Working Title 09.28.06: Hollywood: The Game - Whip it Good
Posted by Jordan Williams on 09.28.2006
Whips, Chains, Crosses, Holy Water. Sound like great movie props to me. This week in Working Title we kick off Hollywood: The Game and I show you the first game I think would make a really good movie. If you haven't figured out now, you never will.
Hello out there! We are back to our regular format, and it's time for Working Title.
So, let's take a look at where Working Title has been. It's been all over the Next Gen scene, has gone head-to-head with fanboys, and has single-handedly reaped the whirlwind that is Overrated/Underrated. Where else can we go from here?
Hollywood.
That's right, Working Title is going Hollywood. It's common knowledge that movies based on video games are mediocre at best, but why do they have to be? There are some prime game series out there that are just BEGGING for movies, and with the right directors and cast, it could work.
And no, I won't take any pot shots at Uwe Boll. It's too easy.
This series will also be a tad shorter in column length than the others; there's not really a lot you can say when you are talking about a fantasy.
So, let's kick this three-week-long shindig off proper!
Hollywood: The Game
You know you've seen it. You have seen a game that would work so perfectly as a movie given the right attention, but it either never gets made or gets fucked up worse than an osteoporosis patient in a mosh pit. Hell, let's just face facts: most video game movies suck, but we here at Working Title are card-carrying members of Team Positivist, and we don't like to give upon hope.
Now, during the course of these three weeks, I am going to pick out three games which I personally think would make pretty decent movies. I'll even go the extra mile and tell you who I think should be casted as what and who should direct. Now, I'm no movie buff, and I definitely don't know half of the crap I am talking about when I go into the technical aspects of movies, but I think I can give you a good enough idea.
Now, to me, there are only four types of video game movies: Prequels, Sequels, Adaptations, and Universals.
Yes, I made the last two up, but wait up; it makes sense when I explain it.
Prequels - These are the movies that always take place before the events of a game. It usually has something to do with the character getting their powers, weapon, or some other variant. Example(s): I honestly can't think of any at the moment.
Sequels - These are the movies that always take place AFTER the events of a game. They usually add a new character and new story arcs into the mix. Most of the time, they also bring back a character who died in the actual game. Example(s): Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children.
Adaptations - These movies usually take events from the game itself and adapt them into film form. More commonly seen in books instead of videogames because staying close to a video game's source material is a bit hard. Example(s): Mortal Kombat (loosely).
Universals - These are the most common video game movies. These movies simply do one or both of the following. They either take characters from the game's universe and make a movie revolving around them (usually not staying true to the game), or the movie is simply based around the universe of the game itself, not using many (or any) of the characters. Example(s): Doom, Super Mario Bros., Street Fighter, Resident Evil, pretty much every OTHER video game movie you can think of.
Moving along, I will use those four classifications when I talk about my picks. I just figured I'd go ahead and get them out of the way now because it fills up some space, and it saves time in the long run.
So, how about them there picks, hm? Fine.
Hollywood: The Game presents...
Castlevania!
Yes, that's right. It's time for Hollywood to take a crack at another long-standing video game franchise. Sure, if and when the movie comes out, it'll probably suck harder than...something that sucks hard, but if they can fantasy book over in the Wrestling Zone, then damn it, I can fantasy book here, too!
Castlevania: The Movie
Directed by: Guillermo del Toro (Blade II, Hellboy) OR Stephen Norrington (Blade I)
Type of Movie: Universal or Prequel
Castlevania canon is so complex and yet so simple that it'd be way too weird to try to base a movie around any of its characters. If there's one thing that Castlevania does right (aside from making fuckin' sweet games),it knows how to create characters. Sure, not all of them are memorable, but most of the time they stick well enough to get a decent fan following. So, why can't they do that with a movie?
We all know that the Belmont clan obviously goes WAY back. Right now we've only seen nine Belmonts and only four members of the Belmont bloodline who don't share the same last name. There's A LOT of room for exploration there.
Hell, you don't even have to use Belmonts (although you'd damn well better). You could easily take one of the lesser characters and flesh them out a bit more. A prime candidate would be Henry Oldrey from Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness. The first time you meet him, he is a little kid running away from an ungodly mix of Frankenstein and Ash; eight years later, he is a magnum-toting knight who works for the Orthodox Church. There's 8 or so years of explaining you gotta do.
Now, obviously the movie is going to be fairly dark and will feature a lot of vampires, demons, devils, and blood. Who better to bring the nasty other than Guillermo Del Toro? Like I said, I am not exactly a big movie buff, but I LOVE GDT's work. I love Hellboy, Cronos, and Mimic. If I had to fantasy book a director for this movie, it'd be GDT. He has proven he can go there when it comes to theological stories (like Hellboy), and he can bring the gore factor when you just want some nice horror/action (Blade II). Hell, if you couldn't get GDT, at least spring for Stephen Norrington,the director for the original Blade movie.
Could it work?
Hell yeah it could. Sure, video game movies with a much larger source for story have come up flat (Super Mario Bros.), but then again, I don't think ANY video game movie to date has had such a large CONTINUAL universe as Castelavania's to toy with. I mean, the games are action based, which covers the bases for people who want to see some asskicking, it's certainly dark enough to work some drama in, and some of the characters can function pretty well for comic relief. I see no reason WHY the movie couldn't work if it was given the proper attention and handled with the care it needed.
Why would I see it?
Why would you see ANY video game movie? Because you liked the games. A lot of people see video game movies because it looks appealing to them, but almost all of the people who go to see it have some sort of appreciation for the source material. And you'd better believe Castlevania has enough fans to warrant that. With 20+ games under your belt, you have a lot of people who have been with you from day one and a lot of people who are just getting to know you; either way, you have some fans.
You've got the people who remember the frustrating FUN that was Castlevania on the NES, you have the generation jumpers who popping in Super Castlevania and were floored, and now you have the newer generations who already have some great games like Harmony of Dissonance, Aria and Dawn of Sorrow, and the soon coming Portrait of Ruin. Hell, you have almost four separate generations of gamers clamoring to see the same movie. You give me a reason why it wouldn't pull decent sales.
Plus, we know if all else fails, DVD saves lives.
And who could forget the music? I think Castlevania has some of the best and most memorable music out there, right up there with Super Mario, Final Fantasy, and Legend of Zelda. Tell me you wouldn't get a slight surge of nostalgia when the main character (whomever it may be) comes on screen and you hear the infamous bars from Theme of Simon Belmont.
Any way you cut it, the movie is going to draw, be it from people who love the dark and gothic story, horror or action movie buffs, or people who just want a decent nostalgia kick. I honestly think this could be one of the movies that won't go wrong if you have someone who loves the material at the helm.
Now, like I said about DVDs, if Square-Enix can take FFVII:AC and make it a straight-to-DVD release and get that much money, what's stopping another company from doing the same? Konami DEFINITELY has the money (although I'd see them doing a MGS4 movie instead).
Because we know you are an indecisive bastard...
Yeah, I am. While I am only going to highlight three games I think should be movies, there are some others I think could stand a crack at the box-office.
Metal Gear Solid, directed by Hideo Kojima
Legacy of Kain, directed by GDT
A Boy and his Blob (Hey, we need a kids' movie), directed by ???
That's a Wrap
Like I said, these are going to be a bit shorter than my previous series for a lot of reasons. I can't really talk TOO long about something that's in my head without rambling and retreading the same thing. I work another job during October and that pretty much saps my time away on top of my day job. And this week I have caught a HELLACIOUS flu from a certain female editor that shall remain nameless. (Jis the Editor's Note: You're welcome.)
Next week I'll hopefully be back on Wednesdays with a brand new Working Title, and in our second week of Hollywood: The Game, I'm going to try an attempt to tell you why (with the right vision and direction) Hunter: The Reckoning would make a good movie. And before everyone e-mails me, yes, I already know there is a Hunter movie in the making...and yes, I know Hunter is originally a tabletop RPG, but I am talking about the videogame adaptations specifically.
Also, a note for those who sent in e-mail before Tuesday, my mail account went all buggy and deleted a good chunk of my mail, meaning that if you sent something, I haven't got it. So if you could re-send (if you sent anything), that'd be good.
Until next time, I'm Jordan Williams...and this column is awesome because it drinks awesome water.
