I'll base my argument on three films. Assassin's Creed, Hitman, and *Tomb Raider.
Assassin's Creed is a historical revisionist fiction game, using real events to tell a fictional story. Most of it takes place in the past with bits in the present. However, the film for some reason reversed this. The historical parts where Fassbender is hooked to the animus are thrilling, but they're too far and few between. That's not Assassin's Creed and I'm not sure why they went that direction.
Hitman was a great game because you could play it just about however you want. You can run and gun, or you could disguise yourself and do the whole game without really killing anyone besides the targets. IMO that's the most fun way to play, because it becomes like a sort of puzzle. However, the film turned it into a generic action slop, much like you used to be able to find at the bottom of the bargain bin at Walmart.
Tomb Raider is probably the strongest of the three and actually pretty solid at parts. However, the end was infuriating. Part of the lore of the current Tomb Raider series is the presense of supernatural forces. They can't be explained, so the games don't really try. And that's what made them fun and imaginative. The film however, takes this element and again reverses it at the end of the film to provide a perfectly logical explanation to the "supernatural forces" that aren't really supernatural after all.
If you're going to make a video game film, then you need to be faithful to the spirit of the game. Quit changing stuff around and make an actual video game film.
Submitted November 23, 2019 at 04:43AM by CrashRiot https://ift.tt/34dltLJ
