If this goes ahead then the movie is most likely screwed since Verbinski is a hack. Note I did enjoy the first Pirates movie but that had little to do with his direction.
Variety reports
I wonder for the sake of the battered-wife-like videogame-to-movie adaptation hopefuls if this movie will also star Gore Verbinski as Andrew Ryan.
If this goes ahead then the movie is most likely screwed since Verbinski is a hack. Note I did enjoy the first Pirates movie but that had little to do with his direction.
I personally think videogame adaptations are doomed to fail unless they change the nature of the story they are telling.
In the case of BioShock, the compelling cinematic story to tell would be the fall of Rapture not the story developed ingame.
I agree. But the problem with most of the past movie/game adaptions is that their source material didn't really lend itself to good film (ie DOOM). But with Bioshock, you have a fantastic, original setting, a solid, simple premise, and a load of interesting characters (it'd be nice to see Sander Cohen in there somewhere). Bioshock somehow seems more suited to film than a lot of games. But you're right, a retelling of Jack's adventures splicer-killing would make for a very dull movie. I'd prefer to see the story told in the audio logs, with Jack as an aside.
Does Jack have a second name?
Is it Sparrow?
I sense franchise tie-ins.
Also the movie should be called "Rapture", not "Bioshock".
Presumably his name would be Jack Ryan
I think Harrison Ford's a little old to reprise the role, personally.
It will be like Resident Evil, just serious.
Lord help us
Alec Baldwin's Jack is still the best one on film.Originally Posted by Scots Taffer
And frankly a film version of Bioshock could only be better than the game.
Agreed, Fafhrd. I dislike how Ford made it a one-man-army action vehicle for middle-aged people. Baldwin's depiction really was an analyst thrown in at the deep end and he played it well.
As for BioShock, well, it's a videogame-movie. Need anything else be said? There isn't a single good one.
I think Rapture definitely has potential as a film setting. Something like City of Lost Children. That would rock.
I'm tired and can't seem to put meaningful sentences together today so I'll just put it like this:
Gore Verbinski sucks.
Events retracing the fall of rapture. No firefights, almost no real action until the end. No over-the-top characters. Merely a hint at the birth of the main character of the game, actually hints at most elements and characters of the game without going into detail. Budget big enough to create believable decor sets. Good cast and refined soundtrack.
I'd watch that.
Verbinskis schtick is nothing like that, it's over the top setpieces sprinkled with ridiculous action and run of the mill storytelling, so clear that you can see it a mile away.
I'm not trying to be a pessimistic bastard, I'm just not convinced he'll do anything else than a blockbuster popcorn-film with a craaazy visual style.
Someone elsewhere pointed out that Levine could write it. Which is actually not a bad idea.
I disagree with this. Sure DOOM doesn't have much depth to it but it's a concept that given the right kind of director, say James Cameron back in action mode, could have definitely have made a kick-arse action film.
A videogame that was poor source material for a film was Super Mario Brothers. Jesus that was awful.
The big problem with videogame to film adaptations is the lack of talent involved. It wouldn't matter how good the source material was with the directors that have been given the task thus far. Look at the results comic book to film adaptations get with bigger talent. Now you might argue there is more to the source material but none of those films follow the comics exactly, how could you with the various threads and restarts many of them have, they just take the main ideas and go from there. I am sure that game to film adaptations could have just as much success if an actual talented team of film makers took the core idea of a game and ran with it.
Some more info in this interview.
Me: Given all the effects that might might be involved, do you see this movie being as big and epic as "Pirates of the Caribbean?"
GV: I don’t think it'll be on that scale. Of course, with "Bioshock" there are no locations I can go to. We have to build it. We'll cleverly use matte paintings and all the technology we have to achieve a great deal of scale without actually building everything.
It's a much more intimate story than "Pirates." Although its an adventure, it’s a dramatic adventure. I see it more along the lines of "Blade Runner."
Me: You obviously have a relationship with Ken Levine. How involved do you expect him to be with the film?
GV: Right now I'm talking a lot with John Logan about it. But Ken and I speak on a regular basis in terms of what characters we feel are working well and where he feels things should be different in a movie. This is a great asset to pick up the phone and call. He has been very open to it. I look forward to continuing that relationship.
That's only the Pirates trilogy, which was just as much a Jerry Bruckheimer creation as Verbinski's. Verbinski's other movies haven't involved loud action setpieces.
I don't have any particular love for Verbinski, but the first Pirates was fantastic and actually had a reasonably decent storyline. If he has enough talent to work with I'll be cautiously optimistic about a Bioshock film.
His other films are 'Mouse Hunt', 'The Mexican', 'The Weather Man' and 'The Ring', none of which are that good. However he is technically competent and maybe with Levine on board and the right cast, cinematographer etc it could turn out alright. That post of Vraptor27's is promising. At the very least it could shut up all the film critics who roll there eyes at video games since Bioshock has some thematic depth to it.
Only one of those I saw was "The Ring". Thought it was decent. Kind of a stupid premise (blame that on the writers), but not bad direction anyway.
But my point was none of those movies were full of loud, brainless action, so I'm not sure Verbinski is necessarily that type of director. I've always considered the Pirates trilogy to have the traditional Bruckheimer fingerprints all over it, the director was less important.
I dunno, maybe he'll be terrible and Bioshock will suck. But at least it's not Uwe Boll or Paul WS Anderson. While I can think of at least a dozen directors I would have preferred, I find it encouraging that it seems Hollywood is taking it seriously enough to at least give it to someone that's reasonably competent.
Both Tomb Raiders and Mortal Kombat are pretty good. And I hear Resident Evil isn't half-bad, either.
Hur. Outcome looks doubtful.Players control a pilot who crash-lands at a secret entrance to the city,
Dude, please tell me you are being sarcastic.
As an aside, I saw RE:Apocraplypse the other day with a friend; which we watched for fun (the idea of being Resident Evil fans proves utterly pointless). Although it's a little hard even for that when it continues to vomit awfulness in your eyes every minute.
As the AskANinja Ninja so eloquently put it, I really hope the movie "has more gore and less verbinski."
Both Tomb Raiders are entertaining. Mortal Kombat perfectly captures the spirit of the games, and parts of Resident Evil are kinda cool.
Posting Permissions