Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Doom.

 Azreal13 wrote:
I also think you're crediting him with too much artistic integrity, my general impression is he fully understood the implications of the German tax laws around investing in movies and set out from the get go to exploit them, but I daresay that can't be proven without the man effectively confessing to what could amount to tax fraud.

A side note in terms of Uwe Boll's "personal integrity": At one point a few years ago, he challenged his critics to an exhibition boxing match. Lowtax from SomethingAwful took him up on it - wrote a negative review of one of his movies, and then went to the bout with some other critics.

It was an exhibition for charity, and Boll promised it would all be for show, just a fun thing for PR, and they would get training and equipment beforehand.

Not only did that not happen, but Boll did not disclose that he had a background as an skilled amateur boxer, and wound up absolutely beating the snot out of Lowtax and the other 2 critics who went to the event. One of them needed a paramedic, IIRC. He tried to "win by knockout", which is a pretty crappy thing to do with how the event was presented and the skill set of the opponents (one critic DID have some boxing experience, and Boll did not face him, if I remember - he only fought the totally inexperienced).

Uwe Boll is a POS.

Afaik Boll had everyone who wanted to step into the ring fill out a sheet with things like weight, height and experience. Then based on that list he handpicked the (smaller) critics he felt he could (and did) beat up. Real POS.

Edit: making everyone who knows about this feel old, a few years ago translates to 2006...

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Edit: making everyone who knows about this feel old, a few years ago translates to 2006...

My whole life was spent waiting for the world to end in 2000 due to a divine/nuclear/environmental/computer apocalypse. So everything since then is gravy. 2000 will always be a few years ago.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Does Twitter / Facebook count as a game ?

If so the Black Mirror episode Nosedive might qualify, really unsettling what if premise pondering if social media actually had a bearing on the real world, heck I even tolerated Bryce, plus it has a happy ending

I think there should be a separate category for films about games or films involving made up properties.

In films about games, there are some bad ones (The Wizard comes to my mind first) and also some good ones (the Southpark episode about World of Warcraft was good). Films about people playing made up video games is even bigger- since it will include The Last Starfighter, Tron, Ready Player One and Sword Art Online.

In films involving made up games, I can think of at least two Black Mirror episodes about made up video games that were good (Bandersnatch and USS Callister).

Still none of these are really adaptations of video games to film- they are films that involve video games, so I wouldn't count them. I would not count them as none of them face the same kind of challenges that are ever-present for proper video game adaptations to film.



(of course, if we do include video game to television adaptations, we get to include a lot of anime like Persona or Castlevania. I haven't watched enough of those to know if they are as bad as the normal video game to film adaptations, but I expect them to be better).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
So yeah the plot of the Producers (Mel Brooks film and musical) was they got people to invest millions more than they needed then planned to disappear with the money after the show flopped.

They weren't planning to make a dozen plays over the course of decade, so why did people keep investing? Was it just that it was a no lose proposition, pay the money to Boll and maybe you'll get a profit, or pay it as taxes and never get it back (directly, barring intangibles like an educated society or safe streets)?

It might have come from a no-lose proposition. From what Bol said, the investors would get half their money back, so that cuts any risk in half. So unless they were able to write off the whole investment for taxes and THEN get half of it back from Germany, I don't think that's what was going on.

Also, I haven't actually heard any way in which the film would need to fail in order for this to work. Maybe it only pays out if the film has no profit? That's the Bol fanemy theory, but I can't find anything to substantiate it.


We know that Bol could not make whatever film he wanted. His investors beleived that video game properties would eventually pay off, so they only funded those.

Still, there's something fishy about Bloodrayne. The film bombed hard, then the sequel bombed hard then ANOTHER SEQUEL got made (and bombed hard). If this wasn't a way to scam the German government, then I don't know what kind of idiot kept investing in more Bloodrayne movies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I also think you're crediting him with too much artistic integrity, my general impression is he fully understood the implications of the German tax laws around investing in movies and set out from the get go to exploit them, but I daresay that can't be proven without the man effectively confessing to what could amount to tax fraud.

A side note in terms of Uwe Boll's "personal integrity": At one point a few years ago, he challenged his critics to an exhibition boxing match. Lowtax from SomethingAwful took him up on it - wrote a negative review of one of his movies, and then went to the bout with some other critics.

It was an exhibition for charity, and Boll promised it would all be for show, just a fun thing for PR, and they would get training and equipment beforehand.

Not only did that not happen, but Boll did not disclose that he had a background as an skilled amateur boxer, and wound up absolutely beating the snot out of Lowtax and the other 2 critics who went to the event. One of them needed a paramedic, IIRC. He tried to "win by knockout", which is a pretty crappy thing to do with how the event was presented and the skill set of the opponents (one critic DID have some boxing experience, and Boll did not face him, if I remember - he only fought the totally inexperienced).

Uwe Boll is a POS.

Please don't get me wrong. I think that Bol honestly tried to make good films, and tremendously sucked at it. He wasn't a guy who made terrible films on purpose, or he wouldn't have taken the criticism so personally.

I think this is also shown in how personally he took the failure of his Kickstarter for "Rampage 3" (he posted a video telling everyone to go f*ck yourselves" along with a tirade about the highly successful Avengers films, basically implying that Bol's films are real art while MCU movies are hacks).

He is a deeply insecure guy who was constantly looking for outside reinforcement of his delusions- and he gets very angry when his reality does not accommodate his delusions.

Maybe its just another Brooker observation that social media is really an MMO where you have an avatar / profile that isnt really you and the aim is the farm up a score of likes, retweets or wot not by presenting a version of your life you think is most likely to start the happy bits of your grey matter lighting up due to said likes just how regular games do

The not Resident Evil one was pretty good too

It's not a straight up adaption but Alan Wake lifts an awful lot from David Lynch, specifically Twin Peaks, but a couple of other nods to his work. While not a straight up adaption the game is brilliant and one I'd recommend to anyone who hasn't played it. Steam summer sale is on next week so you'll get it for less than a pint of beer.

 Barbachop wrote:
It's not a straight up adaption but Alan Wake lifts an awful lot from David Lynch, specifically Twin Peaks, but a couple of other nods to his work. While not a straight up adaption the game is brilliant and one I'd recommend to anyone who hasn't played it. Steam summer sale is on next week so you'll get it for less than a pint of beer.

There are some good games that were adapted from movies. While a lot of them are crap, there are some that are really great (various Star Wars, Goldeneye, etc). I don't think that's a point of contention.


It is about whether or not a film made of Alan Wake would suck. And the odds are definitely against it.

 Nevelon wrote:
I liked Doom!. Not going to say it’s high art, but was a fun watch and pretty true to the source.

Let’s not go nuts. Doom was a fun sci fi alien action movie. It wasn’t true to the Doom source at all, however.

But it had the Bio Force Gun!

Marines on mars fighting zombies and demons. With ehough of the right trappings, and even the FPS scene.

Close enough for government work.

Opinions obviously vary.

 Nevelon wrote:
Marines on mars fighting zombies and demons. With ehough of the right trappings, and even the FPS scene.

Close enough for government work.

Opinions obviously vary.

They specifically weren't demons. They went out of their way to rewrite the miniscule amount of plot the original game had. I've already had my mini-rant on this ITT but suffice to say the "plot" of the Doom movie was a really bizarre decision from the writers.

I'm going to disagree with the majority and say I really enjoyed Warcraft. Probably helps that I'm not super familiar with the games or universe of it though.

Rampage, Detective Pikachu, and Sonic were all good fun too, as were Prince of Persia and all three Tomb Raider movies.

Wreck-It Ralph is kind of a meta pick, as it's not actually based on a real video game, but it still kind of a video game movie and it's awesome. The sequel, less so but not terrible. I could probably mention Ready Player One under the same sort of criteria (I liked it, although the book is FAR superior).

For me, both the first Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter were firmly in the "so bad it's good" category. Between the two, I definitely prefer Street Fighter, and that's mostly because Raul Julia as M. Bison just steals the show.

Haven't seen Doom or Mario Bros., but I've heard they weren't good. I have seen Wing Commander, and that is a terrible movie indeed. I don't even really know much about the games, and I still thought the movie was crap.

Rampage was based on a game ?

 Argive wrote:
Rampage was based on a game ?

I suddenly feel very old.

two come to mind

The original animated streetfighter II movie-it even had a fantastic (original japanese, not the crappy american re-edit) soundtrack,






The other is the vampire hunter/dark stalkers OVA series.

they even used the iconic attacks.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Rampage was based on a game ?

I suddenly feel very old.

I forgot they made it into a movie.

Loved the old game.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I'm going to disagree with the majority and say I really enjoyed Warcraft. Probably helps that I'm not super familiar with the games or universe of it though.

I got the impression it was a set up movie assuming a franchise was near certain, setting it around the era of first few RTS game was an odd choice as its mass appeal was the MMO so missing out Thrall, Arthus, Jaina etc was a strange choice, also painting a purty human lady green with some joke shop teeth does not make a half-orc

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I'm going to disagree with the majority and say I really enjoyed Warcraft. Probably helps that I'm not super familiar with the games or universe of it though.

I got the impression it was a set up movie assuming a franchise was near certain, setting it around the era of first few RTS game was an odd choice as its mass appeal was the MMO so missing out Thrall, Arthus, Jaina etc was a strange choice, also painting a purty human lady green with some joke shop teeth does not make a half-orc

I mean, that's how warcraft has always done all its female versions of the character races.

Troll man: Crazy 3-foot tusks, gorilla stance, 8 inch nose, 2 foot ears, big fat fingers

Troll lady: Hawt bewbs lady painted blue with petite little costume shop fangs standing fully upright with normal human limb proportions

My problem with Warcraft is that it looks like a B movie while it's a 160 mln $ blockbuster.

I watched a couple of times and it's not terrible, but nothing on it (acting, plot, visual effects, etc...) is worth a sequel, that's the impression I got.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I'm going to disagree with the majority and say I really enjoyed Warcraft. Probably helps that I'm not super familiar with the games or universe of it though.

I got the impression it was a set up movie assuming a franchise was near certain, setting it around the era of first few RTS game was an odd choice as its mass appeal was the MMO so missing out Thrall, Arthus, Jaina etc was a strange choice, also painting a purty human lady green with some joke shop teeth does not make a half-orc

I mean, that's how warcraft has always done all its female versions of the character races.

Troll man: Crazy 3-foot tusks, gorilla stance, 8 inch nose, 2 foot ears, big fat fingers

Troll lady: Hawt bewbs lady painted blue with petite little costume shop fangs standing fully upright with normal human limb proportions

true but in game everyone is a stylised cartoon so it doesnt stick out as much, it may have been a practical choice given her lengthy screen time as the other female orc looks way better but looks like a lot more work in make up and costume along with cgi tweaks

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Argive wrote:
Rampage was based on a game ?

I suddenly feel very old.

The Rampage film starring Dwain The Rock Johson was based on a game about humans that morphed into Kaiju and go stomping on cities.

The Rampage from famed video game to film adapter Uwe Bol is one of his few films that was not based on a video game (and to which he made two sequels).


Surprisingly, the critical response to the Uwe Bol film was more positive than to the Johnson film, which obviously does little to recommend the Rock's film.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I'm going to disagree with the majority and say I really enjoyed Warcraft. Probably helps that I'm not super familiar with the games or universe of it though.

I got the impression it was a set up movie assuming a franchise was near certain, setting it around the era of first few RTS game was an odd choice as its mass appeal was the MMO so missing out Thrall, Arthus, Jaina etc was a strange choice, also painting a purty human lady green with some joke shop teeth does not make a half-orc

I mean, that's how warcraft has always done all its female versions of the character races.

Troll man: Crazy 3-foot tusks, gorilla stance, 8 inch nose, 2 foot ears, big fat fingers

Troll lady: Hawt bewbs lady painted blue with petite little costume shop fangs standing fully upright with normal human limb proportions

true but in game everyone is a stylised cartoon so it doesnt stick out as much, it may have been a practical choice given her lengthy screen time as the other female orc looks way better but looks like a lot more work in make up and costume along with cgi tweaks

I think you're spot on. It is really hard to adapt cartoon logic into a live action piece- I'm not sure that there was any way for them to actually get Warcraft 'right' and still make a live action film.

I remember when Rampage was the hot arcade game. Wasn’t it before the TMNT game? The TMNT game that took the Double Dragon formula and ‘modernized it’, ushering in the Simpsons game and all the Marvel hero games that seem so primitive today?

 Mr Morden wrote:
Depends what you like and cosider "good"

I thought the following were excellent but you may not agree......

Dead or Alive

With DoA, you can tell that the creators really put a lot of thought into "Okay, what's the core appeal of this franchise, and how do we translate that to the screen?"

 Elemental wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Depends what you like and cosider "good"

I thought the following were excellent but you may not agree......

Dead or Alive

With DoA, you can tell that the creators really put a lot of thought into "Okay, what's the core appeal of this franchise, and how do we translate that to the screen?"

That beach volleyball scene was absolutely integral to the plot!

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I remember when Rampage was the hot arcade game. Wasn’t it before the TMNT game? The TMNT game that took the Double Dragon formula and ‘modernized it’, ushering in the Simpsons game and all the Marvel hero games that seem so primitive today?

Yes, I just did some checking, and your timeline looks dead on.

Rampage-1986
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - 1989
The Simpsons - 1991
Captain America and the Avengers- 1991


With the two year gap between TMNT and the other brawlers like it, I think it is safe to say that those games were deliberately modeled after TMNT. And brawlers before that were things like Double Dragon and Final Fight -which definitely had a different feel to them from TMNT and later brawlers, but I'm not sure that I can put my finger on exactly what changed.

Slipspace wrote:

 Elemental wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Depends what you like and cosider "good"

I thought the following were excellent but you may not agree......

Dead or Alive

With DoA, you can tell that the creators really put a lot of thought into "Okay, what's the core appeal of this franchise, and how do we translate that to the screen?"

That beach volleyball scene was absolutely integral to the plot!

piffle tis nowt but a straight up rip of Top Gun (without the tacked on lady cuddling bit lest you had had any wrong thinks regarding playing with the boys...)

@ Odin, Yep likewise I think maybe the latter games felt more just mash the attack whereas Double Dragon had a kind of, limited, move set, also fractual drift and impending gimmerdom 30 years on may play a factor

I know people won;t agree with me but I liked the mutant chronicles movie and think that given it's clear lack of budget and decision to spend what they had on actors instead of effects it was good.

So yes, IMO there's one.

I keep forgetting that I own the DVD for Mutant Chronicles. I still plan to watch it some day. Some day.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I keep forgetting that I own the DVD for Mutant Chronicles. I still plan to watch it some day. Some day.

I too have the DVD of the Mutant Chronicles film and can honestly say it is just the right size for a beer coaster.