Published on January 11th, 2011 | by Charlie0
Are Game-to-Movie Adaptation’s Worth It?
Over the past decade or so, there have been a tonne of movies based around some of the world’s most popular video games, with more video games announced to be turning into movies every year. But is there really any point to video game movies?
The thing is, a lot of the video game movies seem to be made and the wrong directors or writers are chosen for the job.
Take “Doom” for example. The movie was, of course, based on the popular Doom games. The movie was directed by Andrzej Bartkowiak (who?). He directed such movies as Exit Wounds and Romeo Must Die, and did cinematography for films such as Dante’s Peak, Speed and Lethal Weapon 4. The Doom movie was created in 2005, and at the time, Andrzej was around 55 years old. A little old to be directing such a high graphical movie based on one of the world’s most popular horror franchises. (But Charlie, it’s usually the writer’s fault) OK. Let’s say it IS the writers fault, which yes, fair enough, it sometimes is. The movie hardly even followed the actual plot of the game at all, which yes, to avoid following the same story that was told in the game, you need to create a fresh story, but you shouldn’t go about changing everything. This movie was based on the game, which from the actual story, you could argue that you could change the name of the movie to something not “Doom” related, since the story hardly followed the game. The way to get an audience, is to take the game’s story and SLIGHTLY change it here and there. And do I even have to go into the actors? Dwayne Johnson? Just… no.
Don’t think I’m not going to bring Resident Evil into this, because I am. As fond as I am about Resident Evil and it’s movies, I do seem to wonder what is the point of the sequels. The first Resident Evil was so twisted and gruesome, and was almost exactly what the games were about. Then Apocalypse came, and sure, fair enough, it was set in Racoon City, the main city of the games, and how the zombies seem to infest on everybody above ground, with the city soon being bombed, like in the games… Then everything changed. The third movie was set 5 years later, where most of the world became deserted. I understand that such a thing may happen in a zombie apocalypse, but then you start to wonder. Is this Resident Evil anymore? Everything started to become so scientific, and it was barely about the zombies anymore. Sure, there were a lot of scenes with zombies in them, but a lot of the time, it was just th survivors going to a new place, zombies attack, move onto the next place, zombies attack, move on and so forth. Not to mention, not much was explained when it came to the 5 year gap on where Alice went. I mean, I was dying to know what happened to that little girl from Apocalypse, but did I get any answers? No. And now Afterlife. This time, you could fully ask. Is there really a point to the fourth movie? The plot was just all over the place, and again, it was hardly about the zombies. That’s what people come to see in a film like Resident Evil. The zombies! Yes, sure, we got to see the iconic Axe-Man in the movie, but really, they could have stuck a giant were-wolf in the movie and it would still be a “who gives a damn” movie.
Do I even have to go onto Alone in the Dark? Which, was by far the worst video game movie adaptation I have ever seen in my life. Yes, it was scary (in places), but was this movie even worth making? I am shocked it got a sequel (even though it was direct-to-video release). And what about Max Payne? I mean demons? WHAT?! THAT’S NOT MAX PAYNE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! Silent Hill was a decent movie, in my opinion, so I will give that one credit, just as I will with Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. They both weren’t perfect, but they were decent enough to stick to the plot… ish. Tomb Raider was alright, but I still think both movies could have been better.
So far, and this will most likely be a long list, games that have been planned or are rumored to be movies are:
- Kane and Lynch (Don’t mean to sound racist, but a black man playing a white role? WHY?!)
- Halo (How long will this movie take?)
- inFamous (Yes, I will talk about PS3 games in this article)
- Uncharted (I’m not sure if Sony are to blame, but if they are… WHY, SONY?! WHY?! WHY CHOOSE MARK WAHLBURG?! Nathan Fillion FTW. And aren’t they already like a movie anyway?)
- Darksiders (WHY?! And Bruce Willis as War? NO!)
- Bioshock (A movie which will most likely be crushed)
- World of Warcraft (Sam Raimi as Director…. eeeeemmmm I have mixed feelings)
- The Sims (Never. Please. No.)
- Gears of War (They better not screw this one up)
- Call of Duty (Are you joking? As much as a “Modern Warfare” type MIGHT work, hasn’t there been enough war movies for a lifetime?)
Many of you will disagree with me, and find my points invalid, but most of the movie adaptations seriously suck! As somebody on N4G said, the companies that create the adaptations rely too much on fanbase’s. Dragonball/Z/GT, a japanese anime, had a huge fanbase. The movie, Dragonball Evolution, flopped, so it just proves a point. There is one thing I will admit too… 95% of the time, game adaptations of movies are usually worse. *cough* Harry Potter *cough* Deathly Hallows *cough*