Bioshock Movie from Gore Verbinski

...at least according to this Variety article. What's everyone think? Verbinski seems to have a good creative head on his shoulders (and hey, he's got a better record than Uwe Boll). Even so, we all know how well video games-turned-movies usually turn out.

I figure there are three most likely options:

1) It'll be only loosely based on Bioshock, but have a plot that differs from the game, and so won't quite feel like it IS Bioshock. Fans turned off because of this.

2) It'll be exactly like Bioshock, only because the fans have already played the game, there will be no surprises, and they'll be stuck watching a movie about a video game that feels like it's missing something because they're used to being able to play. Fans will be turned off because of this.

3) Verbinski will surprise the heck out of a lot of people and make a darned entertaining movie without getting caught in the above traps, much like was done when he made a pretty decent flick out of an amusement park ride.

...Though hopefully Davey Jones won't have a cameo. :smallwink:

:smalleek:*GASP* a video game movie NOT being made by Uwe Boll?!
Oh well. Sounds cool. :smallwink:

I am an absolute sucker for Bioshock. I will be seeing this movie regardless of content. I say huzzah.

From what I've heard of the game's plot, it sounds like it'd make for a great movie.

I'm holding off on an opinion until they start rolling. How long has that Halo movie been in production, anyway?

I hope it doesn't stick to the plot of a video game. I think the setting and the premise could make any number of compelling stories, but I don't see how one could really transfer the plot from the video game to the big screen given the lead character doesn't... you know... talk.

The setting is good, the plot of the game itself much less so. Both the antagonists are way too close to being mustache-twirlingly evil and with plans that just doesn't make sense, though i guess that one of them can have it be explained away with him being completely delusional. Also the plot twist is in my opinion horrible and wrecks all the themes and points the game has been working towards. So really i hope that it does not stick too closely to the plot of the game and instead focuses on using the setting to tell a different story, most likely set at an earlier time than the game itself.

Apparently, if we go by what the company's suits said a few months back, it will NOT be based on Bioshock the game. Rather, it will detail the rise and fall of the utopia. Which makes me place bets on it, that is quite creative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azerian Kelimon

Apparently, if we go by what the company's suits said a few months back, it will NOT be based on Bioshock the game. Rather, it will detail the rise and fall of the utopia. Which makes me place bets on it, that is quite creative.

---

Yeah, that's what I'm hoping for. Personally, I want to see how Rapture really was like before the ADAM business started and everything went to ****. That would make for an interesting backstory to the game.

If that is true Azerian then it holds the potential to be the greatest video game movie ever. The background for Bioshock is extremely interesting and easily one of the best pieces of writing for any video game ever. Not only that it shows that they are actually thinking about how to make it a good movie instead of a quick cash-in if they do something that is comparatively this hard instead of just making a film of the plot of the game itself. So i really hope it is not just a rumor but what it is going to actually be.

The idea of a BioShock movie got a thread a while ago, and somebody came up with a brilliant idea then.
Get Sander Cohen to make it.
I agree completely.

Though, if this movie is actually going to show the rise and fall I am all in favour in so many ways.
Problem comes in who it focuses on though.
BioShock succeeded thanks to its focus on smaller characters, giving even random enemies snatches of personality as they gabber into the darkness and fulling developing characters you never meet via the diaries.
But then, even if they don't delve into minor characters much, what about Atlas and Fontaine? Do you keep that as some big reveal it make it something fairly well known to the audience?
It could also lose a little of its story to people who have played the games since if it charts the rise and fall, we've already seen that in the diaries, and we already know from the start that this city is going to die. They would have to have new revelations to keep the gamers happy.
And who would they get to Andrew Ryan? Because I don't think anyone could ever replace Armin Shimerman.

Contrary to that chunk, I will actually look forward to this.

Bioshock is definitely a good enough setting, environment, and story (if necessary) to form a compelling movie.

any bioshock movie should only be loosely based on bioshock. a lot of what made the game good only worked because it was a videogame. for example, no reprogramming the defense droids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jibar

And who would they get to Andrew Ryan? Because I don't think anyone could ever replace Armin Shimerman.

---

That was Armin Shimermann? Wow. I never checked the credits, and I really couldn't tell by the voice. Either I'm an idiot, or he's got a much greater range than I thought. (Or both, I suppose.) :smallsmile:

I wish they would stop trying to cash in on games twice by making movies based on them and just make games that are watchable instead. Seriously, games these days have the budgets of minor blockbusters and still, 90% of the time the story goes: "ZOMG aliens and/or demons are attacking! Hey Chosen one, you gotta help us shoot them/cast spells!"

For reference

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poleboy

I wish they would stop trying to cash in on games twice by making movies based on them and just make games that are watchable instead. Seriously, games these days have the budgets of minor blockbusters and still, 90% of the time the story goes: "ZOMG aliens and/or demons are attacking! Hey Chosen one, you gotta help us shoot them/cast spells!"

For reference

---

there is no movie videogame transparency, most of what works in a game won't fly as a movie, and vice versa. that is why we don't have "games that are watchable"
make a game too cinematic and the player doesn't feel in control of the character (railroaded).
a fight in a game involves the player at every level, in a movie it is the character showing off, do more than a few, or too big, and the character is unbeatable.

That's not true. A game can have hour long cutscenes and still be a masterpiece, it just requires a nigh-flawless plot. 'Course, the number of nigh-flawless plots out there is small.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thubby

there is no movie videogame transparency, most of what works in a game won't fly as a movie, and vice versa. that is why we don't have "games that are watchable"
make a game too cinematic and the player doesn't feel in control of the character (railroaded).
a fight in a game involves the player at every level, in a movie it is the character showing off, do more than a few, or too big, and the character is unbeatable.

---

This is technically true. However, this is only because of people's expectations. When playing a video game, most people will assume that they will be in control of the action. I personally prefer rail-roaded games over free-roaming ones, mostly because the latter almost always stumble over their attempts to give you the ultimate freedom and end up creating a game world that is huge and impressive, but also shallow.

However, this was not supposed to be a discussion about aesthetics or experience. What really gets me worked up is that the games industry is essentially trying to cash in twice on the same experience - movies based on games are always that and nothing else. They're not any worse than your average hollywood blockbuster which is usually just a movie based on a movie cliché, but since gaming is my favorite hobby and greatest interest, I rabidly defend it from the daily attempts to cheapen the media.

That being said, I'm somewhat positive that a halfway competent person finally decides to give a game spin-off movie a try. If he can turn a Disneyland attraction into a fun and entertaining movie, maybe he can also pull videogame movies out of the deadly sulphorous mire they are currently slowly starving to death in.
I'm also extremely sceptic, because to my knowledge it has not yet been done in a way that did not make me cringe at movie clichés and "hilarious" sidekick characters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poleboy

I'm somewhat positive that a halfway competent person finally decides to give a game spin-off movie a try.

---

*ahem* What's wrong with Resident Evil?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thubby

make a game too cinematic and the player doesn't feel in control of the character (railroaded).

---

*Makes evil, evil eyes at Final Fantasy X*

If the film contains at least one of the following phrases, I'll be happy:

Spoiler

Show

GODDAMN SPLOICERS. FISTFULL OF LOIGHTNING. ZAP'EM AND WHACK'EM, THE ONE-TWO PAUNCH. With the accent.

Also, for everyone saying that you couldn't have games which were like movies - would you kindly remember Half-Life 2? It wouldn't take much to adapt into a film, and Valve (somewhat pretentiously, but nonetheless with a grain of truth) said how they were looking at something beyond cinema with it. Either way, it's more atmospheric than many films I've seen recently.

I've heard the story that Monkey Island 3 was initially developed as a movie and became a game when that deal fell through.

And, of course, let's keep in mind that Gore Verbinski is best known for making a blockbuster movie franchise out of an amusement park ride. I'd think that making the best video game adaptation ever would be rather a step back challengewise for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColdBrew

*ahem* What's wrong with Resident Evil?

---

They were terrible scripwriter's-girlfriend-insertion fantasies that barely touched upon the game's plot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revlid

They were terrible scripwriter's-girlfriend-insertion fantasies that barely touched upon the game's plot?

---

Yes. However, I felt that the first one did capture at least some of the feeling of the games. Or maybe that's just because it ripped off every zombie movie ever made, y'know kinda like the game. Resident Evil 2 though... yikes. That was just painful to watch.
I think the third one would simply make me die of shame because I would recognize something from the games in it, and realize that someone actually thought they were making that movie for people like me.