[Captain Blondebeard]

I can't really find any updates. Does anyone have any insight?

[Tiocfaidh]

Nope, sorry.

Last news I heard are from March 2009.
Back then Charles Cecil confirmed that the movie´s being made.
http://www.adventure-treff.de/artikel/interviews.php?id=60&lang=eng

Since then ...

[Origami]

Better question:

What happened to the rumoured The Last Express movie?

[rayvio]

or, sticking with Revolution, the Beneath A Steel Sky sequel

[Intrepid Homoludens]

For that matter, whatever happened that Myst movie that was being so freaking hyped here?

[Joee]

I didn't even know a Broken Sword movie was being considered! I wonder if they'd tell the story of the first game, or tell a different one altogether?

Despite my love of Broken Sword, somehow this rumour doesn't excite me too much. I'm not entirely sure why, but probably because I have a nagging feeling the movie wouldn't live up to the glory of the game. Video game movies rarely do...

[cbman]

Broken Sword would make a bog-standard film.

The stories in most games really are nothing special. It's the interactivity that makes it interesting. A mystery is more gripping when you solve it yourself. Just watching it play out would be underwhelming.

I think that trying to make an adventure game into a film would be like trying to make breakfast into dinner: it could objectively be a great meal but outside of its intended element it wouldn't be as satisfying.

[MoonBird]

I completely agree with cbman here.

[gray pierce]

Originally Posted by cbman

Broken Sword would make a bog-standard film.

The stories in most games really are nothing special. It's the interactivity that makes it interesting. A mystery is more gripping when you solve it yourself. Just watching it play out would be underwhelming.

I think that trying to make an adventure game into a film would be like trying to make breakfast into dinner: it could objectively be a great meal but outside of its intended element it wouldn't be as satisfying.

What is it with people who belief games are incapable of reaching the same quality in terms of story and characters as movies. I mean, I agree that most games do not have a rock solid story and characters but that doesn't mean that the genre will allway balance on that level. Look at a game as Overclocked, a higly story driven thriller with very well developed characters and plot. I mean if this were a movie I would've raved about it just as much as I do about the game.

And there are more like that, Dreamfall for example or to a certain extend Fahrenheit. There are games out there that show just what the genre can achieve in terms of narative and storytelling. Indeed these games are scarse but they are there and who knows how many more there'll be in ten years? What the quality of the narative in some games will be by then

I rest my case

[DustyShinigami]

Originally Posted by Joee

I didn't even know a Broken Sword movie was being considered! I wonder if they'd tell the story of the first game, or tell a different one altogether?

Despite my love of Broken Sword, somehow this rumour doesn't excite me too much. I'm not entirely sure why, but probably because I have a nagging feeling the movie wouldn't live up to the glory of the game. Video game movies rarely do...

It's supposed to be a movie based on the first game. From what I last read, they're working on a script and Charles Cecil wants to make sure it's 100%. But I agree with you, video game adapations do tend to be very underwhelming. The majority of people - who've never head of the game - will probably look at it as a Da Vinci Code rip-off. As far as I'm concerned though, Broken Sword 1 (and Gabriel Knight 3) is far superior.

If I was going to do a movie based on Broken Sword, I think an animated movie would've been a better choice.

[MoonBird]

Originally Posted by Gazzoid

If I was going to do a movie based on Broken Sword, I think an animated movie would've been a better choice.

That would be gorgeus, yes!

[Origami]

"The majority of people - who've never head of the game - will probably look at it as a Da Vinci Code rip-off. As far as I'm concerned though, Broken Sword 1 (and Gabriel Knight 3) is far superior."

Funny...as how Da Vince Code ripped of its story from other sources.

[cbman]

Originally Posted by gray pierce

What is it with people who belief games are incapable of reaching the same quality in terms of story and characters as movies. I mean, I agree that most games do not have a rock solid story and characters but that doesn't mean that the genre will allway balance on that level. Look at a game as Overclocked, a higly story driven thriller with very well developed characters and plot. I mean if this were a movie I would've raved about it just as much as I do about the game.

I rest my case

I think you should rest your case as it belongs in a different trial. You've totally misunderstood my point.

Games and film are different mediums. Their respective stories are designed to suit and complement that medium. Different mediums have different advantages and disadvantages.

A film (or book) doesn't have the limitation of having to include puzzles and suchlike into the narrative, destroying the pacing. A game doesn't have the limitation of being a passive experience like a book or film does. A book has a greater capacity for conveying narrative information than either films or games but the latter have the advantage of being able to present visual information. A book has the advantage of being paced by the reader, who can consume the information at their own speed. A film does not have this advantage but does, on the other hand, have the benefit of being able to control the consumer's experience much better and more directly push the creator's artistic vision upon them. A game is somewhere in between, with its alternation between sequencies played through and cut scenes / dialogue.

Most crucially, a game is interactive and a film isn't. That gives very different requirements for how a narrative is told. In a sherlock Homes game the character of Sherlock solves mysteries at the player's speed. In a film the viewer solves mysteries at Holmes' speed. You can't just shift a plot from one to the other and expect it to be equally thrilling.

It's not about whether games can come up with stories that are as good as other media; you're totally missing the point. It's about coming up with a good story for the respective medium. If you are serious about the story you're telling then you compose it specifically for the medium you intend to use. Why is there this obsession with turning everything into somethigng else (especially films)? If you like the original then why would you want to see it cannablized (bastardized) in a different form? That is doing the artistry of the original work a supreme disservice.

Equally, i have no interest in a game that wants to be a film, such as Heavy Rain. That is a story being told in the wrong medium because the creator doesn't have the capacity or means to produce it in the correct medium.

Rather than my argument disregarding or disrespecting the artistry and craft put into a game I would argue that the kind of mentality that says 'this would be so cool as a film' is doing that because it is implicitly implying that the story can only achieve its full potential in the film medium. After all, if a story is perfectly conceived then what could be added of worth by transferring it to other media? It's this 'everything of worth must become a film' mentality that degrades other media. Broken Sword is fine as it is - as a game. As a film it wouldn't stand out.The things that make it special would not be replicated in film.

[Origami]

I love your post, especially your opening sentence but I found it hard to agree with this particular paragraph...

"Equally, i have no interest in a game that wants to be a film, such as Heavy Rain. That is a story being told in the wrong medium because the creator doesn't have the capacity or means to produce it in the correct medium. "

Why is told in the wrong medium. You acknowledge a game is interactive and a movie isn't. But that's what the director of Heavy Rain tried to achieve. A cinematic interactive narrative.

[Joee]

I agree largely with everything cbman says. However, I wouldn't say there is necessarily a 'right' or 'wrong' medium for a story to be told in. It's more that there's 'better' or 'worse' mediums. You're right, the story for Broken Sword works fantastically in a game, and I certainly agree that turning that into an equally gripping film would be difficult, but not impossible. If producers want to try, I won't oppose it. Experimentation with tricky concepts is something I have a lot of respect for.

I've not played Heavy Rain, but this comments on it interests me:

"But that's what the director of Heavy Rain tried to achieve. A cinematic interactive narrative."

Regardless of how good or bad this game was, at least the director made an attempt to combine cinematic and interactive narritives. Maybe it's difficult to achieve, but if directors keep on trying, maybe one day we'll get something good and the formula for doing so will become clearer.

The Metal Gear Solid series is another good example of a combination of cinematic and interactive narratives. These games I have played, and I would say the director did a good job with the narratives. One might object that many cutscenes were way too long, but I don't believe that was due to trying to turn games into movies. That was just down to too much backstory and unnecessary dialogue which could have been cut without disrupting the main story arcs, which were very compelling.

[rayvio]

some games could work as movies, and some movies can work as games. but in 99% of cases, a lot of changes are necessary and you have to ask just how much of the original is left at the end and if it was worth it

off the top of my head I can think of two games based on movies that are good, coincidentally or not, both are adventure games
Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade while not as good as Fate of Atlantis was a fun game which stayed very true to the movie yet still managed to provide some challenging puzzles to players even if they'd seen the movie
Blade Runner took a different approach and told a different story to the movie which took place at the same time. it worked very well, although the game would probably have been just as good if it had nothing to do with the movie and would have needed only minor tweaking to achieve that
also there's The Dig, which was apparently originally planned as a movie but instead became a classic adventure game

then there's the other side of the coin, movies based on games. I'm sure we could all pull a dozen or so bad game-movies out our heads very quickly but I can think of only two that are even remotely close to being any good
Mortal Kombat managed to achieve the status of "watchable" in my opinion, which compared to other attempts makes it a masterpiece. it achieved this however by drastically changing half the plot from the games (for example Raiden went from being an insane and destructive god in the games to a benevolent protector of humanity), even more confusingly the later games chose to consider the movie as cannon instead of the previous games
the recent Prince of Persia movie is by no means a classic, however it too achieves "watchable" as it ranges from "not too bad" to "so bad it's funny". likely not what they were aiming for with the movie but still better than most other attemts. I can't say how true it is to the games though as the only Prince of Persia games I've played are the 2D Amiga ones that most fans of the 3D games probably don't even know existed

what does amaze me though is that nobody, (except for some independent attempts) to my knowledge has ever made a movie based on an adventure game, not even in the genres heyday. somebody somewhere actually thought that the plot of Doom ("wait, Doom had a plot?") would make a good movie but nobody thought the same of Monkey Island or Gabriel Knight?

[gray pierce]

Originally Posted by cbman

I think you should rest your case as it belongs in a different trial. You've totally misunderstood my point.

Games and film are different mediums. Their respective stories are designed to suit and complement that medium. Different mediums have different advantages and disadvantages.

I think it is the same point you're just categorizing it differently. Sure each medium has it's own advantages and disadvantages but does that mean we should just leave it at that. I honestly belief we should explore those disadvantages and improve the medium.

A film (or book) doesn't have the limitation of having to include puzzles and suchlike into the narrative, destroying the pacing.

In my opinion when a puzzle destroys the pacing you'd better leave it out no matter how ingenious it is. I think just how many puzzles you put in a game depends on what kind of story it is you want to tell. If you're making an Indiana Jones type of AG you get lots of puzzles because that belongs in this type of story. In adventurenovels and movies the main characters are often solving puzzles such as deciphering somethinghundred year old clues left by a forgotten civilization or famous person, or dodging traps in dark and ancient tombs. So you'll have lots of that in a game as well. However when you're making a taunt thriller the last thing you should do is break the pacing. You could integrate a small break from the action in wich the main character is focussing on a completely other activity rather than the main storyline. This is often a common element in novels and films as well. An example of that would be the cookie puzzle in Still life wich in essence was completely redundant but I think the developersput in to give the player something else to focus on rather than the main storyline.

Most crucially, a game is interactive and a film isn't. That gives very different requirements for how a narrative is told. In a sherlock Homes game the character of Sherlock solves mysteries at the player's speed. In a film the viewer solves mysteries at Holmes' speed. You can't just shift a plot from one to the other and expect it to be equally thrilling.

This is indeed a very good point you're making however it's not an absolute rule. What if the character has prior information the player doesn't have. That means that you're actions set in motion a whole stream of thoughts yet ungraspabble to the player.

Why is there this obsession with turning everything into somethigng else (especially films)? If you like the original then why would you want to see it cannablized (bastardized) in a different form? That is doing the artistry of the original work a supreme disservice.

There are many good bookadaptations. Pick any Dennis Lehane novel and you'll see I'm right. An adaptation doesn't have to cannabalized. It's just more limited than the novel or game. Smpily because a film is generally much shorter than a novel or a game. Also films tend to spur new interest in the source material. So honestly if they release a horrible BS adaptation but spurns a lot of interest in the game series and possibly in AGs, how can that be a bad thing?

Equally, i have no interest in a game that wants to be a film, such as Heavy Rain. That is a story being told in the wrong medium because the creator doesn't have the capacity or means to produce it in the correct medium.

I have not played Heavy Rain so I can't specifically comment on that but from what I've read it's just a game that pays a lot of attention to the (changeble)narative structure and the psychology of the main characters. How can that be "wanting to be a film"? Games should have a strong story and characters. The fact that most of them don't really doen't mean it's a charactaristic of the madium.

Rather than my argument disregarding or disrespecting the artistry and craft put into a game I would argue that the kind of mentality that says 'this would be so cool as a film' is doing that because it is implicitly implying that the story can only achieve its full potential in the film medium. After all, if a story is perfectly conceived then what could be added of worth by transferring it to other media? It's this 'everything of worth must become a film' mentality that degrades other media. Broken Sword is fine as it is - as a game. As a film it wouldn't stand out.The things that make it special would not be replicated in film.

You have a point there. I indeed do not believe a story can only achieve it's full potential is a film. However I do belief Broken Sword would make a good adventuremovie. Indeed perhaps not the best but there are so many movies that aren't considered a masterpiece but are however highly enjoyable so what's worng with that?

[Bruno_Malta]

If and a big IF this movie came out, it would be a major flop. I can´t tell you any game based movie who was good. All of the sucked. Broken Sword would be compared to Da Vinci code and all those kind of movies.

[Martin Gantefoehr]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

For that matter, whatever happened that Myst movie that was being so freaking hyped here?

<OT>
Excellent question. To my surprise, http://mystmovie.com/ has a production journal that is still being regularly updated (even though the information provided there is, let's say, rather cloudy).
</OT>

[Bruno_Malta]

Originally Posted by Martin Gantefoehr

<OT>
Excellent question. To my surprise, http://mystmovie.com/ has a production journal that is still being regularly updated (even though the information provided there is, let's say, rather cloudy).
</OT>

Or better.....rather Misty LOL