To preface this, we all know the power house that Hollywood is. It's estima
ted that in 2010, the US Movie Market will make roughly $11.02 billion. This is higher than the GDP of dozens of countries around the world. Needless to say Hollywood can pretty much do whatever they want with no looking back because of their massive amounts of cash flow.
The Video Game industry is definitely booming. Despite many companies going through layoffs and closing, games are still pouring out and millions of people every day turn on their XBox, PS3, Wii, DSi, PSP, even PC's for the purpose of immersing themselves into a world of interactive bliss.
I won't trap myself in an imagination land where every video game has a deeply rewarding story, game play, or is even good for that matter. A vast majority of the games which come out for systems are overlooked critically and commercially because they just aren't that good. No innovation, no new story, no new taxes. But there are some games which will literally rip your brain out of your head, take it to a nice steak dinner, romance it all night, and then put it back without any hanky panky because these games are classy and don't kiss on the first date. One such game series is the Uncharted series by Naughty Dog Entertainment. I completed the first game and I'm on my way to finishing the second and I have to say that for both, they are a mental explosion of awesomeness. There are huge moments where things are falling all around
you, exploding, just an insane amount of action. Here is the point: I fear for the day I hear about an Uncharted movie being in the works.
With the advances in video game technology, most of the cut scenes and even in game experiences look as impressive as movies. For a game like Uncharted, even something like Halo, it feels like I'm interacting with a movie in my living room. Why would anyone want to strip that from the gamer and the entertainment fan by making a movie from a video game? It inevitably will be cast by a pack of wild hyenas that are let loose on a movie lot with the intention of casting whoever they attack as the starring roles. Add into it that with the limitations of special effects when doing live action movies and the same advances of video games which are making them more realistic, there is no way to recreate the same massive events that occur in video games without massive Hollywood budgets. Consider this, as convoluted as this has been so far, your introduction paragraph.
First let's look at the interactive aspect. I recently went to see The Twilight Saga: Eclipse with my girlfriend at midnight at a theater. Don't you dare judge me. The only interaction that I had with the movie was the gut wrenching feelings I got when I had to watch Kristen Stewart act. On the other hand, I played Uncharted 2 last night and got to progress the story myself, keeping me awake until 4 in the morning. I took part in every gun fight. I jumped across every chasm. I ran away from every tank. I was immersed in the action because it was interactive. Don't get me wrong, there are movies that keep me locked in my seat through drama and action, or humor. But they don't hold a candle to how intensely tied into games one can get. It's the difference between being pulled behind a NASCAR race car as it speeds around the track and being the driver. It would be far more exciting and engaging to be in the driver's seat.
Let's move on to casting. Hollywood has a core group of actors and actresses which when you see them, you say "I want to see that movie." The rest of them just get plugged into ever other role that the movie industry comes up with, and there are a bunch of them. With video game movies, I can't reference a point when the casting has been absolutely awful. Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft was a reasonable move. Timothy Olyphant as 47 in the Hitman movie is another good call considering how well he performed that role. But I always fear that the casting decisions will end up turning out awful and leaving me hurling my lunch all over the carpet of the theater. There's always the hope that some big studio would hire a small, indy director to take on this project and then allow them to do all of the casting themselves to ensure that it turns out the way they want. But the likelihood of that is slim. With video games gaining popularity and the desire of Hollywood's aging and washed up stars to appear that they're hip and cool, they all sign on as soon as possible to take any role they can to prove that to themselves. Plus we all already know that Samuel L. Jackson is in everything.
One of my bigger fears is definitely casting. But it's also the lack of sense and sensibility when it comes to picking video game movies which are going to be made. Tomb Raider had an already established story, which through dozens of iterations was run through the mud, stabbed, beaten, bludgeoned, molested, tickled and then set ablaze already by the game company. The movie industry took a concept which had been played out in an interactive media and forced us to watch them play it out again without any control. At least in the games when it got boring you could make Lara swan dive off of a cliff. Hitman loosely followed the concept of the game and injected more of a story line into it. It was about betrayal and revenge, much like the games, however it also forced an interaction of emotion from the title character that isn't found in the games for the purpose of drawing in a larger audience.
It can usually be determined video game movies aren't great ideas when one of the most popular game franchises out, the Halo series, can't get a movie rendition off the ground. The incredible following that the game has would mean droves of gamer fan boys (yeah me too) would line up to see that movie, and it can't get studio or director support. Even with Peter Jackson of Lord of the Rings fame backing it. Hollywood doesn't have faith in game movies and won't throw the kind of money needed to get the right cast, writer, and director to make it truly successful and not let down an entire nation of gamers. When you short change something like that, it's not setting it up for success in the long run. Transformers was given a $150 million dollar budget and was pretty successful at keeping the comic and cartoon fans happy. Tomb Raider had a $115 million dollar budget but was awful because they took something which was originally interactive, and removed the interactivity, destroying the concept.
What I'm saying I guess is that you need to ensure that you have a large budget in order to make the movie good, but even that doesn't guarantee success. Hollywood is so terrified to throw a huge budget at a video game movie (I know they did it with Tomb Raider and maybe that jarred them) that it doesn't provide a good omen when one is announced. It's so likely that they will do it to try to cash in on the popularity but won't be willing to take the risks to make the movie well and really engage and deliver to the video game fan base.
And maybe that's the issue. The video game fan base is so looked down upon as a small margin of people when it comes to demographics that they are ignored. But the video game industry is growing exponentially. There are three major systems which appeal to all different sectors of society. Grandma's are playing Wii, frat boys are playing Xbox 360 (guilty) and people who want a blu-ray player are buying up PS3's. As scary as it is, we're about due for a great video game movie which blows away the gamers and makes them hungry for more. Once the formula for success is developed it will be duplicated to oblivion and I'll be writing another blog about how they need to stop making video game movies because they're played out.
I don't have a negative opinion about Hollywood. I love movies. Video games and movies are like oil and water though. Most of the major movies which get video game renditions turn out to be atrocious as well. Too short, awful game play, awful everything. The only success they've seen has been in the Lego series with Star Wars, Batman, Indiana Jones and now Lego: Harry Potter. Those games simplify a story and add a jovial spin to it, instead of trying to fabricate the drama of a movie in an interactive form.
Video games and movies need to keep their distance until someone can formulate the best formula to ensure that it is going to be successful. It may even require the simultaneous production of a game and a movie, on the same timeline, making sure that the movie doesn't try to overtake the game's action and drown out it's interactivity, all the while developing a story which translates well to movies and provides the necessary drama without needing interactivity to keep it interesting. It makes me think to the Animatrix which was a successful series of animated films based in the Matrix Universe. Going along those lines, I think video games could be successful in translation to movies and vice versa. As for now though, please leave my favorite franchises alone. Thanks!
Feel free to comment below. If you thought Tomb Raider was an Oscar-worthy piece of American cinematography then by all means, let me know so I can reply to tell you how incredibly wrong you are. Or if you want one of my images, please send 25 cents to me and I'll e-mail it on over from my table to yours!
No comments:
Post a Comment