While bashing Uwe Boll and Paul W.S. Anderson is an easy option when looking for a reason why videogame movies often tank, is it perhaps worth taking a step back from directorial blame to look at the possibility that videogames are simply not cut out for Hollywood success due to poor storylines?
When it comes to the likes of Uwe Boll or Paul W.S. Anderson, a sound case can be argued for incompetence and a distinct lack of nounce after weighing up the terrible twosome’s respective movie portfolios, but writer Nicole LaPorte offers that videogame narratives are simply unable to sustain successful movie spin offs.
Comparing videogame movie adapatations against Hollywood creations reliant on the comic book world, LaPorte says that the "weak narratives" often found in videogames are unable to make the transition to big screen credibility – unlike certain comic book inspiration.
"Hollywood can't win at videogames," says LaPorte. "Because 13-year-old boys spend hours zapping asteroids or stealing virtual cars, movies based on videogames would seem to be the logical follow-up to the comic-book-to-movie frenzy."
However, while current Hollywood trends and the persistance of directors like Boll (Alone in the Dark, Postal, BloodRayne, Far Cry) would indicate that gaming is a veritable goldmine of possibilities, LaPorte points out that screenwriters are struggling to convert the integral attraction of entertaining gameplay into compelling, attention-holding cinema.
"Josh Olson, who was rewriting the ‘Halo’ script [which Peter Jackson was set to executive produce] before the movie fell apart, says video games ‘have aimless cycles," she outlines. "You go to A, shoot some monsters, then go to B, then start over and do it again.’"
News Story attached to:
- Alone in the Dark [PS2, PC, PSP, DS, Wii, PS3, XBOX360, Movie]
- BloodRayne [PSP, Movie, PS2, PC, Xbox, GC]
- BloodRayne 2 [PC, PS2, Xbox]
- Far Cry [PC]
- Postal 2 [PC]
Submit a Story
Register
Get Started
Webmaster Tools
Comments with -5 or lower "thumbs" are removed from display.
It makes no sense. =P
...btw how the *bleep* did he manage to get actors like Burt Reynolds or Ray Liotta or Ben Kingsley? Wtf?
So yeah, if it became standard as a source of reference material, that each of the higher ups at least played through PART of the game(s), the overall quaity would probably be better >_>
OOOOH! Something occurred to me...since gaming is getting nearly as big as Hollywood, that it would actually become industry standard to hire either some part of the original team that made the game (producers, or writers, or something), or at least hire an 'expert' in said game (or game series)???
That might help >_> Either way, they'd be able to tell them what would likely make sense for a given scene >_>
The first-person part of the Doom movie was probably the best part of that movie.
It's just lazy for directors to blame crappy game-based movies on the poor stories in the original games (as Uwe Boll did). They're the director - They should be able to make something out of a limited storyline. That's their job.
Most games have decent enough storylines to make an hour-and-a-half long Hollywood movie. If they think the storylines are poor, then they're just looking at the wrong games.
However, a game such as...FFVII to be made into a movie would have to be exact, fans wouldn't want any changes to that...except maybe not having Aeris die, of course. xD