Sunday, May 26, 2013

Adapting Video-Games to Film



Video-games and film have historically rarely gone well together. Combining the two disparate mediums has led to a few decent films (Hitman and Silent Hill spring to mind), but more often than not it leads to screenwriting abominations that fail both as adaptations and as standalone films. Will video-games ever work as films? Perhaps, but they have to overcome the inherent problems in the adaptation process.


The most recent video-game adaptation, Silent Hill: Revelation, provides an excellent example of the difficulties adapting games to film. Based off of the popular horror game Silent Hill 3, the film was a low-budget 3D attempt to cash in on horror fans, even being fittingly released on Halloween. Despite being directed and written by Michael J Basset, a self-proclaimed passionate fan of the Silent Hill series, the film still bombed with critics and audiences, largely due to the messy writing throughout it.

Faced with a difficult narrative structure that relied on cryptic notes and slow-burning atmosphere almost as heavily as it did on actual dialogue, Basset chose to create a story that got the major points of the plot across, but he also extensively changed how things happened, often to disastrous effect. Characters got their roles and personalities changed, the foreboding atmosphere of the original game was painfully underutilized, and barely any of the scenes from the original game made it into the film. The movie alienated fans of the original game and offered nothing of any interest to casual movie-goers, which proved to be its undoing.

This kind of failure is what is fans are hoping doesn't happen with the upcoming adaptation of Mass Effect. The trilogy of science fiction role-playing games received considerable acclaim for its writing and has had fans clamoring for a film ever since its inception. A well fleshed out universe, likable characters, intense action, and striking visuals made the games a logical choice for an eventual adaptation, but even a series such as Mass Effect faces significant problems on its way to the silver screen.

Mass Effect is frequently cited as one of the strongest examples of storytelling in gaming.
The sheer amount of content and flexibility provided in each game makes a straight film adaptation difficult at best. The protaganist—Commander John Shephard—has no canon personality or even gender, instead being a blank slate whom the players can mold with their own choices and moral compass. Each of the Mass Effect games takes at least twenty hours to beat—hours filled with endless character and universe development. Additionally, it is very possible that the screenwriters will have to come up with their own ending for the series after the infamous ending to Mass Effect 3.

This doesn't preclude the possibility that Mass Effect will succeed as a film though. Talented film directors and screenwriters have made excellent films out of far more challenging source material. The key word there though, is talent. Hiring no-names like Basset rarely end well because they simply don't have the talent or experience necessary to take on difficult projects. These people get hired because these projects lack the budget or creative spark necessary to attract the more talented individuals in the industry.

Films live and die by the names involved in the production. Casual movie-goers are drawn in by the names on the poster, whether they be experienced actors or well-known directors. Fans of the source material will place more faith in a film that has solid talent on board. Skilled film-makers will usually produce something of quality, which in turn will generally find an audience. Everyone in this situation ends up happy.

Will future video-game adaptations such as Mass Effect manage to avoid the pitfalls of previous game adaptations? Only time will tell.

Friday, May 24, 2013

Oblivion Review

  


A thrilling and visually splendid film that favors style over substance,

After a barren stretch of releases for the first third of 2013, we are finally beginning to see the larger profile and more interesting releases, one of the first of which is Oblivion. Directed by Tron: Legacy's Joseph Kosinksi—who also wrote the comic book that inspired the script—and starring Tom Cruise, I went in with high expectations. I came away satisfied, but was also left wondering how a few changes to the script might have benefited the final film.

The story sounds simple at first glance. Jack Harper is a technician stationed on a futuristic Earth that has been ravaged by an alien attack. As he repairs defense drones and wanders around the remnants of Earth, Jack begins to suffer from strange dreams and is eventually pushed to reevaluate everything he thought he knew about his simple life. That's all you really should know going into this film, because the beauty of the story is the twists and turns that start appearing after the lengthy introduction.

Oblivion goes in some directions you wouldn't necessarily expect from a high-budget sci-fi action flick. The plot twists start piling on in the second act and adds a surprising amount of complications to the story. Chances are that you've already seen many of these twists before in other films, but Oblivion makes it work for the most part. Think of Oblivion as a tapestry of homages and elements taken from other—arguably better—films and you'll have a better sense of what to expect. No one will ever accuse Kosinski of being the most original writer around, but the blend of twists that Oblivion serves up is very exciting, if somewhat predictable in parts.

Although the plot of the film is very entertaining to watch unfold, Oblivion begins to stumble when it comes to dialogue. As damning as this may sound, the film is simply better when no one is talking. The purely dialogue-driven scenes grow wearying, although thankfully there aren't that many of them. The dialogue isn't bad per say, it just doesn't pop, and the lack of strong characters only compounds this problem.

The characters apart from our protagonist Jack Harper just aren't that interesting. Jack is the only one that goes through any kind of meaningful character arc; the rest are just there to support him. Even Kurylenko's character—who is critical to the story—starts out one-dimensional and shows little growth over the course of the film. Extending the run-time or modifying the script to have more of a focus on the characters other than Harper would have benefited the film greatly.

What it comes down to is that Oblivion is a much better action/thriller film than it is a character driven drama. Kosinski seems to be significantly more skilled at writing mind-bending plot twists and staging thrilling action sequences than at crafting quiet dialogue-driven scenes. The characters—apart from Jack—just aren't interesting enough to put in scenes involving nothing but conversations. This isn't a huge flaw, as they pace the film fairly well—there is more than enough beautifully shot action and trippy plot twists to keep your attention—but I did catch myself folding my arms and growing slightly annoyed during the scenes where the characters do nothing but sit around and talk. Thankfully, the splendid visuals are enough to make the temporary boredom of those scenes melt away.

Gorgeous scenes such as this one pervade the film.
Visually, Oblivion is spectacular. The use of color is breath-taking, and the film's extensive use of CGI surprisingly never looks cheap or fake. Even when the story slows down, the film can still keep your attention through the excellent visuals. I can't say I was expecting this, but Oblivion actually ranks as one of the most visually stunning films I've seen in quite a while. I'll be lining up to see Kosinski's future films if he can keep this same standard of visual quality. Sadly, this quality doesn't transfer over to the majority of the acting.

Cruise turns in a middle of the road performance that, although far from his best, is still more than competent and works well for the character of Jack. You do see Cruise's typical cocky bravado that he's been using in his action films for years, but he does shine in the slower and more solemn moments too. Unfortunately, Cruise is forced to carry the film due to unexceptional performances by the rest of the cast.

The rest of the cast is largely mediocre. Cruise's female co-stars Olga Kurylenko and Rise Borough both deliver decent, if fairly shallow, performances, but they're not being given much to work with by the script in the first place. Morgan Freeman shows up and tries to work his magic, but it doesn't add much due to his being in the film for all of fifteen minutes and his character having little to no backstory. It's the Tom Cruise show all the way, and everyone else falls by the wayside.

Don't get me wrong, that doesn't ruin the film by any means. Cruise's trademark charisma allows him to carry the film on his broad shoulders, but it is a shame that they didn't improve on the side characters. The final film works as a whole, but you can't help but wonder how a few changes in the script would have improved it.

If you love beautifully shot films, are a fan of Tom Cruise, or just want a twisty sci-fi film, I'd recommend Oblivion. Spectacular action and an entertaining story combine to make the film an excellent way to spend two hours. It's predictable and derivative in parts, but it still adds up to an intriguing sci-fi action-thriller that'll help tide you over until the summer movie season hits in full force.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

The Rise of 3D Movies


3D movies are big business. Ever since Avatar, the film industry has become enamored with 3D, releasing a steady stream of 3D blockbusters year-round. Most of this is due to the tremendous amount of money from the $3-4 up charge they get on each 3D ticket. Unless 3D abruptly stops drawing in audiences, it looks like the format is here to stay for the foreseeable future. Although 3D has come a long ways over the past several years, but several problems keep popping up.

The biggest problem is when 3D becomes a commercial and not an artistic decision. Recently, prominent sci-fi filmmaker and writer JJ Abrams admitted that he was forced to make Star Trek: Into Darkness in 3D. Although Abrams confessed that the final 3D conversion was tolerable and far better than he had expected, the principle behind it is concerning to say the least.

Not the worst choice for 3D, but certainly not the next Avatar.
A large amount of films are given 3D conversions or are shot in 3D simply because that is what other films are doing. Iron Man 3, which wasn't even shot in 3D, was given a 3D conversion simply because all superhero films are doing it, and that's where the money is at. Although the final film didn't have any significant 3D blunders, it was still nothing more than another 3D conversion

Making the decision to convert films into 3D purely based on greed can have disastrous consequences. 2010's Clash Of The Titans was slammed for its unplanned and poorly done 3D conversion and now serves as the poster-boy on how not to do 3D conversions. Despite this, Clash Of The Titans went on to quadruple its production budget, undoubtebldy bolstered by 3D upcharges. Thankfully, Warner Bros. put significantly more time and effort into the 3D conversion of the sequel Wrath Of The Titans.

If 3D is used properly, it can be one of the most useful tools in a film-maker can use. Last year's Life of Pi was a spectacular use of 3d that proved the format's worth. Life of Pi was planned and shot in 3D, which is what led to it becoming one of the most acclaimed 3D films in years. The moral of this is that 3D can work as long as its not forced on filmmakers. The best 3D films are those that are the result of filmmakers who are passionate about the format, not those that are forced into 3D by greedy studio executives.

Sunday, May 5, 2013

The New Star Wars Films


Despite many of us thinking that the Star Wars film series would never see another trilogy, due to George Lucas's lack of interest in filmmaking recently, Disney has made it possible. Supposedly, there will be a new Star Wars film every year, starting in 2015. They will presumably be released in 3D, and possibly even IMAX if Disney sees it fit. To much praise from fans, Disney got acclaimed director, producer, and screenwriter JJ Abrams to head the project.

Most interesting is the fact that that there will be several stand-alone films released alongside the new trilogy. It is unknown what these films will be about, but it is speculated that they will be about smaller characters in the series, such as Boba Fett.

I for one am excited for these films. JJ Abrams has proven himself to be an excellent director, with the superb Mission Impossible 3 and Star Trek to back him up. My main concern is that Abram's chronic weakness has been abandoning projects, which he has done repeatedly over the years. For example, he abandoned Lost after the first season to go make MI:3, and it now looks like he is jumping ship on the Star Trek series after he finishes Into Darkness. Hopefully he will stick with the Star Wars series for at least a full trilogy before leaving for other projects.