Should Valve make a Half-Life movie?

[PurpleGaga27 39]

This may be old news, but back at August it had been discussed before:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/08/26/valve-wa...vie-themselves/

http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/11/intervie...alf-life-movie/

 

Since Valve is good at making games, I say no since Valve has limited experience in making movies (although they might be trying for it). I mean if you look into what EA, THQ, Activision and Blizzard did in making movies in their games, they are way far superior at that and Valve is not a movie studio company to do this sort of thing. Let some other movie studio company make the movie to the big screen as long as Valve associates and supports with it, not just Valve making it themselves. Because then otherwise, Valve will never make another game again for a long, long time.

 

If there is going to be a Half-Life movie, Hugh Laurie (whom you have seen in the House TV show) must be in the movie as Gordon Freeman (because he has the best looks) and Morgan Freeman is the perfect guy to act as Ely Vance (because he's the real Freeman and a good supporting actor).

[Doctor Destiny 41]

**** no. This would be like making a Zelda movie. THE MAIN CHARACTERS NEVER TALK. At least to my knowledge Freeman doesn't.

[Malevolence 6]

While it may sound cool initially, seriously, how will this work out?

I think stick it to game platform.

[Nmenth 289]

This would be like making a Zelda movie.

You are right, but still, that fake Zelda movie trailer IGN made looked pretty good.

[rSquar3d 0]

Nah. In general, game movies suck, especially when meddled with by the Hollywood machine. Just look at Prince of Persia (****ed up storyline). Not to mention that the other characters, since they are the ones that do the heavy talking, will also be the ones doing the emotional lifting; the protagonist (Freeman) will end up becoming the best SUPPORTING actor instead.

 

I rest my case.

[Gben 20]

I enjoyed the mechanics of the C&C4 FMV trailers. I think somebody, some day will do a decent attempt at the style of First-Person-Movie.

Okay I may to wait for a Holodeck... but one day it will happen.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

In general, game movies suck, especially when meddled with by the Hollywood machine.

No. Hollywood makes better game-based movies than Uwe Boll. That man needs to be slain for his crimes against the gaming industry. ****ing no talent hack.

[Nmenth 289]

Hollywood makes better game-based movies than Uwe Boll. That man needs to be slain for his crimes against the gaming industry. ****ing no talent hack.

He even knows his movies are bad...

[Luk3us 63]

lol... Uwe Boll he sure is a character.

[rSquar3d 0]

Now that's a whole different definition of "suck." LOL. But I hate seeing the heart and soul of games (read: STORYLINE AND SCENES) get ripped apart to cater to a bloodsucking Hollywood production system that caters to people whose attention spans are as long as their goddamn nuts. >.<

[Inferno 22]

Nah. In general, game movies suck, especially when meddled with by the Hollywood machine. Just look at Prince of Persia (****ed up storyline).

I liked the Prince of Persia movie >

[Nmenth 289]

I liked the Prince of Persia movie >

Did you play the game?

[rSquar3d 0]

@Inferno. To each his own. It's your opinion, I won't meddle in it. But I do suggest you play through at least the first three games; and maybe (I won't jump to conclusions) you'll see things in a different light. Meh, I LOVED POP's story. But not the movie's. Far less deep than the game.

[Inferno 22]

Did you play the game?

Yes. Why do you people always have such high expectations? Why do you always assume that the story is exactly the same or goes deeper into it? If you just look at it as unrelated to the games, it's just a good movie.

 

@Inferno. To each his own. It's your opinion, I won't meddle in it. But I do suggest you play through at least the first three games; and maybe (I won't jump to conclusions) you'll see things in a different light. Meh, I LOVED POP's story.

I did.

 

But not the movie's. Far less deep than the game.

They only have an hour and a half. You can't expect the movie makers to explain the entire PoP story in one movie. People who never played the game should also be able to watch it, you know.

[Revolutionary 0]

Video games are more compairable to books when it comes to movies, your never going to fit every thing in to one movie, A book or video game can leave you entertained for days following the story where as a movie realy lasts usually for around 2-3 hours.

 

The problem with video games compaired to book is the story is very often more player centered, drawn out over a long time and you can see what is happening. If you are using actors or graphics to replicate scenes which belong to a video game it wont work very well unless you are using ingame content. If there was a Tiberian sun movie using actor if it was done in the style of the ingame movies it would fit in and look good where as if you did the same with renagade where you never see a real actor in a cutscene a real actor movie realy wouldnt work or look as good.

 

Story is a big problem, the Dune movie was based on the books but what if it was based on the games, how would it translate?

[rSquar3d 0]

Aaah, but the Lord of the Rings is pretty hard to translate into movie form, very dragging (yet GOOD) in book form, yet Peter Jackson translated it into movie form, with modifications, but stayed oh so loyal to the story that NO ONE can possibly not love him for how he interpreted the source material. Books and games are hard to translate, but books are harder. Not to mention that games already have a universal visual imprint, while books, well, there are as many possible visual interpretations as there are readers. And I mean, if they made it a 2-hour movie, started a trilogy (going with Sands of Time first), and put there money-making schemes second to creative integrity, it would have been breathtaking, just like the game was when it came out.

 

Now, for Half-Life (since we are digressing), I think it might work. I say might because, again, if it doesn't hearken back to the game and the emotions it brought out of those that played it (and these emotions aren't limited to gaming, remember), then it'll suck. But if it does hearken, then boy, we'll have a saga that might chronicle the whole Half-Life storyline (one movie would be HL, the next HL2, so on and so forth). I do suggest, if they really will go ahead with it, to have Neil Bloomkamp (he did an amazing work with Halo: Landfall, and that's even for my dad who hates Halo, as well as District 9) and Peter Jackson (he does amazing work with CGI direction and story interpretation, and maybe they should bring along his screenplay writers from LOTR) for best effect.

Edited December 25, 2010 by rSquar3d

[Nyerguds 100]

Well, I don't know, this could be a good idea, if not for the fact that Freeman is alone 90% of the time. It'd make the movie really boring. Besides that, it would be a pretty nifty adventure storyline.

 

As for Prince of Persia, while I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, the ending was bull. Why the whole scare about the fact releasing the sands of time will end the world, if they're immediately used to revert that very event anyway?

[rSquar3d 0]

His solo sequences could be shortened, owing also the constraints of the movie medium. The problem is if the story will get ****ed up or not. The way the story was handled in POP was just plain crap. Not to mention, a few minutes into the movie, you do know that the story ISN'T THE REAL ONE FROM THE POP GAMES. You can actually go so far as it borrowing elements and characters from POP, then giving them another story altogether. Then, that would have been okay if it weren't for the fact that the story was too cheesy, the action sequences not even half of POP: SOT's, and I ended up wishing the prince would just die so I wouldn't have to watch that wretched drivel anymore, and instead play POP.

 

@Nyerguds, your last complaint is actually kinda explained by the first three games in the POP series, especially Warrior Within.

[Nyerguds 100]

...then do explain it to me plz?

[rSquar3d 0]

It's kind of like a paradox. You rewind time, but then, there's such a thing called "destiny" in the POP universe, so it sums up to nothing. In between the end of Sands of Time and Warrior Within, the prince discovered that, upon rewinding a whole lot (way before the war between Persia and India), there was the Island of Time, and there was the Empress of Time. Kill the empress, stop the sands from being created. So that's what the prince did, and he ended up creating it because the sands actually form when the Empress dies. So he does another damn rewind as a Sandwraith, and saves the Empress instead; happily ever after supposedly after that.

 

However, in Two Thrones, the Empress is killed (yet again), this time by the Vizier, who managed to take over India and lead it to victory over Persia. At the end of Two Thrones, the prince finally accepts his "destiny," doesn't bother to change it anymore, and instead retells the whole fiasco to Farah (princess of India), starting from the events of Sands of Time, and so, we go back to the first scene of Sands of Time. So it's a never ending-cycle or rotation. It's pretty deep, actually, and the lines were kinda nice in-game.

 

The movie version is the exact opposite of that.

Edited December 25, 2010 by rSquar3d

[Inferno 22]

Aaah, but the Lord of the Rings is pretty hard to translate into movie form, very dragging (yet GOOD) in book form, yet Peter Jackson translated it into movie form, with modifications, but stayed oh so loyal to the story that NO ONE can possibly not love him for how he interpreted the source material.

Note that he had not one, but three movies to tell a story.

[Nyerguds 100]

Peter Jackson did a superb job with LOTR, despite the lack of Tom Bombadil.

[rSquar3d 0]

Exactly my points! If you could stay loyal to a book that, hey, has as many movie versions as there are readers (at least, this is how it goes for books since, after all, each and every reader has his/her own visual interpretation of the book), is very long, and pull it off with still having the same story, the same (if not similar) depth, and make a big buck without ****ing the original story up, then you could do that for a game! All I'm saying is that the POP movie sucked because I had a distinct feeling that the director and screenplay writers haven't even played POP, and therefore had no idea what the **** they were writing and directing for. Peter Jackson read LOTR, and he is a fan; he knew what he was doing. The people who raped the POP intellectual property? I doubt they even had an inkling on what POP is.

 

Which is really the do-or-die factor in all adaptations from one medium to another; it's a matter of making the right compromise between the materials, still staying loyal to the original (without sacrificing your medium), making modification when necessary, and having a crew, or at least screenplay and direction team, that knows the source material WELL. I say RIGHT compromise because nothing should be sacrificed for nothing when it comes to adapting something for another medium (in LOTR, Peter Jackson sacrificed bits that would have taken long, but were not super significant cogs in the story, therefore maintaining the integrity of both the story and the movie). I say staying loyal to the original because, hey, if you're sourcing something, actually USE it, not just ride on the material and name of the source and make your own ****ed up stupid ass bull**** story (as was the case in POP). Lastly, I say know the material well because, hey, the two aforementioned salient points actually need a guy who knows both the story, and the needs of his medium (in this case, film), to make the right decisions, and come up with the best possible output.

Edited December 25, 2010 by rSquar3d

[Nyerguds 100]

The problem is that games simply aren't the same kind of story as a book. The flow and focuses of a game are radically different to those of a book. A book is already a normal story flow like the movie should become. The game isn't; the only reason it doesn't get boring without constantly continuing storyline is because of the actions the player has to perform. That kind of time filling, which is essential to a game (otherwise it wouldn't be a game), is usually totally useless for a movie though.

[Guest Stevie_K]

If there was a Tiberian sun movie using actor if it was done in the style of the ingame movies it would fit in and look good where as if you did the same with renagade where you never see a real actor in a cutscene a real actor movie realy wouldnt work or look as good.

 

I strongly disagree. Where Tiberian Sun (and Firestorm) covers the amount of story that only a large book can handle, I think Renegade is constructed much more like movie material. Besides, games are games and movies are movies. Honestly it should stay that way. I hate it when they have to make movies of everything. It completely ruins the whole universe and feel that you have built up over the years inside your head.

 

Lord of the Rings is the only successful line of books that have been made into proper movies imo. Just because one series of movies can achieve it, doesn't mean it should be done with every good book or video game. Sadly, it seems like people are too greedy to care these days.