I DON'T LIKE IT! WHISKEY SOURS ARE NOT ART, BARTENDING IS NOT STYLE. JUST PUT IT IN A TUMBLER, AND THROW IT AT MY HEAD.
Sorry lost my train of thought. If the story was lacking in any discernable area, it wouldn't be the driving point for why people would play the damn game (and more importantly pay $60 for the fucking privilege of doing so.) Take for example Silent Hill (another movie based off a game in case you're retarded). It kept the needless changes to a minimum, maintaining the same pacing, camera angles, music & sound effects, ect. everything that made the actual game as good as it was. It even kept 90% of the characters intact. I saw the Silent Hill movie opening day and while I was still somewhat disappointed I begrudgingly felt that that was the best these types of movies are ever going to get, and box office sales numbers agree with me.
Part of me feels that writers do this not because of the "Uppity Bartender" theory but because they feel they need to make a compromise. While few gamers are still stupid enough to be excited when a new movie is announced, their excitement is because that particular story meant a lot to them and they want non-gamers to enjoy it too. The writer and director in turn feel the need to make a compromise to gamers and non-gamers alike, effectively sticking their cock in a once tasty salad that in turn satisfies no one. In Max Payne (the movie), John Moore and Beau Thorne couldn't have missed the point more if they were holding the gun backward, and the point was in another country all together. I'm just glad I didn't pay for it.
Yes, I'm proud saying it. I think Hollywood doesn't understand why people download movies. It's not because we're lazy, or cheap. It's because you don't respect you. You don't DESERVE our money. We worked for it, we earned it. When you shovel shit like this in our faces time and again (like X-Men origins), we shove right back. If you don't like it, earn our respect back.
I don't see why Advent Children doesn't count as a good video game movie