6700 réponses à ce sujet

[Getorex]

AwesomeName wrote...

Getorex, you're definitely overanalyzing and far too hung up on the superficial intimidation side of things... You need to keep in mind that it's not real life, it's a sci-fi. The ME IP is FULL of artistic license and requires a lot of suspension of disbelief to appreciate the story. She's genetically enhanced, her armor can make her punches harder, she might be biotic, etc., etc... If you want something super realistic, why would you even bother with mass effect? It may seem unrealistic to have a female lead, but we're talking about a film - a form of art where they're going to tell a story where themes and emotions are going to take precedent over realism.



And like I've said a kazillion times a femshep wouldn't have to exclude any action - not if they do it CG and use performance capture, which I think sadly is a technology not many people are fully aware of - and this is exactly the kind of thing where it would be an excellent idea. In many people's opinions they've proven with the game that a female shepard works well (arguably MUCH better than a male, thanks to Jennifer Hale), so I can't see why it couldn't work with the movie too (even more so, since it wouldn't be animated using performance cap).

I agree, I may (likely am) overanalyzing but...as I said, I am hoping for a 'realistic' scifi movie rather than an obvious fake. 2001 A Space Oddessy was realistic, yet sci-fi. SOME of Avatar was realistic-ish (skip the floating mountains, and so forth) and sci-fi. Alien and Aliens was gritty and realistic-ish as far as it goes (Alien more than Aliens). Bladerunner was realistic for scifi. For its time, Forbidden Planet (I'd LOVE to see remade and modernized) was realistic scifi. Being scifi doesn't mean it has to go crazy or silly. You can go with "given this universe, these cultures, this physics, that means this..." and your characters can always be realistic rather than cartoonish (female superheros, or ANY superhero for that matter, is copout and cheating). I'd like to see realistic. Realistic humans (that which we KNOW very well) and realistic human capabilities, even if you give HUGE license via "biotics", realistic krogan, asari, etc. Not cartoons and not cartoonish. I most certainly don't want a CGI movie. This doesn't need to be Avatar, especially when using human characters. What's the point? We have actual humans all over the place to BE human. Krogan and Salarian and Turian? Absolutely must be CGI and would be best done via motion capture. Asari and humans are enough alike that actual live human beings can play them, with enhancement for asari. Quarians? They're masked so their faces are beside the point and only their bodies are somewhat in view so they can be played by human actors.

If the thing is to be realistic, even given it is scifi/fantasy, then a fem shep doesn't fit. And to base how "great" the fem shep is by the voice? Really? They are IDENTICAL in all respects, all actions, all moves, yet the voice magically means that a live action movie should be fem even though it wouldn't be with the same voice? C'mon! Dollars and common sense say no fem shep. No money in it. It (fem shep) fits with a cartoonish/video gamish movie but not a movie intended for a wider-than-gamer audience. CGI makes it gimmicky in an unnecessary way if you are using it for humans. Seriously, instead of using actual humans to play humans you'd rather see it as clearly CGI (even the best motion capture is still obvious).

Leave the motion capture for the actual games and movies where it would suck to use makeup effects on humans but not when you are dealing with actual humans as characters.

Modifié par Getorex, 25 octobre 2010 - 08:00 .

[Getorex]

AwesomeName wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...

 The fact of the matter in regards to FemShep is that its a well established fact that action/adventure films with a female lead always gross less at the box office than a very similar movie with a male lead.  

The film industry knows this.  They are well aware of this fact.  
There's a reason that on the same $110 million budget, Salt made 1/2 the money that Bourne Ultimatum made.  
Its the same reason that Warner Bros. decided to push off a Wonder Woman film and instead went ahead with Green Lantern.  

In terms of shear ecomomics, it makes no sense to go with FemShep.  

Yeah and?  How is that our problem?  That's for THEM to worry about.  As fans of the game, we're much more concerned about them making a good movie, than a movie that makes concessions so that they make more money.

This DOES matter. It is an expression of a very objectively real fact: audiences don't buy the fem acton/adventure lead as much as the male. They don't buy it (literally and figuratively). You can't force them to just because your game voice preference is a female. They are not going to make a movie just to cater to a handful of gamers. There's no money in that. They are targeting the bigger audience. The audience that likely doesn't even know there is such a thing as a Mass Effect game in the first place (something like 99% of the entire planet). You don't draw them in by floating another failure (Salt) with a female lead - attempting to duplicate Bourne with a chick - no worky.

If they wanted to appeal to gamers they'd just go to the same people who did Tomb Raider (yech), or the Resident Evil movies. Small audience, lower budget because they know their income wont cover the costs otherwise. If they play it right (male shep, solid story, solid f/x) then they can expect a greater likelihood of making MORE money than they put into it...and that leads to more movies of like quality in the future. A wrong move (playing to a small crowd of fem shep partisans, for instance) means no more movies in the future because they will take a dive at the box office and it will feed the idea that vid games CAN'T be made into good movies, even when they have a fairly decent (Stephen Baxter/Gregory Benford/Greg Bear -ish) story behind it.

Modifié par Getorex, 25 octobre 2010 - 08:09 .

[Getorex]

AwesomeName wrote...

@ Getorex

Well the point of using performance capture and CGing everything is that you can have several people doing one character (a body, a face, the main actor, a stunt double (gender doesn't matter), etc.), and so you aren't restricted to the limitations of a single actor anymore.

And as I said, one of the things that made femshep so great, is precisely because her animations are almost entirely identical to the male's. Hence the performance cap suggestion. And no, Jennifer Hale's performance is most definitely not identical to Meer's and not merely different because of how her voice sounds - there's a lot more to acting than that. If you read one of my previous posts, I explain why I think a female is much more compelling (I never said that they should go with a female purely because of Hale).

Regarding my other post - I think you missed my point.  You're not a studio exec trying to make money, your a fan who wants to see a good movie.  Take Blade Runner for example, when the studio wanted the bloody narration stuck in there.  Okay, great for them - crap for us.  It's THEIR problem, not ours.

Pretty cavalier with THEIR money (and future) for your voice acting pleasure. It doesn't magically make an action "realistic" for a female simply to have a male body do a male-like act and then stick a female shape over it. Realistic is more than appearances and goes to actual capabilities vs limitations. You can't magically sidestep that by mixing and matching computer graphics. Having a male actor physically lift and toss someone and then sticking a female shape over that male actor body doesn't make a female tossing someone suddenly realistic. CGI is expensive and pointless when humans are available to do the acting. Plus, instead of paying 2 or 3 or more people to play ONE part, you pay one to do one part. It is logistically more logical and economically more sensible. CGI is for nonhumans or cartoon movies and games, not a replacement for humans acting human.

[Getorex]

AwesomeName wrote...

@ Getorex

Well the point of using performance capture and CGing everything is that you can have several people doing one character (a body, a face, the main actor, a stunt double (gender doesn't matter), etc.), and so you aren't restricted to the limitations of a single actor anymore.

And as I said, one of the things that made femshep so great, is precisely because her animations are almost entirely identical to the male's. Hence the performance cap suggestion. And no, Jennifer Hale's performance is most definitely not identical to Meer's and not merely different because of how her voice sounds - there's a lot more to acting than that. If you read one of my previous posts, I explain why I think a female is much more compelling (I never said that they should go with a female purely because of Hale).

Regarding my other post - I think you missed my point.  You're not a studio exec trying to make money, your a fan who wants to see a good movie.  Take Blade Runner for example, when the studio wanted the bloody narration stuck in there.  Okay, great for them - crap for us.  It's THEIR problem, not ours.

A c'mon. A fem shep is as "compelling" as a female Salt. Or trying to shoehorn a female in as Jason Bourne (Janet Bourne?). It is as compelling as any of dozens of other fem action leads. No magic there, just hot bods as eye candy, sacrificing realism for style.

It DOES matter what they make at the box office. People pay for what they like, they demonstrate, repeatedly, that they don't like fem action leads as much as they like male action leads. A good movie is what people pay to see. The surest kiss of death is to be critically acclaimed but tank at the box office. In this case, you are seeking to make happy a (relative) handful of fem shep partisans for a small "critical acclaim" and thus sacrificing the box office (and any chance of decent future movie offerings). You don't make big movies to please a small swarm of gamers. You make big movies to please the larger audience and that screams against a fem Shep. They simply don't go for that and there's no need to do it as there are plenty of juicy lead fem roles out there. There's no shortage.

[Omega-202]

AwesomeName wrote...

Omega-202 wrote...

 The fact of the matter in regards to FemShep is that its a well established fact that action/adventure films with a female lead always gross less at the box office than a very similar movie with a male lead.  

The film industry knows this.  They are well aware of this fact.  
There's a reason that on the same $110 million budget, Salt made 1/2 the money that Bourne Ultimatum made.  
Its the same reason that Warner Bros. decided to push off a Wonder Woman film and instead went ahead with Green Lantern.  

In terms of shear ecomomics, it makes no sense to go with FemShep.  

Yeah and?  How is that our problem?  That's for THEM to worry about.  As fans of the game, we're much more concerned about them making a good movie, than a movie that makes concessions so that they make more money.

Enjoy your little fantasy world.  

As a fan, I'm concerned with them making a movie that succeeds so it gets sequels.  
As a fan, I'm concerned with them making money because it means further reinvestment into the franchise (aka, more ME games, movies, books)

As a fan, I'm also concerned about them making a great product.  The better product, in all objective measures, has a Male Shepard lead.  It allows them to ignore the entire concept of "Hey strong female lead" and just get on with the movie.  Every action flick with a female lead spends way too much time focusing on the incongruity of the lead female's predicament.  

I don't want a single whisper mentioned throughout the movie about what gender Shepard is.  If you have a female lead, that just can't happen.  At some point, some character will point that fact out and harp on it.  That's how all past female action movies have been.  

Also, following your logic, you also suggest that in order to be a fan, you have to be against Legendary  even using the ME 1/2/3 story line, as that's a concession that would make them more money than if they gave us something new like a prequel or sequel.  

You have to be a realist sometimes.  When it comes to something as main stream and concrete as movies, you can't be an idealist and remain happy when your dreams never pan out.  

[LUCIANO49]

Hi i just wanted know what im doing wrong. I have finished all the missions of recruiting my team but i cant recruit the justicar. I think it might be because i first completed the lair of the shadowbroker mission and now i am unable to get to the justicar on ilium for recruitment.

[Omega-202]

AwesomeName wrote...

@Getorex

Well we just disagree dude *shrugs*.

With regards to my response to Omega-202, I still think you've completely misunderstood where I was coming from - you're acting as if I think it's a non-issue alltogether. If I wasn't clear enough here's what I mean: I don't think it makes sense to push and argue for anything other than the film you want to see, because it's your money you're parting with. Why on earth would you argue for a movie that would make the studios more money, but isn't what you want to see? That's for THEM, the studios to worry about, not you. You should argue for the movie you want - don't worry about whether or not it's economically viable. They'll worry about what will make them money; you should worry about whether or not it's worth your money.

And who are you to dictate what we should or should not argue for?
I want to pay for a high quality movie, with a solid production value that doesn't get into preachy gender politics.
The best way to avoid that is by simply going with a Male Shepard.  

Just because that view point coincides with the economically viable argument doesn't make either of those arguments invalid and it most definitely doesn't mean they're not tied together.

There's a reason that female action leads are not economically viable.  Unbelievability, preachy gender politics, unrelateability for the main audience for such films (men), etc.
Those are three reasons why I personally don't like the concept and they're also three of the reasons they don't make money.  The two issues are intertwined.  

And honestly, we're talking about Mass Effect here.  You've got no shortage of the strongest, hot headed action supporting females in gaming.  Ashley, Miranda and Jack all work for the strong female role.  But compare the supporting male cast.  Kaiden, Garrus and Jacob can't carry the macho supporting role in a movie.  You need a male Shepard to project that male presence that the other guys just can't.  I'm not saying they're not great male characters, but they're just not the manly-man types that an action movie needs to have at its forefront.  

[DetailedSubset]

LUCIANO49 wrote...

Hi i just wanted know what im doing wrong. I have finished all the missions of recruiting my team but i cant recruit the justicar. I think it might be because i first completed the lair of the shadowbroker mission and now i am unable to get to the justicar on ilium for recruitment.

You're in entirely the wrong thread.

[Ryzaki]

...Or it could be that more people liked the Bourne Identity than Salt. Shocking I know.

[Omega-202]

Ryzaki wrote...

...Or it could be that more people liked the Bourne Identity than Salt. Shocking I know.

Then how come this same trend holds through across more than just that one example?  

Tomb Raider vs Mission Impossible II 
- 1 year apart, very similar budgets, strong IP's but not overwhelming, BIG name actors
- MI 2 had double the box office

UnderWorld  vs xXx
- 1 year apart, similar budgets, firsts in a new series
- xXx way outgrossed UnderWorld

Why was Ultraviolet such a flop but Transporter became such a hit?  Why was Aeon Flux universally regarded as crap?  Can you keep blaming the story over and over?  Because I'll tell you right now that Underworld had better writing than xXx.  

Again, Warner Bros Studios have come straight out on record and said that they're afraid to do a Wonder Woman movie because they know it won't be as successful as it should be.  That's why they're testing the waters with Green Lantern first.  

A perfect case in point: Last year they released an animated full length feature on DVD for both of these characters.  Their gross was approximately the same even though they put a lot more money into advertising for Wonder Woman and got a more well known (expensive)  voice acting cast including Alfred Molina, Keri Russell and Nathan Fillion.  

The simple fact is that female protagonists in an action film just don't sell nearly as well.  

[Getorex]

Ryzaki wrote...

...Or it could be that more people liked the Bourne Identity than Salt. Shocking I know.

If it were a one-off, sure, but it is a consistent "issue" with female action lead movies. They never ever do as well as male action leads. It is not a mere sample of one here, but a sample of dozens.

Then there's the argument that there's just no good chick characters in this game/movie. Forget the fact that the entire galaxy of Asari are chicks (matriarchs, commandos, etc). Then there's Ash, Liara, Samarra, Tali, Miranda, Jack. All of them weak, Betty Crocker roles, all of them shrinking violets.

Hell, let's make Garrus into Garrusina and chick HIM up too, and Kaiden? Make him Kathy. Hell, the only dudes in the movie should be Joker and Wrex, and later Grunt. That way, Wrex and Grunt wont really count as dude roles because their Horned Toad aliens and Joker is just comic relief. That way, we can eliminate any hint of testosterone, muscle, physical strength, etc, that a strong male would bring to the whole thing. Who needs dudes when we can have nothing but hot girl-on-girl action from start to finish?

[Dazaster Dellus]

^^ Don't forget how badly AVP was received with a female lead, also Resident Evil movie series(whose stoyline was butchered just to make the director's wife Mila Jovovich seem like this super badass female heroine), Whiteout, Blood Rayne 1 & 2, Silent Hill....I'll stop there.

[Omega-202]

Dazaster Dellus wrote...

^^ Don't forget how badly AVP was received with a female lead, also Resident Evil movie series(whose stoyline was butchered just to make the director's wife Mila Jovovich seem like this super badass female heroine), Whiteout, Blood Rayne 1 & 2, Silent Hill....I'll stop there.

Its not worth harping on the ones that were mediocre -> bad.  I picked 2 of the most successful ones and compared them to others with a similar budget within a similar time frame.  

If we wanted, we could go on for pages with all of the bad ones.  

The sole exception to the rule seems to have been Kill Bill which was a success considering its small budget, but it wasn't a blockbuster.  

That's why I'll go back to my original statement from pages ago:  The movie will be based on a Male Shepard who looks like Mark Vanderloo, who will be mostly "paragon" with a streak of slight snarky "renegade" to him.  Its what will sell best and what most viewers would want to see.  He'll be forceful and heroic, but have a James Bond-like suave romantic side.  

[Ensalari]

Mientras Seth Green haga de "Joker", y Martin Sheen de "Ellusive Man", la cosa será perfecta....

[graavigala85]

just dont make the movie as dark as MassEffect2 is then it will be good

[SalTy1234]

I havent read all of the posts here so forgive me if i repeat things, but I had to put my opinion in.

I agree with the person/s that said a single movie would do this great game serious injustice. The game is a trilogy the movie should at least be a trilogy. I read somewhere that Seth Green should play Joker and I completely agree. I would still see the movie, but it wouldnt be as good. The same goes for Yvonne Strahovski (name maybe spelt wrong). She gave her appearance and voice for Miranda, she should play Miranda.

I think a game like there should be the main trilogy with male paragon Sheppard. Then there can be additional movies like showing the First Contact War, the Quarian-Geth war or the Protheans defeat by the Reapers.

I read somewhere that someone wants the movie to be as realistic as possible. I think that if they keep to the way the game there wont be an issuse. No Citadel ship has massive penetrating lazers, so they shouldnt be in the movie. If this was done right, there could possibly be 4-5 movies made. I personally love the fictional background in these games but thats never shown. That could be a movie.

anyway, sorry to go on and on but these are my thoughts.

p.s, the Krogan rebellions would be a good movie

[Olyvar Targaryen]

graavigala85 wrote...

just dont make the movie as dark as MassEffect2 is then it will be good

What? ME 2 was dark? OK, there were some scenes, but there were a big variety of atmosphere´s in the game and  I really liked that, better then in the first Game.

[Getorex]

SalTy1234 wrote...

I havent read all of the posts here so forgive me if i repeat things, but I had to put my opinion in.

I agree with the person/s that said a single movie would do this great game serious injustice. The game is a trilogy the movie should at least be a trilogy. I read somewhere that Seth Green should play Joker and I completely agree. I would still see the movie, but it wouldnt be as good. The same goes for Yvonne Strahovski (name maybe spelt wrong). She gave her appearance and voice for Miranda, she should play Miranda.

I think a game like there should be the main trilogy with male paragon Sheppard. Then there can be additional movies like showing the First Contact War, the Quarian-Geth war or the Protheans defeat by the Reapers.

I read somewhere that someone wants the movie to be as realistic as possible. I think that if they keep to the way the game there wont be an issuse. No Citadel ship has massive penetrating lazers, so they shouldnt be in the movie. If this was done right, there could possibly be 4-5 movies made. I personally love the fictional background in these games but thats never shown. That could be a movie.

anyway, sorry to go on and on but these are my thoughts.

p.s, the Krogan rebellions would be a good movie

I'm one of those who have expressed a desire that it be "realistic". Sure, it's scifi but realism means having characters (particularly humans since they are what we all know well) that are believable, act believably (no indestructability ala Arnold Schwartzenegger in "Commando" and similar), are not just a slew of hot young actors and actresses (good looking if fine, rugged good looks is better) - NO pack of twentysomethings! A Commander is a LtCol. LtCols do NOT come younger than LATE 30s, early 40s at best.

Realistic in that it respects itself and doesn't fill the game with cutesy one-liners and silly comic relief (beyond that of Joker and any other NATURAL seeming humor). It means humans acting as humans that we all know, not caricatures. No super women who can defeat, single-handedly, a room full of armed men, or toss a man like a rag doll, or effectively headbutt anyone (even guys have trouble pulling off the last one). No super MEN either who can get through fights and battle without anything more than a minor scrape. It means making sure things are consistent and logical.
It was an action movie so of course it was extreme BUT...Bruce Willis in the original "Die Hard" was realistic. He came to the end of that movie shredded and limping and beat to sh*t. Jason Bourne movies are decent in that regard too. The new James Bond is pretty damn good. He gets bloody, he gets hurt, he gets angry and even desperate, and he kicks ass in a fairly realistic manner.

It doesn't need to be so unrelentingly dark (literally - lack of light) as "Alien" but that movie, as well as "Bladerunner" were scifi done realistically. Star Wars, on the other hand, the originals, were good but they were still fairly cartoonish and NOT an example of "realistic scifi". Even "Pitch Black" was done realistically (they went off the rails when they went on to "Chronicles of Riddick").

I strongly agree that the main ME story should be told first and as AT LEAST a trilogy. Only after that does it make sense to start fleshing out things, with related stories and new characters blending with old, from this universe (first contact war, krogan rebellians, though the krogan rebellians would be problematic - it would be peopled almost exclusively by CGI creatures rather than human characters, putting it perilously close to being a computer-animated cartoon).

Modifié par Getorex, 27 octobre 2010 - 12:42 .

[Getorex]

I just pictured how a ME movie with a Fem Shep could go.



Practically nothing but estrogen and ovaries, we could see scenes between missions where all the girls on the crew are in one or the other's room. They are all sitting on couches or chairs wearing their pajamas, each eating icecream out of the containers. They all are dishing on boys, clothes, that chick they saw at the citadel and how she was dressed and thought she was 'all that.' The room's TV would be tuned to the Lifetime network or the Lifetime Movie Channel.



Seriously, this could work. The poor few guys in the movie, Joker, Grunt/Wrex, etc, would all be holed up down in engineering slamming beer and enjoying the break from all the constant nagging and wild mood swings from the OVERWHELMINGLY female crew as they watch an action flick on the TV and slam beer, belch, eat pretzels, and rag on each other, insult each other's mother or describe what they did last night to the other's mother. Man style.

Modifié par Getorex, 27 octobre 2010 - 12:52 .

[BWBamboo]

I know you're a tough soldier and all, but maybe if you got over your issues for a while and started up a FemShep character you would get a different idea of how a female lead could work...