Sign up for the FREE Tell Membership and receive benefits that include the digital edition of Tell Magazine sent straight to your inbox, product giveaways, coupons and much more!
Sign up for the FREE Tell Membership and receive benefits that include the digital edition of Tell Magazine sent straight to your inbox, product giveaways, coupons and much more!
Last week, Jim Sterling of Destructoid posted a well-constructed analysis on the subject of why game movies fail so often, a topic we’re very interested in ourselves here at Cut/Scenes. It’s certainly true that most game-based movies are terrible, so there must be a reason for it. Sterling contends that it’s the nature of adaptation from game to film that’s the problem, and hence no game movies will ever really be up to par. According to him, adapting a property from a game/series to a movie literally takes something away from the experience – and this process strips out the natural identification that comes with an interactive media.
From his post:
It’s certainly an interesting point, and a very valid one. However, he’s discounting the power of audience identification in film –something that isn’t cheapened by a lack of interactivity. In fact, we would maintain that the level of psychological investment and identification in a character has nothing to do with the media (game, film, novel, etc.) and everything to do with the quality of the writing and characterization.
Audience identification has existed in film from the very first days. People have always seen themselves in characters – this is where the emotional power of film (and truly, any storytelling medium) is, in this ability to connect to fictional characters. Horror films are scary because we imagine ourselves as the characters, vicariously experiencing the shocks and thrills of their adventures. To say that a horror film is no longer scary if you aren’t actually playing as a virtual avatar is a bit misguided. After all, even within the interactive medium, the player is separated from his/her avatar by a TV screen. Both film and videogames require a comparable suspension of disbelief.
It all comes down to the quality of the narrative itself. Whether a person is invested in a character depends upon whether they care about that character. Screenwriters are constantly told to create believable, likeable personalities that “fit’ the stories they write. Even when the protagonist is an antihero or a despicable person, he/she has to captivate the audience. In games, this sort of investment may be achieved due to the personal “stakes” involved (i.e. “if the character dies, I’ll have to start this section over again”), but again, to actually care about the character requires good game design and writing. For example, consider the reactions gamers have to certain characters – Alyx Vance from Half Life, Aeris from Final Fantasy 7, etc. in contrast with a character such as Pac-Man or even Marcus Fenix from Gears of War.
We would argue that it isn’t the nature of adaptation that destroys videogame movies; it’s the fact that on the whole, the current crop of game films are poorly conceived and aimed toward a very specific, very lowbrow target. Once a talented filmmaker comes along and creates a film that actually captures the essence of a game, and the resulting film is treated like a movie of worth instead of a mindless product aimed exclusively at teenage boys, we’ll feel differently about adaptations. Until that day, we’ll enjoy the campiness and rue the missed opportunities of videogame movies.
Read [Destructoid]
Related Posts