Director predicts Warcraft film will break video game movie trend
by Dawn Moore 
Jan 2nd 2011 at 4:00PM
In the article, Jones says he believes it's possible to make a good adaptation -- it just has to be approached properly. "A good game adaptation is where you find the story or the emotional aspect that's at the heart of a computer game and you replicate that on film. It doesn't mean you need to have first person perspective or try and capture the mechanics of a game," he says.
Jones thinks the Warcraft film will be the film to break the mold because director Sam Raimi seems to be approaching the film correctly. "From the little I've read of interviews with him, the way he's approaching it makes so much sense. It's what I was talking about – it's not worrying about how the game plays, it's about creating the world of the game and investing the audience in that world."
Jones explains that he's a serious gamer himself and is skeptical about other directors who claim the same. He doesn't think most directors have the time to be both hardcore gamers and filmmakers. Jones, on the other hand, says he stays up all night to accommodate his gaming habit and cites titles like Starcraft 2 and Call of Duty: Black Ops. He also says he's looking forward to Diablo 3.
Jones admits that he's "hugely jealous" of Raimi's getting the chance to direct the Warcraft film; the writer of the article goes so far as to suggest that Jones have a chance at directing it, since Raimi set it aside to work on The Great and Mighty Oz. That's not really quite how Hollywood works, though, so unless Raimi steps down from the project himself, I wouldn't count on his losing the project just yet.
Filed under: Warcraft Movie
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Razorlution Jan 2nd 2011 4:07PM
The movie will most likely be like the L
Razorlution Jan 2nd 2011 4:09PM
Bah..Lord Of the Rings which would be fine by most I assume
xaospro Jan 2nd 2011 4:50PM
If they want to be smart and not ruin a chance at a box office feature film, they need to stop what they are doing.
They need to create a 90+minute movie, using 3D modeling and effects, like you see in the xpac cinematics and the cut scene cinematics in the wc2 and wc3 games.
This is the ONLY way they can have the world look as perfect as it should. Actors and actresses WILL RUIN the movie, and by having a 3d movie( like the new warhammer 40k one - expect bigger) they can concentrate on making the world seem as alive as they do in the current cinematics.
Blue studios is an amazing company tthat could pull this off. but it takes time. Oh well
Talutha Jan 2nd 2011 5:36PM
I would love it if they did this! But there are a few problems that prevent them from doing so.
I can't find out where I read this to cite it so it could be something I magically made up one day but from what I remember it took the animation team at Blizzard an upwards of a year to create the short cinematic that is the intro to Cata. And that is without a story line or any type of real lip syncing with a large cast of voice actors.
If you remember, this was one of the requests fans of Square made regarding the Final Fantasy series which was hugely popular at the time. Square actually did take the plunge with Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within in 2001 and even though the brand was popular, the movie bombed at the box office(which wasn't even that bad of a movie IMO).
Not only that but the resources needed to pull the movie off were astronomical. It took over four years of development time and nearly 1,000 computers to render the entire movie. Now I know that processing power has increased exponentially since then but so has the level of detail we would come to expect from a Blizzard cinematic.
Now lets look at a company like Pixar who's movies, while extremely impressive, do not have the amount of detail we would expect from Blizzard. The movie Up took five years to create from writing to release. This is also taking into account the fact that Pixar already has the resources in place to start an animated movie like this. Blizzard would be starting from complete scratch to create an animated movie for Warcraft.
So we are looking at a six year turnaround time with Blizzard having to create an entirely new movie studio that would go to waste if the movie is not a commercial success. A filmed movie from writing to theatrical release takes on average 18 months.
So while I, and many others I am sure, would absolutely LOVE to see this done, I don't think it is in Blizzard's interest to devote so many resources to a project that may or may not be a success.
ersatzplanet Jan 2nd 2011 5:50PM
All I have to say is after the success of Avatar it should be much easier to promote a CGI movie than ever before. The only way in my opinion to make this film work is via CGI. The tools are there, the render farms are there, and the talent is there.
carebear Jan 2nd 2011 7:20PM
they need to make the characters and story be the main feature not special effects. what did special effects do for the star wars prequels?
carebear Jan 2nd 2011 7:31PM
@ersatzplanet
avatar doesnt have legs to stand on just from the special effects. it used a tried and tested plot. Pocahontas? people will go see a movie for badass state of the art special effects but they wont sit through it a second time if the story sucks.
uncaringbear Jan 2nd 2011 7:37PM
@Talutha
It's not really accurate to compare the production times for a movie like FF:Spirits WIthin, which was made with significantly older technology than the CG movies today.
I'm not sold on the idea of making a WoW CG movie in the flavour of the game trailers. I have yet to see a movie that followed this trail and not avoid the uncanny valley problems. Films like FF and Beowulf really drive this point home for me. CG movies succeed when they don't try to recreate the living actor experience, and instead focus on using the abilities of CG to give memorable characters more depth. This is why the Pixar movies succeed, although I don't see the Pixar formula fitting in with something like WoW.
As one of the other commenters suggested, going the LoTR route is probably the best strategy, if executed well.
Elmouth Jan 2nd 2011 8:33PM
CGI can be awesome, Avatar and Advent Children are proof of that.
Right now, the wow movie looks like its gonna fail just like the last airbender failed.
Drakkenfyre Jan 2nd 2011 9:41PM
Spirits Within was technically a marvel. It's storyline sucked.
It's plot was designed for Japanese audiences only, and it limited it's widespread appeal. As someone who is interested in Japanese culture, I sat there thru parts of it going "Huh?". It's story made very little sense unless you were very familiar with the theme behind it.
It's like a Japanese RPG. It may have one hell of a quirky storyline, have fans, and be a niche title, and that's great for a video game. A movie costing over $200 million, and distributing thru the world, not so much. It failed terribly at the box office.
The average movie goer, who might have gone simply because of the hype surrounding it, and the fact that it was the first photorealistic full CGI movie, would have come out thinking "What the hell was that?". It starts off like you have missed a movie before it. You feel lost in the beginning, and it doesn't do anything else to help that later on. So, movie failure was inevitable.
It also bankrupt Square. If it weren't for Sony coming in and saving them, Square would have closed up. They spent tons on it, and the return wasn't even half, or hell even a third, I think.
Joakim Jan 3rd 2011 11:35AM
@Xaospro
I think you're wrong.
Why was LotR such a massive hit (it was, just look at the revenue) and why will a WoW movie suceed??
* It was built on a "geek fandom"; Tolkien (God rest him) is almost equal to World of Warcraft. Everyone has heard of WoW, if not played it. Almost everyone know some scrap of lore - or "game mechanic". WoW is, in fact, the MMO-age equivalent of Lord of the Rings. Even my parents have heard about WoW (before I told them).
Peter Jackson made a right decision in going a completely novel way than Ralph Baksi had done. Baksi made a cartoon movie, it's great if you're stoned or drunk or don't have anything else to visualise your own image of Middle Earth with, but ... it's a crap movie. You're not supposed to Lol at Epic Movies (unless they're Evil Dead).
I even have high hopes for "the Hobbit". :)
* CGI is awesome, but only in its own context; in a game CGI is appropriate, main characters, environment, NPC's, comic sidekicks, extras - all that. In a movie, CGI is a helpful tool for both story and actors - but mostly story. It is a minority of the audience who relish the idea of a 120+ minutes of computerized emotions. You have to take in to accountall those who don't play WoW, who don't play computer - or consol games, who maybe even don't own a computer (but own a DVD player and will get sucked in by the promotion). Simply put: You can't make a Major Motion Picture for a small number of gamers; Uwe Boll, man ... Uwe Boll. He's tried it once, twice, over and over again.
It's the human emotion on the silver screen that makes a motion picture worthwhile. The pores, the tears, the facial ticks - all th stuff we as humans do naturally without thinking, but tkaes hurs and hours of work for a CGI "actor". Check out Heavy Rain, for instance; very human yes, but they move as robots.
Combine CGI with trained proffesional human actors and - well, Win. Not wipe. Skip the humanity and you Will Wipe.
Actually, that last one should be a golden rule for both PuGs and raids ;)
Bynde Jan 3rd 2011 3:56PM
If you write a good story, and have good actors , it will be good. See 'The Road' for a good example of that. You can cram as much CGI in as you wish but that won't make the movie any good. See any Transformer movies for evidence of that.
If Blizzard sticks the the age-old truth...write a story with heart and plot...then they can't go wrong. The tropuble is, with this movie more than others, they will play to a certain age group of males who want titties and explosions, with the occassional fart joke. If they cater to THAT group, then forget it.It'll be as bad and predictable as Avatar was.
Better news is that the The Hobbit is being filmed in NZ and is being directed by Peter Jackson. That's the one film that'll rule them all, I hope.
THAT'S A LOW PRICE Jan 2nd 2011 4:19PM
Jones said he was pumped for Diablo III, which begs me to ask.. Are we going to see a release date or WHAT?
BigBadGooz Jan 2nd 2011 4:28PM
Like christmass
Drob10 Jan 2nd 2011 4:30PM
After seeing what Jones did with Moon, I'd like to see what he would do with a WoW movie. Don't see that happening with as short of a resume he has though.
Riley Jan 2nd 2011 4:51PM
Well, Peter Jackson had a pretty short one too before he made LotR, and most of the movies he had made were pretty bad to boot
unexpectedeof Jan 2nd 2011 5:11PM
@Riley: Um, what? With the exception of Meet the Feebles and Bad Taste, all of his movies had been critically well received but generally overlooked due to their low budgets and limited releases. All of his movies showed his chops as a director, ability to work within a budget, and storytelling abilities on screen. Hell, he shot the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy for just a bit more than most Hollywood Blockbusters are made for these days.
No other director could have possibly made Lord of the Rings successful.
jam Jan 2nd 2011 6:20PM
Peter Jackson's movies poor? Maybe 'Bad Taste' etc just weren't suited for your tastes, they were far from poor.
ozreece77 Jan 2nd 2011 10:36PM
Jackson also has Weta Studios (backbone of Avatar CG) and a close relationship with Richard Taylor who is a genius (worked on LOTR trilogy and Avatar)
If Raimi bailed, I would offer the job to Jackson if he was at all interested, though at the moment he has his handsful with getting The Hobbit movies off the ground, so would be a few years down the track at least.
Eddy Jan 3rd 2011 2:25PM
Seriously. I don't know if he'd work as well with the sort of incredibly packed, detailed warcraft setting as the simplicity and bare-bones of what he constructed for Moon, but I would love to see what he'd do with it.
Also, on an unrelated note, I got to interview him at a film festival where Moon was showing, and he was totally incredible to talk to. I was nervous (because, um, he's gorgeous and of course he is, he's Bowie's kid, and also a totally amazing director, and it was my first interview with that particular gig) and he did a lot to put me at ease, and then I was really comfortable talking to him. The video seems to be down, now, but he was so eloquent about his own work and passion for science fiction and gaming. It certainly secured my attention on his work for life.