web counter
 

Next Up - Video Game Movie Reboots!: Stop Trying To Make Video Game Movies Happen.

By TK | Posted Under Trade News | Comments (16)

c3cda662d86adfc74741fc997a090e68_content_large.jpg

It’s not going to happen, OK? You’ve come close, Hollywood. The highlight was probably Resident Evil, Christopher Gans was awfully close with Silent Hill, and… um… then there was… that… other one. YOU SEE? You can’t do it. Every time you try, with a couple of minor exceptions, you freaking fail. Sure, movies like Lara Croft: Tomb Raider made a boatload of money, but overall? Crap. Craptaastic, craperrific, crappity crap craposcity. Am I making myself clear?

Apparently not, since the next two projects to currently give me the ragey shakes is that two studios are looking to reboot two franchises.

First, Universal wants to take another crack at Doom, based on the old ID game. The first film had a surprisingly interesting cast, including Dwayne Johnson and Karl Urban. It was horrible. I mean horrible. It was completely without merit or any redeeming aspects whatsoever. So in a way, I guess, why the fuck not. They’ve got nowhere to go but up, right? There hasn’t been a new Doom game in eons, but the fanbase is still there, I suppose. I play it on my phone when I’m bored. But the silliness of rebooting a movie from 2005 is a bit mind boggling, but hey, if it works for Spider-Man, right?
(via Slashfilm)

Now here’s where things get a little bit more interesting. The folks at GK Films have picked up the rights to Tomb Raider, and the timeliness of this is rather key. Game developer Crystal Dynamics is about to release a new Tomb Raider — the video game — that’s supposed to be something of a new take on the character as well. It’s set when she’s much younger and still coming into her skills, and she’s trapped on a deserted island and struggling for survival. There was a pretty cool article in Game Informer a couple of months ago, and I confess it looked pretty remarkable. They’ve redesigned the character pretty radically and made her much more realistic. Check it:

Lara_Concept_Fullsize_300x584.jpg

New-Tomb-Raider-Screenshot-8530x300.jpg

Now, there’s no word on whether or not the new movie studio would follow along with the new game’s trend, but it makes sense that since the property itself is getting a makeover, that the film side of things does too. God, I never thought I’d be sort-of agreeing with the decision to reboot a Tomb Raider movie. But there’s a certain logic to it.
(source: Paste Magazine)









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Eloquent Eloquence Comment of the Day | Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro →









Comments

1) Studios want to make money, by targetting the vast, mouth-breathing masses, and not gamers themselves. 2) You can't go more than about 7 comments into any article about the reboot without some troglodyte suggesting Megan Fox for the role because "she's so hot."

The game should be pretty damn solid, and looks like it'll be closer to survival horror than action-adventure. The film will be an abortion with either Fox or Vanessa Hudgens in the lead role.

Posted by: Markus at March 10, 2011 8:12 AM

Tomb Raider gets a "redesign" or "new take on the character" or whatever you want to call it with practically every movie or game that comes out. At this point I can only assume that they''ll eventually do some big Crisis on Infinite Earths thing to explain Lara's ever-changing backstory.

Posted by: Todd at March 10, 2011 9:36 AM

Serious question: How big can the target audience possibly be for gameboy/fanboy movies like these and the comic book movies (once you get past the Big 3 of Superman/Batman/Spinder-Man)? I mean, how many people can there be who have spent much of their adult lives thinking, "I sure miss Green Lantern. If only they made a movie ..."

Seems to me like the ultimate in niche marketing. Or are there really, like, 30 million people who play "Doom"?

Posted by: , at March 10, 2011 9:38 AM

I think Doom 3 came about 5-6 years ago, and even that was a reboot of the video game series. It used the old pitch dark station/teeny tiny flashlight/jump scare method. Still, can a Doom movie can inherently be anything other than dumb, even if they go the horror route?


by targetting the vast, mouth-breathing masses, and not gamers themselves.

It's been my experience, especially playing any kind of multiplayer, that these two groups are not mutually exclusive.

Posted by: branded at March 10, 2011 9:39 AM

ah yes, a smug elite feeling gamer looks down his nose at the mouth breathing masses. that's just way too funny. something new and ridiculous everyday.

Posted by: idleprimate at March 10, 2011 9:44 AM

*--Spider-Man.

Hey, I hyphenated, at least.

Posted by: , at March 10, 2011 9:56 AM

Based on those photos, "much more realistic" = wearing fatigues instead of hot pants.

Posted by: Ian at March 10, 2011 10:07 AM

...and also not having a cleavage with two separate area codes.

Posted by: Adam C. at March 10, 2011 10:28 AM

It’s set when she’s much younger

So...she got a boob job at some point then? I don't care if they're trying to tone it down. Lara Croft has a huge rack and does Indiana Jones style shit in short shorts. That's just how it works, dammit!

Posted by: Paultera at March 10, 2011 10:30 AM

@idleprimate: I'm so sorry that I feel I'm slightly better than the people who think Megan Fox should be in every movie. If by "elitist" you mean "I don't think the Resident Evil movies do the games any justice," then, fuck me for having standards, I guess.

@branded: True. Multiplayer with screaming, teabagging morons has ruined to many games for pretty much anyone I know.

Posted by: Markus at March 10, 2011 10:36 AM

I mean, how many people can there be who have spent much of their adult lives thinking, "I sure miss Green Lantern. If only they made a movie ..."

Well I doubt anyone even within the comic book community was clamoring for a Blade movie, and non-comic-book people had never even heard of him, and those movies did pretty well. People like all kinds of action heroes, whether they wears tights and fight crime or wear paramilitary uniforms and fight zombies or wear cargo pants and survive in hostile environments. It doesn't really matter what the source material is, just how good the movies end up being.

The mantra of video game enthusiasts has always been that once someone finally makes a good movie adaptation, moviemakers with actual talent will start examining the possibilities, and we'll get more good video game movies. I'm not holding my breath, but I hope it'll happen someday.

Posted by: Todd at March 10, 2011 11:39 AM

I personally prefer Spinster-Man, 50 year old transgender seamstress who prowls the alleyways of New York scolding young women for dressing too scant. With great power comes great collections of cat figurines.

Posted by: superasente at March 10, 2011 12:16 PM

I knew somebody would have fun with that.

Posted by: , at March 10, 2011 1:28 PM

another hollywood misfire. who cares?

Posted by: idleprimate at March 10, 2011 4:38 PM

Honestly, I'd love another Hitman movie. Especially if it would actually play like a mission from Blood Money, with all the subtlety and intrigue, instead of an international crime thriller that the first film so desperately wanted to be. Hell, even bring Olga Kurlyenko back... anything to stare at Timothy Olyphant's pretty little conflicted face for two more precious hours.

Posted by: seed at March 11, 2011 12:36 AM

You state about the Doom movie: "It was horrible. I mean horrible. It was completely without merit or any redeeming aspects whatsoever."

That's true, but with one exception:
There's a scene where a marine falls into a pit with the alien demon monster. Scrambling to fend off the horror, the marine grabs onto the only thing near him, a conveniently placed chain hanging from the ceiling. Breaking it from its moorings and swinging the chain around his head to keep the monster at bay, it turns out the chain is inexplicably attached to a crt computer monitor. So the marine has no choice but to unleash a whirlwind furry of 90's display technology at the beast. He misses and gets his face eaten.

Now I'm no movie critic, but I'd rate this the best swinging a monitor on a chain around your head scene that I've ever watched. Might it be a greater allegory for life, or the technological folly of man? Perhaps some days you just need a monitor on a chain.

Posted by: xian at March 13, 2011 11:47 AM