Jump to content
LCVG
JTello

Upcoming Movies The Trilogy (Part III)

Recommended Posts

Long and short of it:

 

They want a good movie they need to actually understand why people like something. The essence of what actually makes the thing great. Before you experiment as a chef, you have to understand what makes a recipe good.

 

It's like cooking. You might know that pizza is "dough with sauce and toppings that gets baked". But will that make you a good pizza or will you get something awful instead?

 

With that knowledge you might make a traditional pizza that's half decent but you're more likely to make something gross like say:

 

I take some bread and slap some headcheese on it, salmon, sprinkle some grated blue cheese on it and slather it with soya sauce. YUM. In theory it's got Elements of what makes a pizza, so why would it be disgusting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THAT SAID... Joey's comment re: elevators wins for funniest of the day.

 

No...

 

I'll be pitching Main Street: The Movie, about the mishaps of a barbershop quartet running a churro stall outside of the Hall of Presidents... with hilarious consequences.

 

The Hedonism Bot beat him out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh movie, meh profits:

 

They don?t necessarily have sleepless nights over the thought of trying to make a good movie, just a successful one, and a movie doesn?t need to be great to do well this day in age, not when even some of the worst films can generally get back into profit through DVD sales?etc. Hollywood?s interest in games, as with comics, is that they?re buying into existing franchises that already have a high level of interest amongst a demographic of consumers, so for the studios a lot of the work is already done as they know they?ve got a ready made audience to market to.

 

Fantastic Four wasn?t a failure. It cost around 100m and made over 300m at the worldwide box office which helped the sequel get the green light ? the sequel which in its own right made a tidy profit (all this before both reaped the rewards of home video sales on top of box office). Daredevil made its money back and a profit, Batman Forever made its money back and a profit? Batman and Robin did too! The quality of a movie is really irrelevant (look at those wretched Shrek movies!). Likewise, a great film is not guaranteed to make masses of money.

 

99% of games are not like novels or comic books, mediums which generally boast real integrity to their characters and stories making them rich for adaptation. Games have yet to consistently prove themselves in that regard. They are, by and large, rather shallow affairs, with developers rarely seeking to spend time making character and story a priority.

 

Though the relevance of story and character in gaming is a worthy debate we do at least know games can stand on their own without emphasis on such factors. Look at Gears of War; it?s mundane and shallow beyond belief ? a tedious regurgitation of a plot and one dimensional characters we?ve seen many times before, but the game mechanics work and make for an attractive playing experience. They?re making a movie of that I believe, and that kind of brings me to my main problem with movies based on games. Games are really the only entertainment medium that can work well even if the story is lacking so long as the player is challenged by an immersive experience.

 

Movies based on games are basically taking the principals of their source material but taking away your own interaction with that world? and one has to wonder what the point is. Do we need a Halo movie? It?s a great world to play in but not one you turn to for the story (which, like Gears, is a rather dull rambling cliche of a set up). The Silent Hill movie is perhaps the most interesting adaptation, it?s pretty faithful and captures the atmosphere of the games well but doesn?t even come close to evoking the sense of thrill the games achieve by putting you in control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well put, and that's probably why I was so disappointed by the Silent Hill movie. It just wasn't the same not controlling the character through that environment. But I disagree with a Halo movie. Couldn't be any worse than those terrible Fantastic Four movies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I?m not necessarily suggesting a Halo movie would be downright bad. The approach they were going to take, focusing on making it a companion piece of sorts with other central characters against the backdrop of Chief going around doing his thing, I think was more interesting than a movie about the Chief would be, and I certainly reckon it would be rather neat to see familiar ships and creatures come to life in live action with a large effects budget, but those run the risk of being short term thrills. I've just never been convinced the world of Halo is actually that interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I'd rather see an all CG Halo movie, ala the new Resident Evil one coming out next month, than a live action movie. But, in the end, it could end up like Silent Hill for me, simply not working because I wasn't able to zoom in and shoot like in the games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I realize making a movie that makes a big return on money is the primary goal and quality is secondary. I am disappointed that quality comes second when it comes to marketability etc. Slap a franchise logo on a film and it's guaranteed to make money right? v.v :( The thing is, if you want to maximize profit, you really want make a quality experience that actually holds the integrity of character, storyline etc because you can make a crummy film based on a franchise and still see a great return, but make a GOOD film, and you see what happens with something like Dark Knight.

 

Marketing the film based on audience is one thing, not realizing what that audience expects out of the experience is something else. A film that understands what the audience wants from the film, and just doesnt try to cash in on the popularity of a franchise will make Far More than just a cash in film. Is the point I was trying to make.

 

Lord of the Rings for example couldve been simply a straight cash in film, instead Jackson took the property, gave the fans what they wanted, and saw a huge return in sales.

 

In my eyes, as a longterm Marvel fan, Fantastic Four was a failure - the film could've achieved MUCH more than it actually did, and if it hadn't been as badly hamstrung out the gates could easily have been a much larger and more profitable film. I grant the quality of the film has little to do with Initial profitability when you're going based off of the principle that an established fan base will buy any drek that's thrown at them, but the fact is, eventually comic book fans will simply say No and not accept cruddy merchandise and refuse to go if the film is semi poorly done (see Superman Returns - they just didnt deal with what makes superhero films, and Superman films great with that film and it bit them in the back end of the box office)

 

It is unfortunate some of the better films dont make as much money as they could/should but a lot of that can be broken down to when a film is released, what it's released opposite etc. Some films could be megablockbusters if they're released at the right time, that would flop against stiffer competition so :\ That said, quality Does go a long way to profitability. Make a quality product and (if people know about it) it will make a TON more than making a shoddy one that everyone knows is awful.

 

I do agree that many games are more about the gameplay, and aren't necessarily as clearly plot oriented. Clearly a film about PacMan won't have the depth of a shakespearian epic. That said, there are games which have had more effort invested in character and storyline (and still have the gameplay elements) and those are often considered to be the pinnacle of gaming, often mega blockbuster games selling tons of copies.

 

The problem I see with films based on games is that they often strip away even the faintest connection to the source material, and what's left is a hollow shell with a label stuck on it - which is why they haven't seen the same success that say comic book movies have had.

 

Batman is Batman, abuse him as you will it's difficult for someone to take a Batman movie and strip away everything about Batman that makes him Batman and still be successful with it. Put a Batman logo on Mars Attacks and people might go and see it, and then complain it's not Batman. Batman is a character, you can take his character and plug him into situations and magic can happen. Games DO have similar kinds of elements but I do admit that's a little harder of a stretch than comics/novels.

 

Let's say I'm making a movie about Halo. What elements actually matter to the Halo franchise? The enemy types, and Master Chief, maybe a couple of the supporting characters. If we were to "hollywoodise" it though we might see a teen love triangle movie set in space, against the backdrop of an alien war. None of the elements that make Halo "Halo" would be there - just a generic leftovers shell and perhaps not even a hint of the actual elements that made the series popular in the first place. The essence of what actually made the game appealing stripped from it, and without the support of an actual decent plot, decent acting or f/x and the film would bomb. It'd be like making a Lara Croft movie that had "Lara Croft" cast as a black guy from France. The film might make money but it would lose out on any revenue potential from people who had any interest in the original franchise the film was built off of.

 

If you see what I'm saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess what I'm really trying to say is - if they want to see the biggest return for their buck, actually investing in, and caring about the quality of the content will make a big difference in consumer response. The lazy option (slap a franchise logo on a pile of doodoo) may make money but a little bit of care, diligence and craftsmanship will go a lot farther with the consumer, and a Much MUCH larger return is possible. And the thing to remember is that the end viewer is constantly adapting, becoming more sophisticated and expecting more out of the films they want to see.

 

The movies that dominate the box office most often have the most diligence to source/spirit of the source material. Look at the last 10 years of films for example. Films that don't honor the spirit of the source material very well tend to flop in the theater. While the blockbusters the ones that did Really well, often were close to the hearts of fans and paid careful attention to the detailing

 

Honestly, it doesnt seem hard to me to make a decent game movie that would both be profitable, and actually be a decent product but then again, I'm Fred (which as Joey can tell you means I'm a little different than your average person :P)

Edited by OzzelsCousinFred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is, if you want to maximize profit, you really want make a quality experience that actually holds the integrity of character, storyline etc because you can make a crummy film based on a franchise and still see a great return, but make a GOOD film, and you see what happens with something like Dark Knight.

 

Dark Knight is something that happens about once a decade though (if that). I don’t even think Warner know what made it the success it ended up being – hell I love it and not even I can work out precisely why it became such a truly massive phenomenon. It’s just one of those unpredictable things made up of a number of factors (that includes good marketing), but typically Hollywood thinks it is just one thing. Did you see Warner’s CEO talking recently about how the film and its success has prompted them to re-evaluate future projects, even Superman, with a darker tone? They think that’s it, that “dark” is the answer to what people want. THAT’s the mentality we’re dealing with here.

 

 

A film that understands what the audience wants from the film, and just doesnt try to cash in on the popularity of a franchise will make Far More than just a cash in film. Is the point I was trying to make.

 

I understand what you’re getting at, but am just not sure it’s that simple. Take those dire Shrek sequels for example. They are amongst the cash ins you speak of. Lazy, derivative, bordering on vulgar yet people flocked to them in droves. By comparison far fewer appreciated the care and effort that Pixar put into films like Ratatouille and Wall-E which didn’t do as well as the Dreamworks releases.

 

It’s an odd thing as I do think that occasionally a movie will come along that does hit a mass audience over the head and remind them that actually, they can do better in choosing what they see, and that Dark Knight was probably one of those movies. What’s disappointing is how quickly they forget this after the fact. I think marketing/hype and a general morbid fascination many probably had over Ledger’s unfortunate passing were the greatest contributors in getting so many into the cinemas during its first week of release, but it was the quality of the movie itself (and the lure of the breathtaking IMAX version) that kept them going back.

 

What I take from what you said is that you’ve actually hit upon what is essential as a key to repeat business. You mention Lord of The Rings and that, indeed, is a fine example. A lot of hype that got many unfamiliar with the source to flock to cinemas and see what the fuss was about, and by and large the films lived up to that hype resulting in people going back for repeat viewings. It is a rare thing though, and in many ways it is rare not just because of bad/mediocre movies but because Hollywood has created a climate that no longer welcomes repeat business (thanks not only to their lack of commitment to make the films better but to shortening theatrical to DVD/Blu-ray windows which effectively encourage people not to bother seeing a movie theatrically, or seeing it once then waiting for the DVD. Hollywood’s lack of concern in supporting the quality of the movie going experience is also a factor).

 

Movie releases are ruled now by the opening weekend mentality and it’s always struck me that the studios just don’t care enough beyond that - that anything else could be considered a bonus because they know there are too many movies coming out and that they’ll make more money from DVD sales anyway. That’s why with these comic book adaptations I am really not convinced they care that making it a better movie might reap greater box office rewards. They do actually forget that with a little bit of effort that could have their cake and eat it and have a sustained theatrical success and a great home video success too by making a good product and promoting it well.

 

 

 

The problem I see with films based on games is that they often strip away even the faintest connection to the source material, and what's left is a hollow shell with a label stuck on it - which is why they haven't seen the same success that say comic book movies have had.

 

Batman is Batman, abuse him as you will it's difficult for someone to take a Batman movie and strip away everything about Batman that makes him Batman and still be successful with it. Put a Batman logo on Mars Attacks and people might go and see it, and then complain it's not Batman. Batman is a character, you can take his character and plug him into situations and magic can happen. Games DO have similar kinds of elements but I do admit that's a little harder of a stretch than comics/novels.

 

Let's say I'm making a movie about Halo. What elements actually matter to the Halo franchise? The enemy types, and Master Chief, maybe a couple of the supporting characters. If we were to "hollywoodise" it though we might see a teen love triangle movie set in space, against the backdrop of an alien war. None of the elements that make Halo "Halo" would be there - just a generic leftovers shell and perhaps not even a hint of the actual elements that made the series popular in the first place. The essence of what actually made the game appealing stripped from it, and without the support of an actual decent plot, decent acting or f/x and the film would bomb. It'd be like making a Lara Croft movie that had "Lara Croft" cast as a black guy from France. The film might make money but it would lose out on any revenue potential from people who had any interest in the original franchise the film was built off of.

 

If you see what I'm saying

 

I do see what you're saying, yes, but again I personally can’t help but feel the vast majority of games – including Halo and so on – are just the hollow shells you speak of, which as I wrote earlier isn’t necessarily problematic for a game, but is from the point of view of trying to think up a decent movie adaptation.

 

Bioshock perhaps boasted one of the best narratives in recent gaming memory (despite a wonky ending), but again the thought of the impending movie doesn’t excite me beyond the brief thrill I think I’d get from seeing a real life Big Daddy because so much of what makes the story great is the way it unravels as you are playing and the fact that you are sat there engrossed because you are playing through it. Similarly I wouldn't be remotely interested in seeing what I consider two of the best and most emotionally engaging games of all time - Ico and Shadow of the Colossus - made into movies because so much about what makes their narrative great is the fact you feel part of it as the player.

 

The only game based movie I think I’d be quite interested in seeing made is if Pixar adapted Grim Fandango. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea Dark Knight isn't just about Darkness, or the morbid fascination over Heath Ledger though. I'm sure that affected sales, but as you said what I'm talking about drove repeat business and will drive DVD sales even further.

 

I do understand they worry about delaying the release of DVDs for fear people will forget about the movie in the interim and not care to get it, and because of piracy concerns but meh.

 

I think you're right - Hollywood has backed itself into a corner with the way they release films, and try to make up money on the back end with DVDs. That said I really feel that the franchises both deserve more respect and have untapped potential that could easily be opened up, AND allow creative people to actually put out some quality entertainment while making obscene profits just because the movies are so damn good.

 

Dark Knight doesn't have to be a fluke, it's not the darkness that made the film so good (not that it hurt) it was the totality of the vision, and the execution (it's unfortunate that's not well recognized yet).

 

I can understand films occassionally taking people by suprise with the success, but in all honesty it seems obvious to me that the potential is just untapped atm. It takes real talents to occassionally tap into it (like Jackson, Del Tormo, Nolan, Smith, Spielberg, Cameron etc) but that it's very possible to have someone actually crank out consistent blockbusters that equal or top Dark Knight, we just haven't seen the person capable of doing that consistently yet. Course I was like the only person on the whole net who predicted the Wii would be a smash success (and that seemed obvious to me so meh). So ;p

 

As far as games go, it's just a matter of them optioning the right game at the right time and executing it just so - it'll happen eventually, but then we do, sadly we'll get a bunch of awful movies because they'll think that "Game movies are whats hot now". You are right that most just don't have a good plot for adapting to film. Honestly can't think of a great one off the top of my head storyline wise (though I still think they could do something good with Halo)

 

Oh well here's hoping for the best ;x (and a Pixar adapted Grim Fandango would be interesting... )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bioshock perhaps boasted one of the best narratives in recent gaming memory (despite a wonky ending), but again the thought of the impending movie doesn’t excite me beyond the brief thrill I think I’d get from seeing a real life Big Daddy because so much of what makes the story great is the way it unravels as you are playing and the fact that you are sat there engrossed because you are playing through it. Similarly I wouldn't be remotely interested in seeing what I consider two of the best and most emotionally engaging games of all time - Ico and Shadow of the Colossus - made into movies because so much about what makes their narrative great is the fact you feel part of it as the player.

Which is the most infuriating part about gaming narratives in general. They can be so much more engagin than a film if given the proper care. A very large majority of the time though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really want to wade into this but I feel that i must say that I am finding that most of the movies that have been filmed and made in the UK are better then some of the Hollywood big blockbusters.

 

But then again I have a thing for UK stuff! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for good British films, Screwnut, but as a foreigner, you're only going to be exposed to the best - the rubbish gets filtered out before it makes it over to North America. There's plenty of rubbish produced in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm all for good British films, Screwnut, but as a foreigner, you're only going to be exposed to the best - the rubbish gets filtered out before it makes it over to North America. There's plenty of rubbish produced in the UK.

 

 

No I've seen some rubbish UK films too! :)

 

Actually two things help me in seeing your movies dogbert....

 

1. I'm Canadian and alot of British shows and movies make it over here on tv, theatres and released on DVD.

 

2. God bless the internet. :) Now I can watch shows and movies that would never make it to my shores. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're actually able to get films made in this country? News to me.

 

If we're talking older films then there's a good list to steer you towards, Screwnut. The choice of contemporary home grown films is really rather dire, though having said that I would recommend you look up the works of Shane Meadows.

 

The most interesting work is really coming out of continental Europe, Korea, Hong Kong and so on...

Edited by Doctor Hoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which is the most infuriating part about gaming narratives in general. They can be so much more engagin than a film if given the proper care. A very large majority of the time though....

 

Quoted for truth.

 

Gaming should be the most powerful narrative form ever concieved of. Unfortunately narrative vision is limited by budget, technology, and commercial concerns (for now). At some point though, I'm hoping to see (if not create myself) that narrative game that really shows people the true nonlinear storytelling potential of games. As they are right now, most of them are seriously underdeveloped from a narrative perspective or limited by linearity when they dont have to be, even the best of them :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although not new movies, still important enough an event to post: The Godfather movies will be shown at the Seattle Cinerama theater starting October 10th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenneth Branagh is in negotiations to helm the Thor movie. Interesting choice. I definitely think he can make a movie even if he is not the first person you think of when imagining an epic adventure film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st 10 minutes of "An American Carol". Starts today.

http://www.moviefone.com/movie/an-american-carol/34808/trailer?trailerId=2260907

 

The short trailers I have seen didn't seem very funny, but this clip had me LOL a few times, so I'll take my dad to check it out. Movies like "Airplane" get him laughing uncontrollably.

 

Warning: Political incorrectness abounds.

 

 

Carlos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenneth Branagh is in negotiations to helm the Thor movie. Interesting choice. I definitely think he can make a movie even if he is not the first person you think of when imagining an epic adventure film.

 

Hm, he sounds perfect for Thor - I wasn't excited about the film before, but this sounds like it may be really interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw "An American Carol" today. Turns out the 1st 10 minutes were the funniest. The rest wasn't that good at all. There were some laugh out loud moments for sure. But nowhere near Airplane, Naked Gun, or even "Top Secret" calibre. Not even close.

 

Carlos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×