Gore Verbinski Talks BioShock Film Failure
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
We don't have a game of what I just discribed, there's more to the BioShock universe than what we just saw in the games. Plus I really like what Ghengis John had to say about it:Woodsey said:
I'd say BioShock is one of those games.
Mind you, provided the movie doesn't just re-trace the game's footsteps. Games are interactive experiences and don't translate well to the big screen if you do it 1:1. But that doesn't mean that the entire universe is worthless for movies. Halo and Mass Effect movies could be great I'd reckon as both universes have plenty of potential for movies, but that doesn't mean they have to copy-paste the games and dump it in theatres.
I'd SO watch this.
I can just imagine:
"Whatever, Gore. Isn't this a videogame movie? Why would it need to be rated R? Then all the videogame kids wouldn't be able to go see it anyway."
"Whatever, Gore. Isn't this a videogame movie? Why would it need to be rated R? Then all the videogame kids wouldn't be able to go see it anyway."
So make a game of what you described.Cowabungaa said:
And narratively, BioShock is pretty sparse (to say the least). It essentially turns up for the twist and leaves right after.
Everything it has going for it comes from interacting with the environment. Make a film of it and there's no point.
I don't really see the point of making a movie out of Bioshock. It's like making a movie out of one of the Persona games or Planescape: Torment. Part of what makes these games so fascinating is the way a complex narrative is told through an interactive medium, so when you take the interactivity away from the story, you either have to remove nearly everything that isn't essential to the main plot or reframe it in some contrived way.
It would be much easier, for the story's sake anyway, to adapt to television or a novel.
[sub]I can understand that it would be really cool to see a Big Daddy in live-action, but there's so much more to the game than looking cool.[/sub]
It would be much easier, for the story's sake anyway, to adapt to television or a novel.
[sub]I can understand that it would be really cool to see a Big Daddy in live-action, but there's so much more to the game than looking cool.[/sub]
Oh I'd love to, and I was very disappointed when the sequel didn't turn out to be the prequel I hoped for.Woodsey said:
But there's no reason why a movie working with that untouched material wouldn't work either. Hell I think it would work absolutely great, it has interesting characters, a thought-provoking story and an amazing setting. It's also a lot more accessible than games and I too think that that material deserves a bigger audience than it would get in game-form.
Now the problems you are describing is why a direct-to-screen game adaptation doesn't work, and I'm not in favor of those either so I'm definitely agreeing with you there. The BioShock movie I described, and some other game movies I've got in my head, should rather be called game inspired; they just use material from the game's universe, maybe even parts of the plot, but not the actual game itself.
True, businessmen are interested in profits. That's why they're businessmen. If they cared about art, they'd be artists instead.Atmos Duality said:
mmm... i dont know about that, but in the game we see a little girl possibly 5 sticking a needle into a dead corpse and taking out blood, then drinking such blood in the spot.KaosuHamoni said:
we have the splicers who act in all the sense of the word, like crack addicts to the substance that the very girls are carrying in their bodies and the only way of getting it is by killing those same girls, taking out a parasitic worm from their stomach and eating the worm...
and we have the big daddies, that have a drill for an arm, to protect this kids from the same addicts... and if you are putting a Drill in the arm of a guy, hehe, you USE it in the movie, PG-13 wouldnt cut it
the setting WAS scary/gory and completelly disgusting if you think about it, its just that in a Video Game, that same gore was dumbed down, blood looks like cool aid with a LED in the flask, the drill is nothing more than a big glove to punch people who are then sent away flying, and twirling and... well... there are a LOT of things that didnt worked as they would on real life.
it works in videogames, but a movie is more "visual" than "athmospheric" in my oppinion
not to mention the whole political aspect of the thing is a critique to the current way things are run in most countries, which i would say with very little doubt that it will be censored
And since art, or at least a quality product, requires significant investment we can no longer have nice things unless they are clones of titles from the past.Space Jawa said:
This is why I do not get excited at all about new games and movies anymore, because so few of them even try beyond what their marketing staff can provide.
It's a pragmatic point of view.
I would have liked a film that shows the rise and fall of Rapture BEFORE the game starts with Jack arriving.
Bioshock, in my opinion, would never work as anything other than an R rating. I remember the first combat I can recall (it's been a while) was me running up to a woman in a mask who was singing to a stroller with a pistol in it, and I bashed her skull in. Games are a lot more violent then they seem when we play them, I think.
Still, it's a shame. I always wanted to see a thriving Rapture collapse
Still, it's a shame. I always wanted to see a thriving Rapture collapse