Skip to main content

Why are Video game Movies unsuccessful?

Video game movies have a long reputation for failing. From the early days with Super Mario Bros (1993, Annabel Jankel/Rocky Morton) to Uwe Boll’s slue of terrible adaptations. And even today with video games being more cinematic and centred around the story, why is Hollywood still struggling to adapt them into successful movies? The three most recent Videogame Adaptation are Warcraft (2016, Duncan Jones), Assassin’s Creed (2016, Justin Kurzel) and Tomb Raider (2018, Roar Uthag). All three received mixed reviews and failed to break even at the box office. And today we'll look into why.

Warcraft

Based on the insanely popular MMO game, Warcraft is arguably the most faithful movie adaptation of a video game. With game-accurate landscapes, character designs and stories. So where exactly did the film go wrong? Whilst fans enjoyed it, general audiences were unable to click with it. Well, my belief is that there are two reasons for this. The first is the film’s faithfulness to its source material and its storytelling
   As I previously mentioned, Warcraft is incredibly faithful to its source material. And whilst this is great for fans it doesn’t really allow room for other audiences. The movie expects you to have knowledge of what WOW is about, which doesn’t really help. Director Duncan Jones (Moon, Source Code) wanted to create a movie for the fans, which I believe he successfully did. But general audiences couldn’t really get what was going on.
The other problem was the storytelling. Due to the nature of the game, it features many storylines that the movie tried to tell. The game’s story has been going for many years and has a multitude of layers to it that have been added over time. And so, attempting to adapt as many storylines as the movie did, with no clear leads on either side of the conflict, makes it harder to connect with either side since none of the characters can truly anchor the plot. If the film had selected one character and told the story from their perspective, then perhaps the film would have been more understandable.

Assassin's Creed

Assassin’s Creed is one of the most popular game franchises going now. The story seems like it could be easily adapted to film. With great characters, great action and gameplay and interesting stories. During the run-up to its release Assassin’s Creed had a lot of hype behind it. It had fan-favourite Michael Fassbender (X-Men: First Class, Shame), the costumes were game-accurate, and the trailers showed a pretty interesting story set during the time of the Spanish Inquisition. The film did focus on characters that don’t feature in the games, but that’s okay since most of the games focused on different characters from different points in time. However, when the film finally hit theatres the reception for it was not good.
   Instead of the fast-paced Action/Adventure that was promised in the trailers, audiences were instead given a slow-paced drama that focused less on the action and more on one-dimensional characters set in the present day. The one element of the games that fans simply don't care about. Leaving the scenes set in the past (The thing that fans were actually interested in) with only 20% of the screen time and feeling more like a side-story. Which is a serious shame as those scenes are the best part of the whole movie, with action sequences that were accurate to the gameplay of the video games and a good depiction of the war between the Assassins Guild and the Templars. But these scenes are few and far between and are treated more like fan service. If the movie had been mainly set in the past or only just set in the past, then I think fans would have enjoyed the film more.
   Finally, the film also falls victim to something that doesn’t just plague video game movies but most franchise movies, which is making the first movie a set-up for a bigger sequel. This tactic sank the Andrew Garfield Spider-Man films and the Universal’s Dark Universe. And, unfortunately, Assassin’s Creed does the same. So instead of feeling like a movie with a beginning, middle and end, it feels more like a 2-hour long trailer for another movie. This is not a good way to start a franchise, as the audience feels like they only got a taste of what they already paid to see.

Tomb Raider

Much like Assassin's Creed, the Tomb Raider series is a highly popular franchise. And in 2011 the games were given a grittier reboot with a storyline that seemed very well suited for a movie adaptation. And whilst it does have similar issues to Assassin’s Creed, I believe that the overall movie is more enjoyable. The movie handles its main character better than the other two films. Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander) is a very interesting character and the changes that the film made to her, such as making her more of an adrenaline junkie made sense and Alicia Vikander (The Man From UNCLE, Ex Machina) did an amazing job of making her a relatable action hero who was in way over her head.
   But, as I said, the movie does have similar issues to Assassin’s Creed. Such as focusing on the elements that made the game interesting, such as the gritty action and desperate quest for survival, and puts more of a focus on Lara’s family drama with the action being few and far between and serving more like fan service. And whilst it isn’t as obvious that the film is setting up a bigger sequel it does seem to just end on an unfinished note. If the movie was more about Lara’s quest to save her friends and survive, like in the game, then it would have improved the story.
   Another change that the movie made from the game was the realistic approach. The game had a more mystical story with the main villain being a cult leader who worships an evil Goddess named Himiko and featured monsters that you had to battle. The film, however, takes a more grounded and realistic approach. Making Himiko a queen rather than a God and not giving a mystical curse but a biological disease instead. And whilst that was an interesting take on Himiko’s myth, I think overall, it takes away the fantasy element, which is a big part of the Tomb Raider games. Lara Croft is known for fighting mythical monsters. Even the 2011 video game had this with the giant samurai-styled monsters. It was an interesting take on the villain from the game, but overall, it hindered the movie from feeling like a Lara Croft story.

Conclusion

Whilst all three movies have good elements to them, such as faithfulness to the games in terms of aesthetics and action, but these things are hindered mainly by the storytelling and focus. In the case of Warcraft, it was that they were trying to tell several stories in the same movie and as a result not truly having a coherent narrative. For both Assassin’s Creed and Tomb Rader it was that they focused on the drama between characters rather than focusing on what made the games popular. Not committing to the Gritty Action/Thriller/Adventure genre that either source material is based in.

Is there Hope? 

Yes. Despite the flaws of these films, they do demonstrate that video games can be adapted into movies. Warcraft may be a mess in terms of plot but proved that game-accurate aesthetics can be achieved. Assassin’s Creed and Tomb Raider may treat the action as a secondary concern but the action scenes that they do have are very well done and very faithful to the gameplay of each franchise. If future adaptations put more of a focus on the elements of the games that fans love, like the action and the characters, and really dive into the genres that the games are a part of, then they could be quite successful.
   Love them or hate them. Marvel Studios have mastered being faithful to their source material, ranging around various genres, such as political-thriller to Sci-Fi, whilst also being accessible to general audiences and it’s one of the most successful movie studios of all time. If video game movies achieve the same kind of coherent method of storytelling, then I believe they will be successful.

And those are my thoughts on why Video game movies are unsuccessful. What did you think of what I said? Do you agree or disagree? Leave a comment down below. And, if you liked what you read then you can follow this blog for more content. Thank you for reading.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Spider-Man Out of the MCU? - Situation Review

A couple of days ago it was revealed that re-negotiations between Sony and Disney around Spider-Man have fallen through and the character will be taken out of the MCU entirely. This has come as quite a shock to most fans, especially after the release of the latest movie Spider-Man: Far From Home (John Watts)  which recently passed the $1 Billion mark in the worldwide box office.     So what does this mean for the future of the beloved Superhero? Well in this Situation Review I will be discussing why Sony did what they did and several possibilities for what will happen with Spider-Man. Disney Vs Sony So, the decision comes after Disney wanted to change the deal that they had with Sony so that they would gain 50% of the overall gross of the Spider-Man movies, rather than the 5% that they were currently receiving. A move that Sony wasn't happy with.     Now, if they were only talking about the movies then this would seem like a fair deal. The two studios would split the c

SDCC 2018. Top Five Movie Trailers

SDCC has come and gone, and with it, a whole load of movie trailers have dropped for fans to sink their teeth into! Overall, it seems that Warner Bros. dominated the convention, bringing in new content from most of their divisions, such as DC, The Wizarding World and their Monster Universe. So, without further ado, here is my top 5 list of the movie trailers that were released this year for Comic-Con. 5. Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes Of Grindelwald The hype for this new chapter in the Wizarding World continues with the latest trailer. Whilst the trailer doesn't really reveal a lot more than the previous trailer it does give us some good moments. The beginning with Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) as a child showing his greatest fear is working behind a desk or that Dumbledore (Jude Law)  sees Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) in the Mirror of Erised. We even get to see new beasts, such as the strange cat creatures, and the first look at Nicholas Flemel, the creator of the Philosoph

Spider-Man: Far From Home Review (No Spider-Man spoilers, Endgame Spoilers)

So after the immense success of Avengers: Endgame (2019, Joe & Anthony Russo) , becoming the 2nd highest grossing movie of all time. And now, Marvel hopes to continue their ongoing story with Season 2 Episode 1. Spider-Man: Far From Home (Jon Watts) . The second movie in the MCU's new Spider-Man trilogy, which has proved incredibly popular with fans of both the MCU and Spider-Man in general. But with things like the events of Endgame to deal with, will this movie be weighed down by the weight of that movie? Or can it possibly hold its own? Marvel has had a pretty good run this year. Hopefully, it doesn't trip at the finish line. Initial Thoughts This is a damn good follow-up to Endgame . It's nowhere near as big in scope but it's definitely a good start to a new chapter in the MCU. Focusing more on the aftermath of Endgame and how Spider-Man is coping in a post-Iron Man world and trying to sort out his life as Peter Parker.  Spider-Man/Peter Parker/Tom Ho