Gore Verbinski (Pirates of the Caribbean) has been signed up to Direct a movie version of the hit FPS Bioshock.

Not sure why they bother though - other than to make a few quid obviously.

The move from game to movie usually means disappointment for both fans of the game and fans of the cinema. Possibly both. (Uwe Boll and Paul. W.S Anderson - i'm looking at you !!)

Having said that - Silent Hill was pretty good - though its original (creepy) story did lend itself to the film genre rather well.

Unlike Resident Evil (the films of which are a 'guilty pleasure' at best).

Maybe Verbinski can do a decent job with Bioshock - though having seen the Pirates Of The Caribbean movies i seriously doubt it !!

Slap stick Bioshock eh, it'll be fun atleast!

*bangs head on desk repeatedly until this starts to seem like a good idea*

yeah..... no..

The special effects should be good at least.

It'll require more characters which are directly interacting.

For example, that chap who talks to you on the radio would not be enough interaction.

It might be a group landing, or something like that.

I dunno, having one guy on his own for most of the film might make it more claustrophobic.

quote:

Originally posted by SarinFDUK:
Slap stick Bioshock eh, it'll be fun atleast!

Will there be Benny Hill chase music as he's running from a Big Daddy? There has to be!

I'm not pessimistic about this. The more videogames advance towards realism, the more likely it is that a movie adaptation could turn out successful.

Afterall, it only took them what? 50 years to make the first great comic book - movie adaptation? I might see the first excellent videogame movie before I die.

Well it's good to see Gore Verbinski returning to his horror movie roots. But I still feel that games like BioShock, GTA, Splinter Cell, Metal Gear Solid and the like, should never be turned into movies. The games themselves are cinematic enough as it is. So you'd either end up with a movie that is an exact copy of the game you just played or something that doesn't feel quite right.

quote:

Originally posted by TeaVirusUK:
Maybe Verbinski can do a decent job with Bioshock - though having seen the Pirates Of The Caribbean movies i seriously doubt it !!

Thinks he's got the whole seas thing worked out eh?

If Bioshock was to be a movie, I'd wish that at the very least they'd just make it CGI. Perhaps if one day someone dared to take a different approach to film directions maybe in the ways of Nigh****ch/Daywatch, Amelie or whoever is responsible for "Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind".
I don't know anybody who's truly enjoyed the Resident Evil films, that was AWFUL!!! The Tomb Raider films were REAAAALY BAD... Anybody feedback on the Hitman one?

Upon saying this the worse thing is, as a gamer I'm compelled by my curiousity to see these films even though I expect it to be terrible.

Preferably I'd like it if our video games were left un-touched by hollywood and the likes. As Awkward_Turtle has said some games are cinematic already.

Eternal Sunshine - Michel Gondry, I think. Started off making music videos. Also made Be Kind Rewind

The remake of Ring was a bit rubbish, but not as bad as Dark Water. God, that film just went on and on... poor Hideo Nakata!

Speaking of videogame to movie conversions... guess who's at it AGAIN!

Check out the link.

quote:

Originally posted by Daewoodrow:
I'm not pessimistic about this. The more videogames advance towards realism, the more likely it is that a movie adaptation could turn out successful.

Afterall, it only took them what? 50 years to make the first great comic book - movie adaptation? I might see the first excellent videogame movie before I die.

Let me guess... Superman? And then they went and made Batman and all that. Um, right then...

I don't know why most videogame movies turn out so pants - most games have a basic plot that suits big movies really well, don't they? I'm not saying that plot is necessarily basic, but the basics of the plot lend themselves well to conversion. No?

MGS is really densely plotted though and would need a lot of exposition to cover the backstory of Snake for a start - more than the game goes into and I imagine quite a few of you know how much that game relied on exposition/cutscenes!

They say God loves a trier but even He (or She) must be fed up with Uwe Boll by now!

quote:

Originally posted by Ninja_Raiden:

I don't know why most videogame movies turn out so pants - most games have a basic plot that suits big movies really well, don't they? I'm not saying that plot is necessarily basic, but the basics of the plot lend themselves well to conversion. No?


They say God loves a trier but even He (or She) must be fed up with Uwe Boll by now!

Pretty much everything you've said there is correct Ninja. However many things can get lost in translation during the filmmaking process. And the real trouble comes when writers or directors are hired for reasons other than "a true love of the subject matter". You can hire a really great writer or director, but if they don't understand exactly what they are meant to be doing with the work, then it will show up in the final product.

I believe this is what happens with most adaptations. It happened with comic book movies for years, until the new generation of writers and directors (who grew up on comics) came through. Jon Faverau famously called this situation "A lack of direction". I guess that's why he chose to not only write "Iron Man", but direct it as well, lol.

I just think videogame movies are a big let down and ive stopped getting excitied about it because they are just made for the mainstream, so the little bits we love in the game, even the quirkier bits will get lost, because thats not what puts bums on seats... you know?

The only game movies i liked were the Tomb Raiders, but thats because I liked Angelina as Lara and I think they did pretty well with the Croft Mansion, what annoyed me with those films though was the need the writers felt to give her a love story, we dont get cut scenes in games of her going all weak in the knees, so why does the film need it?

Gah. Bah Humbug.

quote:

Originally posted by JG53_Princess:

The only game movies i liked were the Tomb Raiders

Please tell me you are just kidding around !!

Terrible, terrible films IMO - despite Mz Jolie trying her best with the awful scripts.

The only video game to film cross-over that i have genuinely enjoyed so far (and could even stand alone) is Silent Hill.

The main problem with movies based on video games is (obviously) that the movies are a totally passive experience - so the interactive thrills you get from playing the Tomb Raider games (for example) is completely lost when you are just sat watching the film version.

The Resident Evil movies have got steadily worse - though the first one was admittedly the best of the bunch it still didn't have the isolation, tension or atmosphere of the games.


So why bother at all ??

This message has been edited. Last edited by: TeaVirusUK,

quote:

Originally posted by Ninja_Raiden:
Let me guess... Superman? And then they went and made Batman and all that. Um, right then...

I suppose you could argue that in terms of fanbase, and profit, Superman was the first successful comic book adaptation. But personally I hated it. I'm not much of a fan of Superman though, nor am I a fan of 70s movies.

In my eyes, Spider-Man was the first successful comic book adaptation. I loved it, and it sparked the comic book movie extravaganza of 2000. That would, however, place the time from first comic book to movie adaptation at 70 years or more. So for the sake of my argument, let's say Superman.

In other words, "Why yes Ninja, you're totally right!"

I wasn't arguing because it was, in fact, the first successful comicbook movie, personal taste aside... though I do like it!

You no likey the 70s movies?

Yes, you were right, I was indeed referring to Superman.

It's not that I have anything against 70s movie direction per se, to be perfectly honest, I can't stand the cameras. I could never explain why, but 70s cameras, right up until the mid-late 80s, make me inexplicably ill. Not seriously ill, but slight stomach ache, and eventually after a long time, a migrane.

Sad, but true.

quote:

Originally posted by Daewoodrow:
I can't stand the cameras. I could never explain why, but 70s cameras, right up until the mid-late 80s, make me inexplicably ill. Not seriously ill, but slight stomach ache, and eventually after a long time, a migrane.

Sad, but true.

Thats funny - most (generic) FPS's have a similar effect on me !!