Jump to content
LittleMac

Should Games be Turned Into Movies?

Recommended Posts

This was mentioned in another thread and I figured this deserved to be a topic on its own. Also, sorry, i wasn't sure whether this fell into the category of 'Gaming' or 'Film and TV' so I just picked one randomly.

So, what are your opinions? Do you feel games have the capability of being turned into movies or should remain as gaming experiences alone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've got a story with a beginning, middle, and an end, it could potentially be a good movie.

 

That said, videogames rarely come with good stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've got a story with a beginning, middle, and an end, it could potentially be a good movie.

That said, videogames rarely come with good stories.

I would agree. The problem with video games being movies is sometimes, like you said, the story either being bad or just so small that an entire movie would be difficult to fill. The Super Mario Bros Movie for example. The story just wasn't good enough to be stretched out to a movie's length.

Although, saying that, many games have amazing stories. Last of Us and Heavy Rain to name but a few. But the reason they are better left as games is because the experience wouldn't be the same if you were just witnessing the events unfold and had no input, which is what makes their stories so good. You actually feel like you are there rather than just sitting there doing nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy Rain

That game sums up so much of what I hate in modern gaming ;-; No way in the world is Heavy Rain a well enough written game to be a film.

You can do a game to film so long as you don't stick to closely to it. The pacing of a game compared to a film feels fundamentally different - games emphasise the more menial, laboured process to getting to different plot moments. Usually to the point where these are often an excuse to justify long gameplay scenes and stories are made in such a way to allow for this. Films however are a much more restrained and tightly focused affair where most of the 'process' and uneeded sides are removed so that story beats are hit at an engaging speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see the game Eternal Sonata become a movie. It would be interesting to see all the backstories, not just Frederic's. I love that game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abi (slycooper) is right. You can adapt video games into movies, but they should feel remarkably different. There's no such thing as a playable movie and there's no such thing as cinematic video games. Their pacing is completely different. It's why it's so hard to adapt books into movies. It's rarely done really well and when it is, the plot of the book is not often followed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abi (slycooper) is right. You can adapt video games into movies, but they should feel remarkably different. There's no such thing as a playable movie and there's no such thing as cinematic video games. Their pacing is completely different. It's why it's so hard to adapt books into movies. It's rarely done really well and when it is, the plot of the book is not often followed. 

 

I am one of the few people who do not mind my favorite books being adapted into films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am one of the few people who do not mind my favorite books being adapted into films.

I actually enjoy many book to movie adaptations. I hope my post didn't imply anything different, but I can say, many movies make the mistake of going too slow to preserve too much, or cutting too much stuff out so that it doesn't really make sense unless you've read the book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

This was mentioned in another thread and I figured this deserved to be a topic on its own. Also, sorry, i wasn't sure whether this fell into the category of 'Gaming' or 'Film and TV' so I just picked one randomly.

So, what are your opinions? Do you feel games have the capability of being turned into movies or should remain as gaming experiences alone?

 

Wow, when did we get an awesome member? O.o Sorry to derail, but I've seen a few of your posts now and you seem really cool

 

 

As for the actual question, I don't think so. Most games generally sell to an audience and are cash-grabs, which is the only real similarity I see between movies and games :P (and this is coming with love, as I basically live in the gaming community)

 

To entertain the player, 99%+ of a game is fighting/combat/sports-playing/whatever. A game that has the ability to be made into a movie is practically already more of a game than a movie, because games are (by nature) defined by the player's control and own choices. There are so many aspects to games that aren't relevant to cinema; control being only one. There are games that are story driven like movies (The Last Of Us, pretty much anything by Telltale studios, etc.) but again, those basically are already movies. If you're talking about general shooter or action games, the two are very incompatible as mediums, if you ask me.

 

Heck, I don't even watch tv or movies so I don't know what my thoughts are worth. But EVERY fan whines when a book is made into a movie, or everyone else who sees it finds it boring as all heck. This is because books are descriptive and thusly more story and environment based, while movies are very visual and generally quicker-paced. It's the same with games and movies. Unless you just take the general gist of the story and keep that the same, there's not too much that's transferable.

Edited by Mike Spero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, when did we get an awesome member? O.o Sorry to derail, but I've seen a few of your posts now and you seem really cool

As for the actual question, I don't think so. Most games generally sell to an audience and are cash-grabs, which is the only real similarity I see between movies and games :P (and this is coming with love, as I basically live in the gaming community)

To entertain the player, 99%+ of a game is fighting/combat/sports-playing/whatever. A game that has the ability to be made into a movie is practically already more of a game than a movie, because games are (by nature) defined by the player's control and own choices. There are so many aspects to games that aren't relevant to cinema; control being only one. There are games that are story driven like movies (The Last Of Us, pretty much anything by Telltale studios, etc.) but again, those basically are already movies. If you're talking about general shooter or action games, the two are very incompatible as mediums, if you ask me.

Heck, I don't even watch tv or movies so I don't know what my thoughts are worth. But EVERY fan whines when a book is made into a movie, or everyone else who sees it finds it boring as all heck. This is because books are descriptive and thusly more story and environment based, while movies are very visual and generally quicker-paced. It's the same with games and movies. Unless you just take the general gist of the story and keep that the same, there's not too much that's transferable.

Firstly, thanks for the nice compliment :)

Secondly, I totally agree. Books and games are difficult to transfer to movies because they do tend to be more descriptive and immersive. I mean, the average game campaign would probably be about 9 to maybe 20+ hours and the average movie would be 2 to 2 and a half hours. That's why people complain about books becoming movies. There's no way to cut down all that content down to movie length without someone getting annoyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But EVERY fan whines when a book is made into a movie, or everyone else who sees it finds it boring as all heck. This is because books are descriptive and thusly more story and environment based, while movies are very visual and generally quicker-paced. It's the same with games and movies.

Oh, this is ridiculous.

  • Lord of the Rings
  • Harry Potter
  • Fight Club (which is probably the best example to completely counter your preposterous claim; it's what kick-started Palahniuk's dying career, and has been far better-received than the novel.)
  • The Great Gatsby 
  • The Maze Runner
  • Silence of the Lambs ("I had an old friend for dinner," anyone?)
  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • American Psycho
  • The Godfather (I mean, it's only one of the consistently critically acclaimed films of all time)
  • Brokeback Mountain (perhaps one of the most faithful, literal adaptions ever)
  • The Shawshank Redemption (also ranked as one of the greats)
  • Etc.

Don't use absolutes to make up entirely unsupported, objectively false claims--it would much more feasible for you to say that some modern adaptions have opened to lukewarm critical reception, such as Insurgent or 50 Shades of Grey. But to say that every fan complains and that everyone else dislikes an adaption? That's preposterous and completely unsubstantiated. 

 

And re: most people in this thread, you're taking the question too literally. A movie adaption is exactly what the name implies: an adaption. This is not a literal transferal from one medium to another; the 1976 adaption of Stephen King's Carrie didn't try to tell the story in an epistolary fashion as the movie did, full of newspaper articles, court proceedings, letters, etc. No. It didn't even try. What it did was adapt the content from one medium (namely, a novel) and adapt it into the audiovisual medium. The spirit of the story (because a story can be told in multiple mediums, not just the written form) was kept, but that didn't mean it was impossible because the book was "more descriptive" and "environment-based." What does that even mean? Hello, set designers? 

 

Each medium can, when done properly, be a rich, stimulating, and immersive form of storytelling. Whether I'm listening to a Walk the Moon album or reading a Fitzgerald novel or watching a David Fincher film, it's all a story. They all can work. It's all in adaption.

Edited by Josh (J)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Books may actually be better to turn into films. I mean, reading a book is like watching a movie it's just one is more your own imagination that takes you into those worlds rather than having it plainly shown to you on a screen.

Games can be turned into movies right. It's just a case of what games you choose. Sly Cooper for example is getting a movie which I feel has the potential to be a great animated family film. But The Last of Us and other story driven games are better left as games and not movies. You watch a movie twice and it's the exact same thing. But there are loads of games that can give you a different ending every time you play and provide different experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

Oh, this is ridiculous.

  • Lord of the Rings
  • Harry Potter
  • Fight Club (which is probably the best example to completely counter your preposterous claim; it's what kick-started Palahniuk's dying career, and has been far better-received than the novel.)
  • The Great Gatsby 
  • The Maze Runner
  • Silence of the Lambs ("I had an old friend for dinner," anyone?)
  • To Kill a Mockingbird
  • American Psycho
  • The Godfather (I mean, it's only one of the consistently critically acclaimed films of all time)
  • Brokeback Mountain (perhaps one of the most faithful, literal adaptions ever)
  • The Shawshank Redemption (also ranked as one of the greats)
  • Etc.

Don't use absolutes to make up entirely unsupported, objectively false claims--it would much more feasible for you to say that some modern adaptions have opened to lukewarm critical reception, such as Insurgent or 50 Shades of Grey. But to say that every fan complains and that everyone else dislikes an adaption? That's preposterous and completely unsubstantiated. 

 

And re: most people in this thread, you're taking the question too literally. A movie adaption is exactly what the name implies: an adaption. This is not a literal transferal from one medium to another; the 1976 adaption of Stephen King's Carrie didn't try to tell the story in an epistolary fashion as the movie did, full of newspaper articles, court proceedings, letters, etc. No. It didn't even try. What it did was adapt the content from one medium (namely, a novel) and adapt it into the audiovisual medium. The spirit of the story (because a story can be told in multiple mediums, not just the written form) was kept, but that didn't mean it was impossible because the book was "more descriptive" and "environment-based." What does that even mean? Hello, set designers? 

 

Each medium can, when done properly, be a rich, stimulating, and immersive form of storytelling. Whether I'm listening to a Walk the Moon album or reading a Fitzgerald novel or watching a David Fincher film, it's all a story. They all can work. It's all in adaption.

I wasn't speaking in an absolute fashion. I'm not saying it's utterly impossible to make good transitions in a series between mediums. I was stating that generally speaking, as far different as games and movies are, most transitions would either disappoint the fans and stray from the original or just be a train wreck for anyone else to watch. I'm not saying it's impossible to do it right, but it's very difficult to meet both expectations in these cases, besides regarding games that already border on being almost classifiable as both

 

Most games are 99% player controlled action with intermittent cutscenes of story. Movies are generally more balanced, so to make a movie for a game (in most cases) would involve adding and almost creating a story for many sections. This leaves the producers with the option of simply making a cinematic storyline and losing the original feel or making an action movie that puts anime to shame. Finding the balance is what's so difficult, though I'm sure it's not that it "CAN'T" be done. It's that whatever a studio tries, if the production is even slightly off kilter in one direction they'll have a million angry gamers or movie critics who can't just accept they won't get everything they wanted and who are aching to tear the final product apart

Edited by Mike Spero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) I feel ignored T-T 

 

2) I would just like to point out that Japan has been adapting video games to movies or TV shows ALL the time. Pokemon anyone? It is actually really common over there and usually done as well as any new IP that is created. We get really upset/annoyed by this stuff in western cultures, but in the East they've been doing it for a while rather successfully. 

 

As I stated once and I'll probably state again on this thread, it's a matter of pacing. Getting the pacing right. You can't have a scene for scene video game and make it a movie, but if you know how to adapt things, it'll be fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) I feel ignored T-T

2) I would just like to point out that Japan has been adapting video games to movies or TV shows ALL the time. Pokemon anyone? It is actually really common over there and usually done as well as any new IP that is created. We get really upset/annoyed by this stuff in western cultures, but in the East they've been doing it for a while rather successfully.

As I stated once and I'll probably state again on this thread, it's a matter of pacing. Getting the pacing right. You can't have a scene for scene video game and make it a movie, but if you know how to adapt things, it'll be fine.

Very true. Pretty much everything Japan puts it's mind to is awesome, regardless if the original source was even good or not.

The pacing is the most important thing. I actually feel that video games have the potential to be turned into awesome movies. Some stuff has to be left put just because the movie doesn't have time to go over everything. The East seems to get this more than we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Books may actually be better to turn into films. I mean, reading a book is like watching a movie it's just one is more your own imagination that takes you into those worlds rather than having it plainly shown to you on a screen.

Games can be turned into movies right. It's just a case of what games you choose. Sly Cooper for example is getting a movie which I feel has the potential to be a great animated family film. But The Last of Us and other story driven games are better left as games and not movies. You watch a movie twice and it's the exact same thing. But there are loads of games that can give you a different ending every time you play and provide different experiences.

Are there alternative endings in Last of Us? I thought the only replay value was looking for hidden content. Your choices don't really mean anything in that game, right?

 

Also, people do watch movies over and over again, just like people who play video games where the choices don't matter over and over again, all because they like the story being told and enjoy escaping into that world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

Pretty much everything Japan puts it's mind to is awesome

Not really. You got the hentai and ecchi tv moments, the totally random stuff... And then the rest is awesome!

 

Me!Me!Me! especially, best anti-porn thing ever. Thank you Japan :,3

 

What? I'm not derailing topics. Pshhhhhhh

 

 

Are there alternative endings in Last of Us? I thought the only replay value was looking for hidden content. Your choices don't really mean anything in that game, right?

I'm actually let's playing this right now. I also was under the impression the only ending was killing the doctors. I would like to have this confirmed as well TT.TT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there alternative endings in Last of Us? I thought the only replay value was looking for hidden content. Your choices don't really mean anything in that game, right?

Also, people do watch movies over and over again, just like people who play video games where the choices don't matter over and over again, all because they like the story being told and enjoy escaping into that world.

I was only using Last of Us as an example of a story driven game. Still, many games nowadays give multiple endings and they aren't always necessarily good or bad. It's open to interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually let's playing this right now. I also was under the impression the only ending was killing the doctors. I would like to have this confirmed as well TT.TT

I had heard that you could not kill all the doctors, but it doesn't change your ending. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

I had heard that you could not kill all the doctors, but it doesn't change your ending. 

But you still have to kill the really nice firefly leader?

 

Ugh, I'm four episodes in and I already hate Joel and Tess. They do some pretty inexcusable stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you still have to kill the really nice firefly leader?

Ugh, I'm four episodes in and I already hate Joel and Tess. They do some pretty inexcusable stuff

To be fair, what would you do in a situation like that? I don't condone what they do but, in an apocalyptic event like that you might do stuff you never thought you would, simply for survival's sake. Sad, but, so is the whole game for that matter. I love games that are able to raise questions like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

To be fair, what would you do in a situation like that? I don't condone what they do but, in an apocalyptic event like that you might do stuff you never thought you would, simply for survival's sake. Sad, but, so is the whole game for that matter. I love games that are able to raise questions like this.

If my fiancee was in Ellie's position and I was in Joel's... I wouldn't let them have her but I sure as heck wouldn't murder innocent people unless they tried to stop me from taking her. I don't remember if the firefly girl forces his hand... I get it in that scenario. But if he's just all "We're leaving, byeee :D" and kills her, then that's messed up. Idr what happens, it's been ages since Mark's lp

 

And even in the beginning, he's selling illegal weapons, gets backstabbed, and then murders a bunch of random guys working for the guy he's going for, tortures him, then shoots him in the face. He could have gone with his brother(?) and made a camp in the woods, in pursuit of making a safe and better world. Life being hard and treating you like crap doesn't excuse you acting crappy >.>

Edited by Mike Spero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could work, but I can't think of very many video games that got turned into movies that were considered good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


If my fiancee was in Ellie's position and I was in Joel's... I wouldn't let them have her but I sure as heck wouldn't murder innocent people unless they tried to stop me from taking her. I don't remember if the firefly girl forces his hand... I get it in that scenario. But if he's just all "We're leaving, byeee :D" and kills her, then that's messed up. Idr remember what happens, it's been ages since Mark's lp

And even in the beginning, he's selling illegal weapons, gets backstabbed, and then murders a bunch of random guys working for the guy he's going for, tortures him, then shoots him in the face. He could have gone with his brother(?) and made a camp in the woods, in pursuit of making a safe and better world. Life being hard and treating you like crap doesn't excuse you acting crappy >.>

Couldn't agree more. I certainly wouldn't but you have to understand what Joel has gone through. The game officially starts decades after the infection started. Someone's character can change in that amount of time, all it takes is for things to start piling on top of each other. Between clickers, betrayals, theives and all the other crap Joel had to go through that we don't even know about, you can see why he may have become more, dare I say, sinister.
I'm not sure about Tess. I don't like her but that's just cuz I don't know her as well as Joel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mike Spero

Couldn't agree more. I certainly wouldn't but you have to understand what Joel has gone through. The game officially starts decades after the infection started. Someone's character can change in that amount of time, all it takes is for things to start piling on top of each other. Between clickers, betrayals, theives and all the other crap Joel had to go through that we don't even know about, you can see why he may have become more, dare I say, sinister.

I'm not sure about Tess. I don't like her but that's just cuz I don't know her as well as Joel.

I know, but there's no excuse. Just because it makes sense doesn't mean his bad actions were justified. I'm not saying he's a horrible human being or something, he always came across as a tragic hero. An apocalyptic scenario would be horrible and no one can say they know for a fact that they wouldn't end up along the same lines. I'd hope I wouldn't, but we can't imagine how years of being attacked by everyone and their mother for food, ammo, sex, whatever, would make someone cold.

 

Again, I understand him and I'm not coming against his character on a personal level. I'm just trying to point out that even if he had a great reason, he still could and should have done things right.

 

And don't get me started on Tess. She's my least favorite character thus far. I get she probably has some reasons of her own, but you never develop the relationship with her that you have with Joel; so she just comes off like a jerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×