I might see this movie soon, but first!
Warcraft is coming out in the U.S. today, so it feels like now would be a very good time to tackle the subject of video game movies. I say this because the film is getting hit hard by critics, but it is just one part of a larger trend in a genre that has some incredible flaws. And for the sake of not flying off into a fit of rage, I will be disregarding everything ever made by Uwe Boll. Everyone already understands that the German Ed Wood makes awful movies, so let’s get to the real meat of the issue.
For starters…
1. The Source Material Is Often Terrible.
I never cared for Mario, but we have to admit that this story sucked the big one.
In a departure from past releases, Warcraft may be the first film in this genre to have a rich backstory to draw upon for a film series. The same thing cannot be said for almost all of the other video game films released in theaters over the past 25 years. The vast majority of these films are taken from games that have no character pool that is worth an adaptation. To start, let’s talk about Super Mario Bros.
The Nintendo game may be a beloved classic that has been flogged to death by the company that gave birth to it, but there is no backstory to it that is worth a damn. It is essentially a guy in a plumber outfit fighting a monster and saving a princess. We don’t really know why he is doing that in the game, so that requires the filmmakers to just make things up out of thin air.
Or how about Mortal Kombat? That film may have made back its’ money in 1995, but it is based off of a genre of games that has paper thin backstory and even less characterization. Why? The entire point is to see these characters off each other in brutal and often hilarious ways.
How exactly do you turn this into a narrative?
2. When The Material Is Good, Poor Execution Seems To Be The Norm.
What were we talking about? I got distracted.
The pre-reboot Tomb Raider games are another set of games in the “Like Indiana Jones, but not…” subgenre. I did not really notice them when I was growing up, partly because I did not own a console but still had games like Jedi Knight and X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter. I did see the film, however, and I will just say that Angelina Jolie was the only decent thing about it.
That movie was the first one that made me wonder why Hollywood’s best writers could not seem to execute a good movie based on a game. How do you take a slightly goofy action-adventure story and screw it up with elements like the Illuminati and a device that can control time? What would an organization that already controls the world in that universe need with such a device? Wouldn’t they have already steered events to their advantage anyway?
A cardinal rule when you are writing a story is that you need to have an answer should questions like these arise. If you do not have one, then it is very easy to break the suspension of disbelief and you have lost an audience member.
3. Should There Be An Original Story Or A Cash-In On The Existing Characters?
This movie looks like it might be the first to get things right!
This is one of those topics where the studio bigwigs would lean towards the latter option in most cases. While they may think that adding a beloved character from certain video game properties may mean box office, it doesn’t make a lick of difference if the surrounding movie is not worth a damn. Oddly enough, Assassin’s Creed is looking to counter this notion with an original story that is outside of the games, which may make it a useful jumping off point for new fans.
Personally, I can see room for both approaches if the story is good enough. For instance, Assassin’s Creed would have serious problems if it tried to adapt the first several games, mainly because they would have to completely screw up the timeline and rewrite the 2012 apocalypse plot. However, a story based on Halo would not really work without a Spartan of some kind, so the writers would have to connect it to either the Master Chief, his strike team, or some other program.
Unfortunately, this is one of the places where this type of movie can fall flat on its’ face, which may be why studios are so skittish about this genre.
4. The Creative Team Missed The Point Entirely.
No, Ubisoft! Bad dog! Am I going to have to stick your nose in that?!
Returning to the example of Assassin’s Creed, I wanted to comment on the games because they are a reflection of where movies can go wrong. The entire point of that story in recent installments appears to be just about obtaining Pieces of Eden before Abstergo can get their hands on them. However, that misses the sense of atmosphere developed over the first five games where the greater mythology was something resembling a conspiracy thriller.
It would be very easy for the filmmakers to do the same thing to the adaptation, but that would force people to re-evaluate their competency in their jobs. Before people come after me citing creative license, I want to point out that there is a difference between doing that and bastardizing the story entirely. In my opinion, The Lord of the Rings is among the greatest film trilogies ever made, but it still made alterations. However, those changes were still true to what Tolkien envisioned and, in many ways, made the films better than the books.
Conclusion.
Like movies based on books or other source material, video game films have the chance to be great for everyone that made it and everyone that would see it in theaters. Unfortunately, the production costs involved and the creative decisions that are being made have hamstrung any new creations for ever being made. While some stories should never be adapted from games, Hollywood is only going to get a hit when it learns to dismount the corporate assembly line and reinvigorate their properties with the help of people that are genuinely interested in making a great film.
And if push comes to shove, I’ll write the Splinter Cell, XCOM, and Elder Scrolls movies for you, ya crazy nutters.
No Comments Yet