Just when you thought the landscape was littered with enough videogame-inspired movies as it were, along comes news that Universal Studios is conspiring with 2K Games to produce yet another one -- BioShock. At the helm is director Gore Verbinski, who has asked playwright John Logan to join in on the fun. Of course, the triad wouldn't be complete without the inclusion of BioShock's creative director, Ken Levine, who has been serving as Verbinski's consultant for the upcoming movie. So why does Gore feel the need to fill Hollywood's Rapture void?
"I think the whole Utopia-gone-wrong story that's cleverly unveiled to players is just brimming with cinematic potential. Of all the games I've played, this is one that I felt has a really strong narrative."
We couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Verbinski. If ever there was a reason to own an Xbox 360, BioShock would be it. Oh wait a minute... you're talking about turning it into a movie? It still sounds like another potential hit in the making, but one has to wonder how they plan on getting around those interesting plot twists that most people attending the movie are likely to already know about. I guess we can bury any hopes of BioShock being the next Empire Strikes Back, but there's still a ton of potential here. Think it will work?
[Via Eurogamer -- Thanks, Adam!]
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
59 comments | showing # 1 to 50
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
9:11 AM on 05.09.2008
| 
Quotes like that basically mean "videogames aren't potent enough of an art form to do the exposition justice." I fucking hate the idea that if game has good narrative, it must become a movie. That's a disservice to videogames like BioShock.
Shockingly poor.
Now, a David Lynch version would be a perfect addition to the game. Can you imagine Lynchean little sisters? Can you?!
Agreed, but hey, if we can get more of Rapture, I'm not complaining.
The narrative of the game could be cut and pasted and be a really good movie, but I think, due to the obvious problem that almost everyone going to see it would know the plot twists, they would have to make it on the fall of Rapture, or get a new character in Rapture who's still sane.
What the fuck. Seriously, I'm surprised we don't have BioShock fucking condoms on the market yet.
Leave this beautiful game experience the FUCK ALONE.
But for fucks sake, not Gore Verbinski.
1. No supporting characters that interact with the player directly means they're going to be something more contrived for the movie. Movies "need"* a larger cast of people around the main character than a VG typically.
*There are plenty of good movies that go against this but they tend to be more of 'gamble' movies that need someone big backing them to make it out the door.
SPOILER alert (go play the game already ffs).
2. The whole impact of the realization that you aren't in control of your actions loses its impact when you aren't in control of the main character's actions to begin with.
3. They have to invent a decent ending and a more compelling early/middle. Bioshock's story was told through setting and I don't think that will work as well in a movie when you condense the whole thing down to 1 to 3 hours.
1. No supporting characters that interact with the player directly means they're going to be something more contrived for the movie. Movies "need"* a larger cast of people around the main character than a VG typically.
*There are plenty of good movies that go against this but they tend to be more of 'gamble' movies that need someone big backing them to make it out the door.
SPOILER alert (go play the game already ffs).
2. The whole impact of the realization that you aren't in control of your actions loses its impact when you aren't in control of the main character's actions to begin with.
3. They have to invent a decent ending and a more compelling early/middle. Bioshock's story was told through setting and I don't think that will work as well in a movie when you condense the whole thing down to 1 to 3 hours.
Come on baby, don't fear the Big Daddy!
/end sarcasm
@Logo & Others.
Has anyone considered that the a movie may be based on more then just the first game? We know that bioshock 2 is in the works and who knows where they will be going with that. It is also possible that the movie would only be based on the world of bioshock and could add to the space not by recounting the original gaming experience of bioshock but by adding/explaning background stories. Equally interesting would be if the movie built up the background story for the second game..... now that would be synergy.
That being said the idea of a Bioshock movie does leave me a bit conflicted. The actual story of the game, I think, should remain a game. That is, "guy goes down rabbit hole, finds out he is part of rabbit hole, guy climbs out of rabbit hole" should not be tampered with in a movie setting. And while the idea of a Bioshock prequel, as a game, doesn't fill me with much hope. I think THAT story is the one that could be done competently in a film.
I also think with the kind of talent pushing this movie, namely: Gore Verbinski. There might be some hope. But at the same time we all remember Pirates 3
But that's just this man's opinion.
It's like we share the same mind or something.
Quotes like that basically mean "videogames aren't potent enough of an art form to do the exposition justice." I fucking hate the idea that if game has good narrative, it must become a movie. That's a disservice to videogames like BioShock.
Shockingly poor.[/i]
Truth.
Almost.
I would consider a more appropriate metaphor being a "book based on a movie" rather than a movie based on a book. As such, I consider videogame movies generally pointless.
Exactly. Like what I mentioned yesterday somewhere - I actually owned a paperback copy of Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey. Pretty much just the script written out in a more readable form, with creative liberties taken by the poor soul hired to "write" it.
I tend to actually agree the thought crossed my mind that there are some redeeming movie qualities to Bioshock. I honestly (as much as I hate to say it) think that Bioshock the movie should go against the game in many respects as the concepts that would give the movie redeeming qualities come from different time periods in the Bioshock game.
The things that i think would make it well as part of a movie are...
-Andrew Ryan as seen in the game, only after his power has been broken down somewhat is he really an interesting character. If he is the unchallenged ruler of rapture he's not nearly as interesting as when he's desperately trying to hold on to his remaining power.
-The drug-addict like decent from normal human to plasmid monstrosity and eventually even the big Daddy like there was in the game. One of the parts that really spoke to me about this in the game was how it was all fueled by necessity. Something about the way the player resigns to corrupting themselves to survive stood out to me.
-The little sister choice could still work out in the movie but I feel like it might come off as a little more cliched. Still there's room for this to play out alright.
-Rapture's Civil War and some of the build up to it. This is something that's going to have to be in the movie as it will provide action on the appropriate scale for a movie and plenty of characters for the 'player' to be associated with. Also it provides more environment and setting for the story as rather than have the diaries talking about people being rounded up and stuff you could actually show it.
So overall I think the way the movie is going to have to be done is to set it such that the player enters rapture DURING the height of the civil war between Fontaine and Ryan rather than in the aftermath.
The main point is that game settings have enough depth that it is possible for movies to be placed within it. I thinks it is pretty clear that a movies who try to retell your gaming experience will fail.
Here is food for thought.Historically in terms depth of character/setting.
books > movies > games.
but I would say that some games are now on equal footing with movies. And so, I think the time is ripe for a good movie set to be set in a game world.
books > movies >= games
As for Bioshock being turned into a movie, I guess it all depends on how well written the script is. The current track record for good adaptations is pretty slim though. Another problem is the silent protagonist (the player) is going to have become a spoken character on the big screen, negating the option of choice which is defines a part of Bioshock. I guess time will tell with this one. I'd hire the writers for Bioshock to pen this script and/or as consultants. Otherwise, I doubt anyone else could do it the justice it deserves.
"As such, I consider videogame movies generally pointless."
Well, yeah, but as of today the only videogame movies we've gotten range from such gems as the Mario Bros movie to Resident Evil and I would agree that so far... pretty pointless.
But that doesn't mean that somewhere down the line we won't see a movie based on a video game that actually does the source material justice.
Look at it this way. How long did it take for the movie studios to actually produce a decent super hero movie. I would argue at least 20 years, probably more. So don't you think that back in the early days of Comic Book movie adaptations the fans of Superman, Batman, and Spiderman thought to themselves: "Comic Book movies will never work, and damn them for trying."
But here we are in 2008 and living through a glut of really great comic book movies. Sure there are some stinkers out there but over all the genre is doing quite respectably.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm going to be the first one to cry foul if they do yet another shotty movie adaptation of a game. As of yet I haven't seen one that isn't complete shit (yes, the Silent Hill movie is COMPLETE shit).
But I will try to stay optimistic about a Bioshock movie as long as they give me reason to.
That is to say, while having a fantastic storyline, Bioshock is going to translate into a poor movie. Especially when Rapture gets turned into some research facility on a far-away Atlantean planet and the Big Daddies are dolphin-man crossbreeds.
No... please no... Gore just finished doing Disney movies.... please no?
Is not the idea of a bioshock movie that i dislike, is the idea that it will be cheesy.
Sure there are plenty of stinkers, but so long as there are solid directors like Christophe Ganns, Gore Verbinski, and Andrew Lau( Double Dragon!!!) that want a shot at making a tribute to something they love... go for it.
Tim Curry as Sander Cohen has potential to be awesome though.