Movie Adaptions of Games

[Raul1001]

Hollywood usually tends to produce crappy adaptions of our beloved games, So I will be very interested in hearing your take on how to do a proper adaption.

 

[Tanin]

Shouldn't this be Game adaptions of movies?

The new Captain America game was quite fun. Another licensed game I enjoyed was 'Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves' on the NES.

That is what I get for posting when tired.

It is all about taking the game seriously.

 

[WarBlade]

The same way any good movie is made. Script it, shoot it, ship it.

The arguments about games to movies automatically being crap are much the same arguments we used to get about comicbooks getting film adaptations. Now we're inundated with them and some are actually pretty good.

As for how to go about it, it depends on the game. Some are threadbare story-wise (Mortal Kombat), and if that's the case then practically anything goes. Others already have a rich story (Morrowind), so the script could just about take key points from the existing story and wrap a nuanced performance around them for the big screen.

 

[Mandalore464]

Actually, Silent Hill was a pretty good adaptation. So it is possible to make good ones.

I just think the problem is that they let untalented people write them and/or direct them. Uwe Boll anyone?

 

[James]

I think the same rules need apply when adapting movies to games, as games to movies. The best movie to game adaptions are done when they're made as games first, part of a movie franchise second. The Warriors game was great because all of it's focus was on making a good game, and they wrapped the franchise around it.

If the movie makers decide to make a good film, instead of just trying to cash in on a franchise and movie on, they'll break the rule of crappy movies. Mandalore mentioned Silent Hill, I agree, that was a text book case of putting all their effort into making a quality movie first and worrying about the franchise second.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think one of the problems with a lot of potential action video game films, at least a lot of the good video games, are just one large action scene/ Making a straight forward adaptation of a game like that (ex. Gears of War, God of War) would cost like $200 M

BTW: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=345535&page=8&highlight=video

 

[Timstuff]

The biggest problem with movie adaptations of games is that the director usually takes the approach of "wow, this game has awesome action. I'd like to make a movie around that!" There are twp possible outcomes when they take this attitude:

1) They want to make a movie out of a game with great action and no story, and since they only care about the action they don't bother writing a good narrative that outshines the source material.

2) They pick a game with a good story, but since they were only attracted to the action they dismiss the story and write something that is not at all faithful to the original.

Hopefully as video game writing improves and is taken more seriously, directors and writers involved with game-to-film adaptations will start doing a better job of adapting games into non-interactive stories. The video game fandom is getting a lot bigger too, and it's a demographic that is getting hard to ignore, which has a twofold effect: studios are going to want to make money off of this growing demographic, but at the same time they will have to make sure that they are satisfied with what they get. The only game movie to be in true "box office blockbuster" territory was Prince of Persia, which made over 300 million. It may have had a generic plot, but it was fairly faithful to the game and it also offered a fun ride on par with what most big-budget hollywood movies these days do. Most other "successful" game movies do "well for their budget," but that does not say much. Prince of Persia wasn't a great movie, but it was at least a step in the right direction towards getting game movies taken seriously.

 

[Silvermoth]

I think it's a generational thing. When you have old people in charge of making games they tend to rely on stereotypes and generalisations. Then they make bad films. Then they become self fulfilling prophecies ("You can't make a good video game movie so lets just make a low budget bad one")

 

[mr. peasant]

I think one of the problems with a lot of potential action video game films, at least a lot of the good video games, are just one large action scene/ Making a straight forward adaptation of a game like that (ex. Gears of War, God of War) would cost like $200 M

BTW: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=345535&page=8&highlight=video

The thing about that is that a lot of summer action films are like that - from the Transformers film franchise to The Expendables. Both are essentially one long action sequence with minimal story and pretty straightforward concepts (giant fighting robots for the former and classic action stars duking it out onscreen for the latter).

The biggest problem with movies based on games is that the concept of a lot of these games are pretty generic in movie-land. Think about it... what makes Doom, Medal of Honor or even Mass Effect unique from a conceptual standpoint? A lot of it has to do with gameplay and player interactivity - putting people in control and immersing them in that way. While not a video game, chess is a good example having no story whatsoever and a concept that essentially boils down to trying to each time trying to kill the leader of the other team before the other team does the same. However, its gameplay of having the players figure out how to accomplish said goals is what makes it so interesting.

As such, the drive for settings and stories to stand out from other games is less of an issue (instead, more effort is put in improving player interaction) and are thus left more generic (so that players are more familiar with it). Movies, on the other hand, do not work that way. They can't directly interact with the audience the same way games do and have to rely solely on the story and concept to captivate them. Hence, I feel that adapting games to movies is a lot more difficult than translating other forms of media since comics, TV shows, plays and books generally tell stories the same way movies do and all of them rely on the story and/or concept to hook the audience in.

 

[MadVillainy]

The thing about that is that a lot of summer action films are like that - from the Transformers film franchise to The Expendables. Both are essentially one long action sequence with minimal story and pretty straightforward concepts (giant fighting robots for the former and classic action stars duking it out onscreen for the latter).

The biggest problem with movies based on games is that the concept of a lot of these games are pretty generic in movie-land. Think about it... what makes Doom, Medal of Honor or even Mass Effect unique from a conceptual standpoint? A lot of it has to do with gameplay and player interactivity - putting people in control and immersing them in that way. While not a video game, chess is a good example having no story whatsoever and a concept that essentially boils down to trying to each time trying to kill the leader of the other team before the other team does the same. However, its gameplay of having the players figure out how to accomplish said goals is what makes it so interesting.

As such, the drive for settings and stories to stand out from other games is less of an issue (instead, more effort is put in improving player interaction) and are thus left more generic (so that players are more familiar with it). Movies, on the other hand, do not work that way. They can't directly interact with the audience the same way games do and have to rely solely on the story and concept to captivate them. Hence, I feel that adapting games to movies is a lot more difficult than translating other forms of media since comics, TV shows, plays and books generally tell stories the same way movies do and all of them rely on the story and/or concept to hook the audience in.

I cant speak on TF3 because I havent seen it yet.
However there's a difference between Expendables action scenes and something from say an Uncharted or Gears of War movie. Expendables is grounded in "realism" as in it doesnt have the heroes running along exploding trains with helicopters shooting at them or fighting alien monsters. Having about 4 action scenes in a movie like the Expendables wouldnt cost as much as a genre action movie.
But I do agree that video games are the hardest to adapt.

Honestly I think the best choice for a video game movie is Uncharted. Has a likeable/charismatic lead, humor, good action, and hot girls. Plus it could be made PG13 which is something that held up the Bioshock and Gears of War movies.

 

[cherokeesam]

As such, the drive for settings and stories to stand out from other games is less of an issue (instead, more effort is put in improving player interaction) and are thus left more generic (so that players are more familiar with it). Movies, on the other hand, do not work that way. They can't directly interact with the audience the same way games do and have to rely solely on the story and concept to captivate them. Hence, I feel that adapting games to movies is a lot more difficult than translating other forms of media since comics, TV shows, plays and books generally tell stories the same way movies do and all of them rely on the story and/or concept to hook the audience in.

Exactly this.

The problem in adapting games to film --- unlike adaptations of comic books, novels, TV shows or theatre --- is that games are participatory and films, by contrast, are passive.

The problem in adapting any game to film is that the viewer is always bound to ask: "Why should I bother passively watching this story when I can immerse myself in it by playing the game?"

I think, ironically enough, the only thing a game adaptation could possibly be successful at is introducing the story/concept to the NON-gamer. If someone made, for instance, a Halo movie --- no matter how great, no matter how authentic --- then gamers and non-gamers would have two totally different views of it. The non-gamer might say that it's a great story and makes for a great film with spectacular visuals; but the fanboy gamer, as much as he'd like to deny it, would find himself wishing he was back at his console, controlling the action himself.

 

[Spider-Vader]

They need competent directors who atleast mildly know the source material. The problem with game films so far is that they all have hack directors attached to them. Said hack directors also don't know s*** about the games they're adapting. See: Resident Evil movies

 

[Raul1001]

Do you think filmmakers should use the same characters and stories as in the games?

 

[the amazing fro]

The thing about that is that a lot of summer action films are like that - from the Transformers film franchise to The Expendables. Both are essentially one long action sequence with minimal story and pretty straightforward concepts (giant fighting robots for the former and classic action stars duking it out onscreen for the latter).

The biggest problem with movies based on games is that the concept of a lot of these games are pretty generic in movie-land. Think about it... what makes Doom, Medal of Honor or even Mass Effect unique from a conceptual standpoint? A lot of it has to do with gameplay and player interactivity - putting people in control and immersing them in that way. While not a video game, chess is a good example having no story whatsoever and a concept that essentially boils down to trying to each time trying to kill the leader of the other team before the other team does the same. However, its gameplay of having the players figure out how to accomplish said goals is what makes it so interesting.

As such, the drive for settings and stories to stand out from other games is less of an issue (instead, more effort is put in improving player interaction) and are thus left more generic (so that players are more familiar with it). Movies, on the other hand, do not work that way. They can't directly interact with the audience the same way games do and have to rely solely on the story and concept to captivate them. Hence, I feel that adapting games to movies is a lot more difficult than translating other forms of media since comics, TV shows, plays and books generally tell stories the same way movies do and all of them rely on the story and/or concept to hook the audience in.

This. Strip a lot of games of their gameplay, leaving only the story and you're left with something unoriginal and generic. Most game's stories and the way they tell stories are inspired by films, so its sort of redundant to adapt them. Its the gameplay that makes games exciting. Videogames areunique in the ways they tell a story and still are trying to find their own way to have a narrative without relying on cinematics.