544 réponses à ce sujet

[Alex_SM]

slimgrin wrote...

This movie will be as good as the video games you see based on movies. How was that Batman Begins game? or the Ironman games?

And you can found an objetive reason for that? In the main material there is no reason why the movie should be like that. 

The only reason why most of videogame movies are pure crap is due to they are cheap movies with half budget spent in the main star and the rest of  the team (writters, director) fill  with untalented cheap mercenaries who always ignore original game plot and just use the character and the universe. 

Let's see who is involved at least before start whining.

They are making this movie to make money. Period.

Well, they are making every movie to make money. 

[GothamLord]

slimgrin wrote...

Really? So there is no difference between a Michaele Bay flick and a film from Christopher Nolan? Transformers 2 made lots of money. So did the Dark Knight. Which was the better movie?

All movies are done to create money. I think thats pretty clear. The issue becomes if the people involved respect the material to give it the proper dedication it deserves or want to just exploit it for a fast hard profit.   Nolan showed respect to the Batman franchise. Bay on the other hand officially raped Transformers with the second movie for nothing more than greed.

Modifié par GothamLord, 29 mai 2010 - 01:39 .

[Alex_SM]

Really? So there is no difference between a Michaele Bay flick and a film by Christopher Nolan? Transformers 2 made lots of money. So did the Dark Knight. Which was the better movie?

I'm not saying every movie is good. But every movie is made to earn money. Specially those with high budget.

Then the final result depends in who is involved, their abilities and sensibilities and the individual circumstances of the project. 

I'm not saying this will be a great one; just say it may or may not, but better wait until we know something more.

[Minister of Sound]

My opinion is that they should make the movie about the Human-Batarian War (Can't find what it's called) with the Skyllian Blitz and Torfan as set-piece battles. Shepard can be hinted at or given a cameo.

[Wynne]

Too bad that the quotes and everything have already made it roughly 100% clear that this will be about Shepard. I'd have preferred Anderson.

Well, the only way they can do this decent in my eyes is to (a) make Shepard black--has the protagonist in a (good) sci-fi movie EVER EVER EVER been black EVER? Then show me this movie, because I want to see it--or maybe Arabic in ancestry, just to send the message of "this is AFTER the world became united. Nobody sees this as surprising." ( make Shepard female, because only in Alien(s) and Pitch Black has there ever been a female protagonist in a (good) sci-fi movie, and it felt more unique that way, and something sounding like a breath of fresh air is what draws people to movies in the first place--which will certainly happen because females are only the leads in romantic comedies or horror movies where they run around in stupid high heels shrilly screaming these days. © since neither a nor be is likely on the table, especially not b, at least cast somebody who isn't incredibly well known and can *seriously act*--i.e. a Heath Ledger, not a Pierce Brosnan. And one NOT chosen for resemblance to Vanderloo.

And the only way they can make it truly awesome in my eyes is to have two protagonists (because I'm like 99% sure Shepard won't be female; I can't get that freakin' lucky, and nobody's that brave in Hollywood these days.) Maybe brother and sister or cousins. One of them is the captain (the Paragon) and the other is right under them in rank. That way we have both male and female, Paragade and Renegon, all bases covered and nobody feels cheated. But I would call "male audience fanservice" if they put her with Liara. (Plus, the tough military woman inevitably being a lesbian is a cliche.)

Ugh, I have such mixed feelings about this... part of me wants it to be a huge success and be awesome. The rest of me is really, really wary. I have faith that the movie will at least be decent, but not that Shepard will be anything but yet another generic white male.

Hell, I'd bet a hundred bucks on the "male Shepard" part of that equation. If I had a million bucks, I'd bet those too. I love Bioware completely, but generic white (or white-ish; maybe heavily tanned, but still white) male Shepard played by a big name is like a given here. I don't think anybody in Hollywood would let them do otherwise. Hollywood hates risky moves; ironically, since some of their biggest successes have been risky moves. (I think back to Alien/Aliens yet again.) 

I want to have faith in this team and I do, just... that's the one thing I don't believe will be awesome. Maybe everything else will be, but there's no way that it's going to be unique in terms of protagonist. I can't see it being anything other than a white male Spacer/War Hero. Probably named John. That's the problem with making an RPG hero your protagonist... it inevitably ends up being a self-insert module for males (even though there are more women than men on this planet) because that's what everybody supposedly expects and wants.

I would love to be pleasantly surprised, I really would. But at this point I just can't make myself believe that I won't be disappointed in the protagonist and the white bread choices I expect to see.

Modifié par Wynne, 29 mai 2010 - 06:40 .

[2pac Shakur]

Wynne wrote...


Ugh, I have such mixed feelings about this... part of me wants it to be a huge success and be awesome. The rest of me is really, really wary. I have faith that the movie will at least be decent, but not that Shepard will be anything but yet another generic white male.

well that IS the default shepard

I'd prefer it if he would be Russian or Asian, that would be fun, hollywood never gets those kinds of protagonists anymore

and if shepard was a woman, she'd have to be extremely hot or else the nerds will disapprove and not swarm at the theatres and merchandise.

[Wynne]

I know that's the default Shepard, but... why make it the standard for a movie? Defaults are boring. Defaults are for people who are like, "I don't want to think about this too hard, I want to play the freaking game and that's it." A movie has to be more interesting than that. You have to have a Tony Stark or a Peter Parker in order to give a crap, not a John Q. Everyman with no distinguishing characteristics. Why not do *more* than the game could do, rather than less?

Russian or Asian would be cool, too. I love Christian Bale and guys like that, but they're *everywhere.* The white male has been done and done and overdone. Ideally, an actor of very VERY mixed ancestry would fit the ME setting the absolute best. Somebody like a male version of Malese Jow, who if you ask me is just strikingly unique in appearance. (You'd have to see her in motion to really be able to tell, but just trust me.)

I agree that Shepard should be extremely hot if female, though she'd still have to dress classy and carry herself with dignity and power or people would laugh at the cheese rather than enjoy the ride--I think a good choice would be somebody like Scarlet Johansson, especially if you throw in Heidi Moneymaker as her stunt double because those two are quite the duo. Scarlet is gorgeous, but can ACT, and she could totally pull off the Jane Shepard red hair. The only problem is, she doesn't have the Malese Jow factor where you look at her face and go, "Whoa, what the hell is her ancestry?" I look at Scarlet and I can guess what part of Europe her family was from. Too bad Malese isn't older. But there'd have to be somebody out there who fit the part.

Even so, I still think the dual protagonist thing would be more interesting. It would help cut down on the "but there's nobody anything like my preferred Shepard onscreen!" factor, and it would mix things up a little instead of just following the plot of the games too closely. Hell, they could save BOTH crewmates from the first game that way, nicely dodging a few spoilers for anybody who hadn't played the first game and wanted to because they saw the movie. And who doesn't love a little Avengers/Castle-style witty chemistry between a male and female lead?

Modifié par Wynne, 29 mai 2010 - 06:58 .

[InvaderErl]

They will do a male Shep to maximize profits.

That's just the unfortunate way marketers and studios make their movies.

When was the last time there was a big budget action movie with a female lead much less one that made big $$$?

I'm not saying its right or fair but that is the way the cookie will crumble.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 29 mai 2010 - 06:58 .

[InvisiShepard]

A brother sister Shepard duo would be awesome and hilarious. Their sibling banter in the middle of massive firefights could be a joy to watch and a first time ever on screen.



Unfortunately, Hollywood isn't that creative and we will get a generic male shep played by Sam Worthington because the horrible parasites who run the show think American's can't handle anything more radical

[InvaderErl]

God, please no more Sam Worthington.

[Wynne]

InvaderErl--Dude, did you not see the part where I mentioned Aliens? That's the last time that I can think of. The very fact that there's almost NEVER a female protagonist in a sci-fi flick might draw people in out of sheer curiosity. But I agree that it's doubtful anybody's going to have the guts to do such a thing. If they did, they might be praised for thinking outside the box and showing interest in equality and win lots of awards for it, but... yeah. It's just about as likely as Ed McMahon showing up on my doorstep with those million bucks, and I'm in Belgium right now.

InvisiShepard--That's my train of thought *exactly.* Hollywood is getting more and more resistant to creativity and risks, and ironically, that lack of risk-taking is what makes people care less about going to the movies these days, if you ask me. I could not agree with you more!

Modifié par Wynne, 29 mai 2010 - 07:04 .

[2pac Shakur]

InvaderErl wrote...

They will do a male Shep to maximize profits.

That's just the unfortunate way marketers and studios make their movies.

When was the last time there was a big budget action movie with a female lead much less one that made big $$$?

I'm not saying its right or fair but that is the way the cookie will crumble.

Aliens

[InvaderErl]

A movie from over two decades ago.



Yes, I know.

[Wynne]

Okay, fine. Kill Bill. Made 333 million bucks.

[InvisiShepard]

It doesn't matter. The movie will be crap because Hollywood doesn't take video games seriously.

[InvaderErl]

I'm inclined to agree.

Wynne wrote...

Okay, fine. Kill Bill. Made 333 million bucks.

That's the box office of TWO movies put together including the worldwide takes (which studios get a lower percentage of).

Domestically in the US they both came in at about the 70 million mark which is good (especially for a relatively cheap movie to make) but won't cut it for a major big budget action blockbuster.

Comparison: Iron Man 2 (one movie) has made over 500 million worldwide.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 29 mai 2010 - 07:20 .

[2pac Shakur]

InvisiShepard wrote...

It doesn't matter. The movie will be crap because Hollywood doesn't take video games seriously.

hollywood movies based on games are for the marketing of the game and its franchise

ex: Prince of Persia, biggest joke I have ever seen probably sparked interest in the franchise

[InvisiShepard]

Tupac? I thought you were dead!

[Alex_SM]

Movies are too expensive. A 150 Million $ budget movie needs nearly 300 Millions box office just to cover all the money spent and the yearly margins are so little that if one of the "big" movies fails then the whole year is a fail.

Remember New Line (The Lord of the Rings just a decade ago), just one year with their "main movie" gone wrong (The Golden Compass) and the studio went bankrupt.

So the studios get really afraid of every element that could damage the box office. 

Modifié par Alex_SM, 29 mai 2010 - 07:22 .

[InvaderErl]

Alex_SM wrote...

Movies are too expensive. A 150 Million $ budget movie needs nearly 300 Millions box office just to cover all the money spent and the yearly margins are so little that if one of the "big" movies fails then the whole year is a fail.

Remember New Line (The Lord of the Rings just a decade ago), just one year with their "main movie" gone wrong (The Golden Compass) and the studio went bankrupt.

This is the main reason they won't take a risk with female Shep. There is simply too much money to lose if something goes wrong (assuming that they put money into this and don't go cheap in which case the movie's more doomed than I already think it is).

[Wynne]

You're being too American. As if Hollywood cares where the money came from. Vol. 1 made $180,949,045 worldwide, Kill Bill Vol. 2 $152,159,461 worldwide. Technically they were both the same movie, but yeah, I guess they should be counted apart, but they shouldn't just be looked at domestically for a discussion like this.

Iron Man 2 had a much bigger budget than Kill Bill--30 mil vs. 170-200 mil. Try comparing movies that actually had the same budget. As it stands, that's ridiculously unfair. Ever heard that old saying, "You have to spend money to make money"? Of course Kill Bill didn't make as much money as Iron Man 2--Iron Man 2 also had a Marvel comic book following, which is another huge advantage.

The only way we're going to find out if this works is to have somebody actually try it for once. And nobody's going to have the balls to bring in a female lead for a project with a budget like Iron Man 2, not in this decade. Maybe for Mass Effect, but it's incredibly doubtful, as basically everybody is saying.

Modifié par Wynne, 29 mai 2010 - 07:30 .