Action-Adventure Uncharted

[Iceman]

Ellie will be 25 and Joel's love interest.

Omg, don’t even say it.

 

[Iceman]

And that was the guy who CREATED the games!

The guy who made the film was the creator of the games? I didn’t know that. This world doesn’t make any sense.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The guy who made the film was the creator of the games? I didn’t know that. This world doesn’t make any sense.

Yeah, Hironobu Sakaguchi. That was the beginning of the end for him at Square.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The problem is that many of these filmmakers don't respect the source material. Even if you think they shouldn't make VG adaptations, it's even worse that they allow directors who clearly don't respect what they're adapting.
Some director, a good blockbuster director, has to come jn and do it.

Not a movie, but I think the Last of Us show could be it. But then again Uncharted is such a layup and they are messing this up. So who knows

The thing is thought this isn't even a director's vision, it's the studio's, hence why a number of directors have joined and left as the studio obviously wants something specific.

Latest is Ruben Fleischer, who I actually like as a director and feel is a little under rated. If he was doing a full on and faithful Uncharted movie I would be very excited right now. But this crap? Not even Spielberg directing would get me excited.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The thing is thought this isn't even a director's vision, it's the studio's, hence why a number of directors have joined and left as the studio obviously wants something specific.

Latest is Ruben Fleischer, who I actually like as a director and feel is a little under rated. If he was doing a full on and faithful Uncharted movie I would be very excited right now. But this crap? Not even Spielberg directing would get me excited.

Spielberg might have enough pull that he could throw his weight around to get what he wanted at least. On the other hand, Spielberg's action-adventure films have been lacking for awhile. He does better when sticking to historical dramas.

 

[Iceman]

But it begs the question what's the point in doing the exact story if the game is already so cinematic and it's interactive? It's like The Last of Us. It's almost like a step back when you make a movie and an imitation of something that's already there.

In this case why not just write a new adventure for Drake? The concept fits for it. You still get the character you love but put him in a new situation unique to a film with all the charm of the games but that can surprise players and audience members alike.

Yeah that’s a fair point. Particularly with The Last of Us (or anything with important twists) they couldn’t just repeat the game as that wouldn’t work as well second time around.

 

[Iceman]

Yeah, Hironobu Sakaguchi. That was the beginning of the end for him at Square.

I just can’t understand it. If he wanted to make that film, fine. Just don’t call it Final Fantasy if it’s something different.

 

[Iceman]

Spielberg might have enough pull that he could throw his weight around to get what he wanted at least. On the other hand, Spielberg's action-adventure films have been lacking for awhile. He does better when sticking to historical dramas.

True. Ready Player One wasn’t bad.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

True. Ready Player One wasn’t bad.

It was alright. Some nice set pieces, especially the race and the big battle at the end. I didn't like the lead character though.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Spielberg might have enough pull that he could throw his weight around to get what he wanted at least. On the other hand, Spielberg's action-adventure films have been lacking for awhile. He does better when sticking to historical dramas.

Well I was just making point with Spielberg as one of the best ever directors STL working today. Cameron or Nolan wouldn't get me excited for this story either.

After the success of the Zombieland films and Venom I thought Fleischer would have some pull, but I honestly just think he is collecting a paycheck here. Probably so Zombieland 3 gets the greenlight.

 

[Iceman]

Well I was just making point with Spielberg as one of the best ever directors STL working today. Cameron or Nolan wouldn't get me excited for this story either.

After the success of the Zombieland films and Venom I thought Fleischer would have some pull, but I honestly just think he is collecting a paycheck here. Probably so Zombieland 3 gets the greenlight.

A director picking up a pay check directing Babyface Holland as Nathan Drake and Marky Mark as Sully. What could go wrong?

 

[Ninjablade]

Ugh, I still can’t believe freaking Marky Mark is playing Sully. I can understand the stupidity of Holland as Drake, but Wahlberg?

The only cast member that I want to actually be in this is Antonio Banderas.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

A director picking up a pay check directing Babyface Holland as Nathan Drake and Marky Mark as Sully. What could go wrong?

Evidently lots

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The only cast member that I want to actually be in this is Antonio Banderas.

Is that who they cast as Chloe?

 

[MadVillainy]

But it begs the question what's the point in doing the exact story if the game is already so cinematic and it's interactive? It's like The Last of Us. It's almost like a step back when you make a movie and an imitation of something that's already there.

In this case why not just write a new adventure for Drake? The concept fits for it. You still get the character you love but put him in a new situation unique to a film with all the charm of the games but that can surprise players and audience members alike.

I never bought this line of thinking and I think it's one of the reasons so many VG movie adaptations are unfaithful.

Yes video games are interactive and moreso than books, tv shows, etc. but I still think it's silly to say basically "throw out the source story and do your own thing." And then the whole "it's a step back" thing isn't necessarily true at all.

First and most importantly: A lot of people don't play the games. A majority of people who go and see the movies don't and won't play the games. So why not adapt the story that's already there?
It can't just be "well the games are interactive." because most of the people don't check out that interactive piece of source material.
And then there are people who've played the games and want to see their favorite game moments in live action anyway.

And I don't see how it's a step back at all. It's actually a pretty big opportunity. You could fine tune the stories of certain games, you can introduce audiences to a new franchise, and you give fans of the games a chance to relive their favorite moments. How is that a step back? Especially when, again, a majority of the movie going audience isn't going to have had that interactive experience.

On surprising fans of the source material: If you're adapting certain books, there's a certain number of people who know what's going to happen in the book. If you're basing your movie off a TV show, possibly the same thing can happen. Same with most other media transfers. So why is it a problem with VGs. The "it's interactive" excuse can't be enough for the reasons I've already stated.

There are games like Sonic, Mario, etc. where it doesn't matter as much. But why throw out source material and make your own adventure? That can work for comic books, but even a lot of superhero movies adapt things in broad strokes and that's even hit or miss.

Actually your line of thinking could be why we're getting stuff like what they're currently doing with Uncharted. They're writing a new adventure for Drake. One that will surprise audiences and fans alike. They wanna do something different that will surprise audiences. And that seems to be alienating fans. So...

You have the outlineof story, set pieces, etc. follow it while and there are chances to add some new flavor to the source and to do it well. Why throw it out? Don't try and do your own thing.
By your line of thinking there's not reason to adapt anything that's not a book. And even then that's iffy proposition.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

I’m surprised this movie is actually still happening considering it’s been in development hell for the past decade. And through those 10 years in development just about every rumor that leaked regarding the casting, story, etc. sounded terrible

Now that it seems to actually happening, everything still sounds terrible. Tom Holland is a terrible choice for Nathan Drake. The guy is a twig and his voice sounds like he’s still going through puberty. That may work for Spider-Man but not Drake. And don’t get me started on Mark Wahlberg as Sully

Seriously, did the people in charge of casting never play the games?

 

[I Am The Knight]

Because Tom Holland is "hot" right now. Sony thinks they can attach that to a big property as a lead. It's a simple cynical studio decision.

To be fair, the pitch for Teen Drake came from Holland himself. But Sony Pictures shouldn't have said yes

 

[MadVillainy]

Let's fight Tom Holland guys

 

[Sundancer]

Ugh, I still can’t believe freaking Marky Mark is playing Sully. I can understand the stupidity of Holland as Drake, but Wahlberg?

Whalberg is a big box office draw. Business wise, you need to draw in movie goers, not just people who played the games. It makes sense because average moviegoers are bigger percentage of the audience. Most people who watch this will have no idea what Sully is like in the game. I don't know why they want Whalberg. Hllywood has a history of sacrificing story and creativty in orderer to give things wider appeal. This is why we get odd castings.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I never bought this line of thinking and I think it's one of the reasons so many VG movie adaptations are unfaithful.

Yes video games are interactive and moreso than books, tv shows, etc. but I still think it's silly to say basically "throw out the source story and do your own thing." And then the whole "it's a step back" thing isn't necessarily true at all.

First and most importantly: A lot of people don't play the games. A majority of people who go and see the movies don't and won't play the games. So why not adapt the story that's already there?
It can't just be "well the games are interactive." because most of the people don't check out that interactive piece of source material.
And then there are people who've played the games and want to see their favorite game moments in live action anyway.

And I don't see how it's a step back at all. It's actually a pretty big opportunity. You could fine tune the stories of certain games, you can introduce audiences to a new franchise, and you give fans of the games a chance to relive their favorite moments. How is that a step back? Especially when, again, a majority of the movie going audience isn't going to have had that interactive experience.

On surprising fans of the source material: If you're adapting certain books, there's a certain number of people who know what's going to happen in the book. If you're basing your movie off a TV show, possibly the same thing can happen. Same with most other media transfers. So why is it a problem with VGs. The "it's interactive" excuse can't be enough for the reasons I've already stated.

There are games like Sonic, Mario, etc. where it doesn't matter as much. But why throw out source material and make your own adventure? That can work for comic books, but even a lot of superhero movies adapt things in broad strokes and that's even hit or miss.

Actually your line of thinking could be why we're getting stuff like what they're currently doing with Uncharted. They're writing a new adventure for Drake. One that will surprise audiences and fans alike. They wanna do something different that will surprise audiences. And that seems to be alienating fans. So...

You have the outlineof story, set pieces, etc. follow it while and there are chances to add some new flavor to the source and to do it well. Why throw it out? Don't try and do your own thing.
By your line of thinking there's not reason to adapt anything that's not a book. And even then that's iffy proposition.

You make a good point actually. I agree that it is similar to a book or any adaptation in principle whereas it's not like everybody has experienced it and that when adapting anything, you are going to change things to suit the medium. But I think it comes down to how we define the medium of film and the type of video game. In the case of The Last of Us; it's so very intentionally cinematic. Would you say Uncharted is similar to The Last of Us in terms of what it's trying to do? Because if it's not, then I can see where you're coming from.

You combine something as cinematic as The Last of Us, that with the interactive nature of it, like you're playing through a movie, it's like the next step beyond just watching it. That's why I say it's like a step back. If we can interact with something so intentionally cinematic, then what's the point in making a film when it is so much like a film already?

Playing something is different than reading a book or listening to a podcast. It's a different interactive experience. Playing is different from reading or listening. I don't know, maybe that's just me. Maybe I have to think about that more.

I'm not inherently against adapting video games, I just think this is a problem when trying to adapt them. I think you could adapt Bioshock into a movie, I think you could make a great Metroid movie and Metal Gear Solid movie whose games are also cinematic. But they present their own challenges to adapt.

 

[Iceman]

Whalberg is a big box office draw. Business wise, you need to draw in movie goers, not just people who played the games. It makes sense because average moviegoers are bigger percentage of the audience. Most people who watch this will have no idea what Sully is like in the game. I don't know why they want Whalberg. Hllywood has a history of sacrificing story and creativty in orderer to give things wider appeal. This is why we get odd castings.

They will also lose a bunch of people who played the games. The reaction has been quite universally bad. At the moment I'm not paying to watch it, and I'm a massive fan of the games. One of my favourite modern series.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Is that who they cast as Chloe?

Still better cast than the other two.

 

[Iceman]

I would prefer Banderas play all the roles.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Screw it Arnold Schwarzenegger for Elena

 

[Iceman]

Screw it Arnold Schwarzenegger for Elena

We’ re really getting somewhere in this thread. If any of these happen I will be back on board.