Spider-man and X-men are such long running series that they've basically become a solid part of American culture. So when someone chooses to experiment with it, it's no big deal. As a matter of fact, those series grew to what they are now because they shook things up every now and again. Some of it good, some of it bad. But I don't think Uncharted will last that long.Noelveiga said:But... why? Again, all the Spider-man movies haven't interfered with the stories in the comic books, despite being direct adaptation of comic book plots, and Iron Man or X-men didn't ruin the stories in the comic books despite being entirely new stories, either.
When it comes to a movie adaptation of a comic, all of a sudden you have motion, sound, music and whatnot. And so there's much more of a surprise factor, aswell as seeing you're favourite comic book character come to life on screen. The only real difference between a movie adaptation of a game and the game itself, is that it's got live-action actors - sometimes not even that.People keep dodging my comic-book movie analogy, but I think it's valid. People thought comic books made bad movies, when talented people took over they made good movies. The source material is largely irrelevant to cinema. When people say this or that doesn't work they typically mean that the current way in which Hollywood production companies process certain source material into assignment jobs, including casting, staff selection, budgeting and other creative elements, usually produces poor results. Which is a much more complex statement than "videogame movies suck".
But I think the real reason why many gamers, myself included, are very sceptical of Hollywood adapting games, is that videogames are still not respected as a medium by Hollywood or for that matter by the entire mainstream media. Comics are well respected as an artform by the mainstream, but games are still seen as toys. And so, Hollywood doesn't take the games or the story they present serious enough to give it enough of a financial and artistic backing.
When the first Tim Burton Batman came out it was a revelation. Here, suddenly, we had a comic book movie that took it's source material serious and was not overly campy. But before that comics were also regarded as kids stuff by Hollywood and the mainstream. Games are probably in that stage right now.
So as long as Hollywood sees games as kids or teenage stuff, I'd like them to not mess with my favourites in order to make a quick buck.
But in the end I still feel that adapting a game to a movie is a mistake. The reason I like games is, because I get to control the events in front of me. If you take that control away and make it a completely passive experience you lose the main reason why you like the game. There are very story heavy games like JRPG's. But even there you are invested in the story and characters, because you've spend 40 to 50 hours with them and not just 2.
I could go on for hours stating my reasons, but I think I've said all I can say about it. I'm freaking exhausted from thinking this much.