So What's the Deal with Video Game Movies? Why Can't They Get It Right?

[jmc]

There have been numerous successful animation to live-action films as well.

But let's go back to the three points I mentioned.

How many live action video game films actually avoided all three problems?

I can think of only western movie that did so. This past year's Warcraft. One. That's hardly enough to say it can't be done. And even it is a borderline example, because they made the poor choice of adapting the first game instead of the far better Warcraft III or World of Warcraft.

Ace Attorney is live action and quite entertaining, so it can be done.

I come back to the stats. In almost 30 years we've had according to Wikipedia 40 Hollywood movies based off video games. Even taking into account the points you've made the fact the genre has a 0-40 record over that period of time says something beyond what you've defined is affecting how these movies are created, because out of 40 movies there should have been at least one film that bucked the trend. We have to ask then whether it's the creative teams being poor, or whether it's because it's difficult adapting an interactive medium into one that isn't. IMO the evidence suggests the mediums just don't mesh well due to how we consume them. I ask this to you, you clearly don't believe there's enough to suggest the mediums are incompatible, at what point would you consider the mediums incompatible?

 

[LoganGambit87]

the biggest problem imo is alot of these films just get terrible screenwriters

even assassins creed has this problem 2 of the 3 screenwriters(already a problem) are responsible for Transporter Refueled,Allegiant,and Exodus:Gods And Kings

so i have little faith in that movie since a movie lives or dues on the script

 

[Rowsdower!]

I wanted so badly for Warcraft to be good. Instead, it was like watching Dungeons & Dragons 2. I've wanted to see a Zelda movie since I was a kid but... maybe Nintendo was right to keep that from ever happening.

 

[Kyle]

I think Assassin's Creed still has a very strong chance. First trailer didn't grab me, the new one definitely has though.

 

[TheVileOne]

My theory is that the stories don't translate well. Video games are all about giving the player agency into whatever they are doing.

The whole point about Zelda when you play as Link is that YOU ARE LINK. Watch the credits for Mega Man X. What does Capcom and say? "And YOU as Mega Man X!" I mean how cool is that? The devs are basically saying it's you who are those characters. You are enabling and controlling those characters. You aren't passively watch Luke Skywalker save the galaxy. Video games one up Star Wars. Why? Instead of watching Luke Skywalker, YOU are Luke Skywalker.

No one take this the wrong way, but a lot of video game plots, I'm not saying they are bad, but they are just sort of stock-ish generic plots. Or, they are patchwork plots of existing narrative material. The plots of games are really not that important at the end of the day, the plots are just patchwork things to let you play the game and to enable the action of the game along. I get that people have reference for game stories and some characters. That's fine, I do too. But I think that's why it's not such a simple thing to translate a game into a movie.

People who play video games aren't looking for the movie or TV experience. They want that agency that they are the one on the adventure and doing all the action. In a video game, you get to make the choices and drive the action. In a good RPG, you choose the pace of the story. You make the choices. A movie based on that game can't recreate that experience onscreen. Everything about the movie is fixed and arbitrary. You can't go back and have different endings or play through it a different way with different characters.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I come back to the stats. In almost 30 years we've had according to Wikipedia 40 Hollywood movies based off video games. Even taking into account the points you've made the fact the genre has a 0-40 record over that period of time says something beyond what you've defined is affecting how these movies are created, because out of 40 movies there should have been at least one film that bucked the trend. We have to ask then whether it's the creative teams being poor, or whether it's because it's difficult adapting an interactive medium into one that isn't. IMO the evidence suggests the mediums just don't mesh well due to how we consume them. I ask this to you, you clearly don't believe there's enough to suggest the mediums are incompatible, at what point would you consider the mediums incompatible?

Probably not much, given how like I already said it has already been successful transferred to animation many times. Both with regards to television series and films.

But at the very least it would require several more Warcrafts. Big budget serious efforts from talented filmmakers. And we simply haven't had that on any sort of large scale at all.

You could have said similar things about superhero films back in 1998 (with really only Donner and Burton breaking out over 60 years), and look how they took off afterwards.

 

[Guts]

I hope there is a filmmaker out there that wants to make a movie based on this game.

 

[sweetre15]

Honestly I think that all it really takes To make a good one is taking the story beats, backstories, costume designs, aesthetics from said games and then either drawing inspiration from tie in material like spinoff books or comics or just being creative enough to improvise and use your own ideas to fill in the blanks and elevate the material to something more memorable in a way one doesn't expect.

Skirt that fine line between making sure fans are familiar with what they see but make sure it's different enough for fans to not feel like "Hey I saw this already!"


This is why I feel Joey Ansah successfully nailed it with Assassin's Fist, he took core elements, aesthetic, music, storylines and characterizations from the game and even bits and pieces from the Anime's and comics and formed a cohesive narrative that was both engaging and done in a way that didn't feel redundant while very much having a sense of authenticity coarsing through its veins in a way that made it feel like the source material came to life.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

My theory is that the stories don't translate well. Video games are all about giving the player agency into whatever they are doing.

In many cases, this is true. But there are select games that can carry over. There is even the whole video game genre of Visual Novels that are way more about story than gameplay.

And there are other games that translate well as well. The Persona films for instance (and those managed to make it work when the games had a silent protagonist). Pokemon has been going on for almost 20 films and almost as many years. Pokemon isn't to my tastes, but it has been highly popular for a generation.

 

[TheVileOne]

Those movies aren't big budget Hollywood features.

Also, Pokemon after all these years has never been done in live action until now. And they are starting with some weird bizarro Detective Pikachu story.

On a personal level, I love Final Fantasy VII Advent Children. But is it a really great movie? Like if it had a wide release in US theaters would it have actually made money and gotten good reviews? I highly doubt it. Advent Children is like one extended cutscene with a lot of characters we know and love. It's a nice epilogue of sorts to the original game. I enjoy it and it works for me, but I'm not sure if you could call it great cinema.

 

[Asr]

My take on VGMs is that they're pretty much made by people who don't know the property well enough to be familiar with the background/story/mythology. Because, heaven forbid, that a director of one of these movies has actually played the game that the movie is based on!

The source material is given next to zero respect by the majority of the filmmakers, who think they can just pick & choose things from it without having any idea of what made it great for the people who played it—for example, the WarCraft movie having barely any resemblance to the RTS games that came before and clearly being influenced more by the WoW MMORPG.

I also think part of the problem is that these filmmakers in general probably don't play video games period.

My theory is that the stories don't translate well. Video games are all about giving the player agency into whatever they are doing.

The whole point about Zelda when you play as Link is that YOU ARE LINK.

Your whole argument fell apart for me there. While it's true that the player controls Link, I'm pretty sure most gamers perceive Link to be a character separate from themselves. Otherwise there wouldn't be a huge abundance of fan art on the Web shipping Link and Zelda. Are you really going to tell me that gamers wish that they could get with Zelda? No, they want Link to get with Zelda because he's always saving her life.

 

[TheVileOne]

My take on VGMs is that they're pretty much made by people who don't know the property well enough to be familiar with the background/story/mythology. Because, heaven forbid, that a director of one of these movies has actually played the game that the movie is based on!

The source material is given next to zero respect by the majority of the filmmakers, who think they can just pick & choose things from it without having any idea of what made it great for the people who played it—for example, the WarCraft movie having barely any resemblance to the RTS games that came before and clearly being influenced more by the WoW MMORPG.

I also think part of the problem is that these filmmakers in general probably don't play video games period.

Your whole argument fell apart for me there. While it's true that the player controls Link, I'm pretty sure most gamers perceive Link to be a character separate from themselves. Otherwise there wouldn't be a huge abundance of fan art on the Web shipping Link and Zelda. Are you really going to tell me that gamers wish that they could get with Zelda? No, they want Link to get with Zelda because he's always saving her life.

Nope. Game developers talk about this all the time.

From the mouth of Shigeru Miyamoto, creator of Zelda in Hyrule Historia:

http://www.zeldainformer.com/articles/link-is-too-complex-of-a-character-to-just-be-you-or-me

“Link is the player himself . . . the player saves the world.”

Here is more:

"For awhile now, Miyamoto has been saying that he wants the player in a Zelda game to actually feel as if they were going on the adventure themselves, rather than just controlling a character down a path. With MotionPlus controls, you are actually doing real-life movements that match up perfectly with Link. He's acting like more of an avatar than a character, allowing the player an easier path to feeling closer to the experience. With each sword swing and arrow fired, you can see your real-life movements becoming an in-game reality. Surely, this type of control approach will help create memories of fights you took on, and puzzles you solved. One would expect you to better remember the experience as your own, rather than one of just guiding Link." — [ E3 2010 - Ten minutes with Shigeru Miyamoto], Go Nintendo.

"I think it's the feeling that you are actually taking part in the action, that the things in the game are really happening to you. It’s a game where, once you become absorbed in the adventure, you don’t feel like you’re merely controlling the character, but that it’s really you pushing those blocks around. You really feel like you have solved those puzzles in the dungeons. That strange feeling that it’s actually you in the game isn’t confined to puzzle-solving or battles; you get it when you meet and speak to characters in the game, or visit new places. Well, you could sum it up with the word "fantasy", but that sense of experiencing a world that doesn’t exist is different from the feeling you get watching a film. It all comes down to that feel which is totally unique to Zelda games. This is something which may not be that central to the game, but you also bump into all sorts of oddball characters, the kind that leave you thinking: "No game would normally have someone like that in it!" I think that might also be something you could call 'Zelda-esque'." — [ Iwata Asks The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Part 4 - Always Striving to Stay True to the Spirit of Zelda], Nintendo's Wii Video Game console.

DOOM creator John Romero said the following about the DOOM marine and why he doesn't have a name:

Romero said, "There was never a name for the DOOM marine because it's supposed to be YOU."

Some video games have the whole idea is that the avatar for the main character is actually the player. The reason a character doesn't talk in a first-person shooter is because the player is the main character. This philosophy has been around for years.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

That is true of a great many games, and I agree that Zelda and Doom are two that would never work as movies. But not every main character is a player avatar. Nathan Drake isn't. John Marston isn't. Joel and Ellie aren't.

It isn't accurate to paint the entire medium in the same brush.

Those movies aren't big budget Hollywood features.

Nope. But they are films. Which goes back to my original argument. The problem isn't that video games don't work as films, it is that Hollywood can't figure out how to make them work as films.

I think ultimately the problem comes down to that filmmakers don't understand video games, and the people who make the video games can't figure it out either because they don't understand film. In order to make it work you need to find a good director who understands these games, understands what games work as a non-interactive medium and which don't, and has enough budget and support to actually be able to execute his vision. And that just doesn't happen very often, if at all.

That being said, I have little faith that Hollywood will figure it out any time soon. I did have some optimism going into this year with Warcraft and Assassin's Creed, two games that I think SHOULD work as films, but apparently have gotten screwed up. And then I see things like how Uncharted is being handled, which practically is a movie already, and I get really discouraged. So I'd just as soon they stop trying since they never get it right, but I don't think it is because the medium isn't compatible. Certain games yes, all games no.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Pirates of the Carribean. Based off a ride.

And before says anything about the sequels. The first one was dope.

Interesting that you mention Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, because that was taken in large part from a Monkey Island script by Ted Elliott.

 

[Ivan Drago]

All I want is a Halo movie.

 

[Tony Stark]

I'm still curious to see how Assasin's Creed turns out. That's the one game that really could work as a film, however in all fairness, even the game itself has become bland in the last few iterations. Black Flag was pretty fun, but everything since, has been pretty bland.

Warcraft was doomed to fail. There's so much lore in that game. More so than even in Lord of the Rings. A lot of it is borrowed from other medium, for example the Titan's lore from Warcraft is pretty much an amalgamation of Greek and Norse Mythology.

The one story that I thought would be very powerful on screen was the whole Lich King saga, starting from the fall of Arthas and the murder of his father, to the raid on Ice Crown temple. However for a lot of people it's rehashing a story they already know.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Video Game movies will be hard to make work since the only reason for them to be turned into movies is to make money (or try).
They are not used to be deep and meaningful.

For example, Deus Ex in the same vein as Blade Runner? Not going to happen in the near future.

But that is the same problem with a lot of movies, they are done to make money, and they are not even good at that.

But i believe things will eventually turn around. All it takes is for the first quality video game movie to be made. When that happens, i'm sure good VG movies or tv shows will be made.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Warcraft was doomed to fail. There's so much lore in that game. More so than even in Lord of the Rings. A lot of it is borrowed from other medium, for example the Titan's lore from Warcraft is pretty much an amalgamation of Greek and Norse Mythology.

The one story that I thought would be very powerful on screen was the whole Lich King saga, starting from the fall of Arthas and the murder of his father, to the raid on Ice Crown temple. However for a lot of people it's rehashing a story they already know.

I haven't seen the movie, but the reason for it to not work is that they want to put everything in a single movie.

Why not make a trilogy?
The Lich King would work. The rise and fall of Arthas Menethil.

Or why not make Starcraft?
Just look at the first game. You have so much story, so many political background, you can easily make 3 or more movies before Sarah Kerrigan becomes the Queen of Blades.

All in all, there are tons of video games that would great to be turned into movies, but i'm sure, just like i said in my last comment, it will happen.
Video Game movies are bound to be the next Comic Book movies. They will not replace them, but they will work side by side.

Adaptations are the future, for better or worst.

 

[Sundancer]

The important element is remember this a movie and to follow elements of good screenwriting. Please the mainstream audience before the fanboys.

Another essential is to take what people like about the game and use those elements to create a story. Use the setting and characters and adapt the plot when possible. Focus on why Link needs to visit dungeons instead of showing him doing it dungeon after dungeon.

The first Tomb Raider and Resident Evil movies were decent action movies. Silent Hill had great aesthetics but suffered from story choices and a long-winded plot. As someone once said, it's like watching someone play Silent Hill.

Early there was the misconception that games did not have to be faithful and they were for the younger crowd (Double Dragon, Super Mario Bros.) Not so much now.

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

I don't believe there's anything inherently undoable from the switching of the two mediums. I think making good video game movies can be done, they just need to pick the right franchises that have a story that can transfer well to film and get a good team behind it.

Warcraft was a franchise that I felt couldn't really be done justice as a film and would have been better suited to a tv show. There's waaaaaay too much story and things happening to be able to condense that into a 2 hour movie and not feel like an over-convoluted and rushed mess, which is what the film was. Unfortunately, you can't do an effects-heavy series like warcraft on tv without the budged being beyond ridiculous.

It all really depends the team picked, the franchise chosen, and if it has enough material for a film as well as not having too much for a 2 hour film.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Warcraft was a franchise that I felt couldn't really be done justice as a film and would have been better suited to a tv show. There's waaaaaay too much story and things happening to be able to condense that into a 2 hour movie and not feel like an over-convoluted and rushed mess, which is what the film was.

The thing that people don't get is that VG movies are made to make money.
If they don't put all the lore into a single movie, how to the hell are they going to sell toys?

As long as big-budget adaptations movies are done with the sole propose of making money, those movies are always going to fall short.
Capitalism and quality are not very compatible since capitalism puts money as the main goal.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

It's one thing to adapt something like Super Mario or Sonic The Hedgehog or Zelda, these are things that really don't lend itself to anything else but the video game format.

About that franchise, I can actually see a Legend of Zelda film inspired by Star Wars and other good films.

But there are so many modern video game franchises that lend itself to film so well that the games themselves are more or less interactive movies. Things like Resident Evil, Max Payne, Tomb Raider, Street Fighter (Legend of Chun-li? SERIOUSLY??!!), Mortal Kombat, Need For Speed, Warcraft...these things are all, I feel, very easily adaptable to live action.

These days Street Fighter has an adaptable story, we have Assassin's Fist to prove that. Back in 1994 the deepest story was that of Cammy, lost memories and a former love of Vega/M. Bison. Ryu was "It's all about the fight", Guile was "I want to kill Vega/Bison as vengeance for my dead friend, Blanka is the lost son of his mom, Ken was "I beat the boss, let's be a couple my girlfriend".
I give Street Fighter of that time leniency for straying away from the source material, and I think the idea of focusing more on "Allied forces stopping a militant villain" and less on "Power hungry tyrant seeking strong fighters to manipulate for yadda yadda, pushing the military to the background" is neat.

 

[MadVillainy]

Need for Speed couldve been dope. They, again, got s***y directors. Same with Max Payne and Tomb Raider.

 

[jmc]

Nope. But they are films. Which goes back to my original argument. The problem isn't that video games don't work as films, it is that Hollywood can't figure out how to make them work as films.

I think ultimately the problem comes down to that filmmakers don't understand video games, and the people who make the video games can't figure it out either because they don't understand film. In order to make it work you need to find a good director who understands these games, understands what games work as a non-interactive medium and which don't, and has enough budget and support to actually be able to execute his vision. And that just doesn't happen very often, if at all.

That being said, I have little faith that Hollywood will figure it out any time soon. I did have some optimism going into this year with Warcraft and Assassin's Creed, two games that I think SHOULD work as films, but apparently have gotten screwed up. And then I see things like how Uncharted is being handled, which practically is a movie already, and I get really discouraged. So I'd just as soon they stop trying since they never get it right, but I don't think it is because the medium isn't compatible. Certain games yes, all games no.

Isn't playing them part of the problem though? How you feel playing a game is a subjective experience, and with a lot of games these days there are so many variables in how you actually go about finishing the story. It's not quite choose your own adventure, but there's an element of that present.

If I play something like Assassin's Creed I can chose which part of the map I want to go to, whether I want to continue with the main story or do a side quest or do something else entirely, in which case my experience is going to be different to another persons. That's not like TV shows, novels, comic books, or plays which tend to follow a similar narrative path to movies. You can really only experience that type of medium one way. So, I don't think it's about people not understanding the games, it's that there's a different type of experience with games, one that's not as easy to define given we all play them in a different way. The question I think is hardest to answer with any creative team in this genre is 'What part of this game are we trying to adapt?'.

 

[metaphysician]

All I want is a Halo movie.

I still hold that Halo was the great missed opportunity of the genre. It has just about the right balance of story to make for a good adaptation, without either being too sparse or too much. It had a style that would translate into cinema well. It has a colorful cast of characters to work with, rather than just one player-insert. And it even had a major company pushing it as a serious effort.

Sadly, the actual Hollywood studios wanted nothing to do with it, because they were unwilling to treat it like a serious sci-fi blockbuster, rather than a low budget schlockfest.