As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Ebert on videogames etc.

ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User regular
edited November 2007 in Games and Technology
Has anyone else been following the whole "videogames will never be art" thing from Roger Ebert? He's just reviewed the Hitman film and it really annoyed me the assumptions he made without a single attempt to fact-check, so I thought I'd share.
The movie, directed by Xavier Gens, was inspired by a best-selling video game and serves as an excellent illustration of my conviction that video games will never become an art form -- never, at least, until they morph into something else or more.

[...]

To the degree the movie explores their [47 and a Russian girl's] relationship, it is absorbing. There is also intrigue at the highest levels of Russian politics, as the moderate Belikoff is apparently targeted for death. All of that is well done. Other scenes, which involve Agent 47 striding down corridors, an automatic weapon in each hand, shooting down opponents who come dressed as Jedi troopers in black. These scenes are no doubt from the video game. The troopers spring into sight, pop up and start shooting, and he has target practice. He also jumps out of windows without knowing where he's going to land, and that feels like he's cashing in a chip he won earlier in the game. If you want to see what Agent 47 might have seemed like without the obligatory video game requirements, I urge you to rent Jean-Pierre Melville's "Le Samourai" (1967), which is about a lone-wolf assassin in Paris (Alain Delon). He too works alone, is a professional, cuts off his emotions, seems lonely and cold. But the movie is about him, not his killing score.

The "obligatory video game requirements" are of course the exact opposite - they're film requirements! You don't run down corridors shooting people in the games, unless you're rubbish at them. And then Ebert goes on to finish with:
The key producer on "Hitman" was Adrian Askarieh, who told Variety he doesn't consult or collaborate with the makers of a video game he has purchased for filming, but focuses on the characters and situation. Wise. To the degree he doesn't try to reproduce the aim-and-shoot material, he has a movie here. To the degree Olyphant and Kurylenko can flesh out their characters, they do.

So if the producer didn't even look at the game much.. how can the film's shortcomings be blamed on the game? Bleh.

pokes: 1505 8032 8399
Æthelred on
«1345

Posts

  • Options
    LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    blah blah blah

    Nothing to see here.

    LewieP on
  • Options
    CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Honestly, Roger Ebert isn't even really a smart man.

    And I decided that well before I heard him say anything about video games, so it's not just me lashing out.

    Cervetus on
  • Options
    durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Ebert is pretty bad really. I mean, Clive Barker won this argument with him. And Clive Barker isn't exactly a legend of cinema or games.

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • Options
    DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    ebert takes the movie to task for being a crappy movie

    it is a movie based on a video game

    most or all of the moview ebert reviews that are video game based are crappy

    ebert concludes that video game movies are bad because they come from video games.


    honestly the only way to change his opinion is for there to be a good video game movie. I dont really blame him. It just never happens.

    Deusfaux on
  • Options
    darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    RARRRRRGH

    Ebert makes me so angry. He's just a troll, except someone pays him for his opinions.

    edit: Deus, agreed it never happens. But I would posit that most of the time, it's either because the wrong game is chosen to be adapted, or because some assclown decided that the story needed to be screwed with to fit Hollywood standards.

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • Options
    LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Deusfaux wrote: »
    ebert takes the movie to task for being a crappy movie

    it is a movie based on a video game

    most or all of the moview ebert reviews that are video game based are crappy

    ebert concludes that video game movies are bad because they come from video games.


    honestly the only way to change his opinion is for there to be a good video game movie. I dont really blame him. It just never happens.

    This is the same as a games reviewer concluding that all films except Goldeneye and Chronicles or Riddick are bad because of bad film license games.

    I do blame him.

    LewieP on
  • Options
    ZackSchillingZackSchilling Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I like Roger Ebert and I generally agree with his opinions on movies. Once he starts talking about games though, I just block it out because he's stubborn and chronically misinformed. He thinks games can't be high art because they allow the player to control the events and break the 4th wall on even the most well-placed game designs. He argues that since games cannot tell a specific, scene-perfect story in-game, they cannot communicate with people on any deeper level than, say a car or a vase.

    I don't think he's as wrong as much as he is missing the point entirely. Games are about crafting your own story. They are the sets, the costumes and the scripts for what can be an excellent work of high performance art. Or they can be shallow technical marvels. Or they can be braindead diversions. Sounds like another medium I know!

    Anyway, he's not going to change, we're not going to change, and the argument has been done to death. Not to try to assassinate this thread, but I don't see any good here, other than maybe discussing the Hitman movie or making fun of Doom.

    Edit: Elaboration and clarity.

    ZackSchilling on
    ghost-robot.jpg
  • Options
    Spacehog85Spacehog85 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Deusfaux wrote: »
    ebert takes the movie to task for being a crappy movie

    it is a movie based on a video game

    most or all of the moview ebert reviews that are video game based are crappy

    ebert concludes that video game movies are bad because they come from video games.


    honestly the only way to change his opinion is for there to be a good video game movie. I dont really blame him. It just never happens.

    excatly. start the petition for the half-life movies! Pronto!

    Spacehog85 on
  • Options
    DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    The equivalent would be a video game reviewer saying that games that are based on movies are generally shitty because they're based on movies, and being made for the wrong reasons and the adaptation of a movie to a game is horrible

    which still isnt necessarily true (goldeneye, riddick), but it sure as hell is true pretty often.




    edit: his reasoning reaches a little far and I don't agree with some of his end conclusions, but I still say the cause of everything are so many fucking poor video game movies.

    I just looked over the list on wiki. None of those are GREAT movies. None, in video games' 20+ year history.

    Whats the highest rated one on rotten tomatoes? I got a 28% so far on Silent Hill... will keep looking. Succeeded by 43% Final Fantasy TSW. Fuck and thats by a wide margin. Everything else is sub 30%. What a bunch of schlock. What a waste of potential

    The best ones are based not on real video games, like eXitenZ, or Avalon.

    Deusfaux on
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So now the public actually give a shit what Ebert thinks again?

    Didnt we stop caring what that man said long time ago, both in relation to games and movies.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    Recoil42Recoil42 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Huh, and it was just the other day that someone in the Mass Effect thread had just mentioned that Roger Ebert should play that game, too.

    Sounds like it's time to get on that, posthaste.

    Recoil42 on
  • Options
    Spacehog85Spacehog85 Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    So now the public actually give a shit what Ebert thinks again?

    Didnt we stop caring what that man said long time ago, both in relation to games and movies.

    I'm pretty sure we stopped caring as soon as siskel went all room temperature.

    Spacehog85 on
  • Options
    LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    making fun of Doom.

    The best thing about the Doom movie is the Soundtrack.

    It's by Clint Mansell, who composed Lux Aeterna which is used on so many trailers, does the OST for all Darren Aronofsky films (Pi, Requiem for a Dream and The Fountain) also Elevenfounteen, and The Hole, and he used to lead singer/guitarist in Pop Will Eat Itself.

    The Doom soundtrack has a remix that Mansell did of "You Know What You Are?" by Nine Inch Nails. Trent Reznor did the music for the first Quake, another one of iD's games.

    Whenever I have trouble sleeping, I stick on "The Fountain OST" and I always fall asleep just aftetr the last track.

    <3

    LewieP on
  • Options
    Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I don't think Ebert actually plays games any more than Jack Thompson does.

    Houk the Namebringer on
  • Options
    DeusfauxDeusfaux Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Trent also did what would become an unused and unreleased soundtrack for... DOOM 3?

    Deusfaux on
  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    edited November 2007
    So Roger Ebert (who is a critic I enjoy) is ignorant of video games. Everyone is ignorant of something. Everyone tries to make him sound like Hitler for saying some ignorant shit about video games. Who cares what he thinks? The man knows film, he doesn't know games. Why listen to him?

    Tube on
  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    edited November 2007
    Having said that, it's amusing that the things he thinks were added to the film to make it more like the game are the antithesis of the game itself.

    Tube on
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So Roger Ebert (who is a critic I enjoy) is ignorant of video games. Everyone is ignorant of something. Everyone tries to make him sound like Hitler for saying some ignorant shit about video games. Who cares what he thinks? The man knows film, he doesn't know games. Why listen to him?

    Exactly.

    Except he doesn't know films either. Well, in a way. His opinions on them have been increasingly dissonant over the past few years so much so that many other mainstream competing critics and publications disregard him as much as we do.

    Even more painful is when he spouts nonsense about games as fact.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    ZackSchillingZackSchilling Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    So Roger Ebert (who is a critic I enjoy) is ignorant of video games. Everyone is ignorant of something. Everyone tries to make him sound like Hitler for saying some ignorant shit about video games. Who cares what he thinks? The man knows film, he doesn't know games. Why listen to him?

    You sir are correct.
    LewieP wrote: »
    making fun of Doom.
    [HTML]
    The best thing about the Doom movie is the Soundtrack.

    This I do not disagree with. The worst thing? Everything else.

    ZackSchilling on
    ghost-robot.jpg
  • Options
    LorkLork Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Ebert is a moron even when it comes to movies. Why would anyone care what he thinks about video games?

    Lork on
    Steam Profile: Lork
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Lork wrote: »
    Ebert is a moron even when it comes to movies. Why would anyone care what he thinks about video games?

    Slow news day?

    We should start a rumour to liven things up a bit around here.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Ebert eats babies, more at 11.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I'm sure if the mainstream face of video games were BioShock, Half-Life 2 or Mass Effect, rather than Halo 3, Ebert might come to realize that some games do in fact have artistic merit. He might be intrigued by the themes and settings of these titles and maybe even bring himself to play them. He might then see the immense amount of creativity and skill that goes into games like these, as well as experience the hugely diverse landscape of game design. But as long as 95% of all video game advertising is devoted to titles with completely vacuous plots, themes and characters, then this is not likely to happen.

    Azio on
  • Options
    NarianNarian Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Azio wrote: »
    I'm sure if the mainstream face of video games were BioShock, Half-Life 2 or Mass Effect, rather than Halo 3, Ebert might come to realize that some games do in fact have artistic merit. He might be intrigued by the themes and settings of these titles and maybe even bring himself to play them. He might then see the immense amount of creativity and skill that goes into games like these, as well as experience the hugely diverse landscape of game design. But as long as 95% of all video game advertising is devoted to titles with completely vacuous plots, themes and characters, then this is not likely to happen.

    But then he'd have to say he was wrong about video games.

    Narian on
    Narian.gif
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Shit, did you play Halo 3? Well, Halo 2 I guess. Yeah it's shallow, but there are some social and political issues that are discussed in the series.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    FreddyDFreddyD Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    What happened to the movie starring the man who does VA for the game? It looked more like Hitman than this picture did.


    And compared to other movies based on licensed products (Bratz comes to mind) video game movies aren't all that bad. I'm more likely to blame the poor quality of VG films on Hollywood's design-by-committee process than the source material.

    FreddyD on
  • Options
    themightypuckthemightypuck MontanaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    To posit any particular media cannot have artistic merit suggests a bizarre understanding of the word "artistic".

    themightypuck on
    “Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
    ― Marcus Aurelius

    Path of Exile: themightypuck
  • Options
    ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    And that's why Ebert is ignorant. The film sucks because it's bad, not because the video game it's based on somehow made it suck.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • Options
    grrarggrrarg Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Recoil42 wrote: »
    Huh, and it was just the other day that someone in the Mass Effect thread had just mentioned that Roger Ebert should play that game, too.
    Hah, when I first saw this thread title, I thought it was going to be about my ME post. I had forgotten about the Hitman movie.

    His argument is pretty retarded. As others have said, most of the scenes he complains about are not from the Hitman games; running and gunning is the exact opposite of those games.

    grrarg on
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    I miss the dead guy.

    He wasn't nearly as big a moron as the tubby guy.

    Incenjucar on
  • Options
    The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Cervetus wrote: »
    Honestly, Roger Ebert isn't even really a smart man.

    And I decided that well before I heard him say anything about video games, so it's not just me lashing out.

    He insisted that the X-Men were ripping off the Justice League.
    Who apparently have the Human torch as a member. (Who Pyro is a ripoff of...and also not even in the same company as the Justice League) and Storm is a rip-off of the Flash.

    Yes, the weather-wielding black woman who is revered as a Goddess is the smart-alecky super-fast red-headed white guy.
    Hmm.

    The Muffin Man on
  • Options
    CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Spacehog85 wrote: »
    Deusfaux wrote: »
    ebert takes the movie to task for being a crappy movie

    it is a movie based on a video game

    most or all of the moview ebert reviews that are video game based are crappy

    ebert concludes that video game movies are bad because they come from video games.


    honestly the only way to change his opinion is for there to be a good video game movie. I dont really blame him. It just never happens.

    excatly. start the petition for the half-life movies! Pronto!

    You know it would involve at least one Gordon-Alyx sex scene.

    ...Actually, I'm cool with that.
    Cervetus wrote: »
    Honestly, Roger Ebert isn't even really a smart man.

    And I decided that well before I heard him say anything about video games, so it's not just me lashing out.

    He insisted that the X-Men were ripping off the Justice League.
    Who apparently have the Human torch as a member. (Who Pyro is a ripoff of...and also not even in the same company as the Justice League) and Storm is a rip-off of the Flash.

    Yes, the weather-wielding black woman who is revered as a Goddess is the smart-alecky super-fast red-headed white guy.
    Hmm.

    My personal example is when he was complaining that the space ships from the remake of War of the Worlds only had three legs, because this is the 21st century and we've moved past that, as if the definition of a plane changed when the ball dropped or something.

    Cervetus on
  • Options
    OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    edited November 2007
    He's right about one thing: I should really rent Le Samourai

    I've heard good things about it

    Olivaw on
    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • Options
    KamiKami Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    When Ebert is right, he's dead on, and I agree with him 100%.

    When he's off, though? He's wayyy off. The 'War of the Worlds' remake review was one of those times.

    He didn't like the remake, because the aliens were tripods, and that's 'not economical'.

    What?! D:

    EDIT: Hahah Cerevetus, we spoke of the same review, but different portions. <3

    Kami on
  • Options
    EchoEcho ski-bap ba-dapModerator mod
    edited November 2007
    Cervetus wrote: »
    My personal example is when he was complaining that the space ships from the remake of War of the Worlds only had three legs, because this is the 21st century and we've moved past that, as if the definition of a plane changed when the ball dropped or something.

    Durrr. There's even a scene where they fiddle with a bike and appear to go "what the hell, wheels?"

    Echo on
  • Options
    AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Shit, did you play Halo 3? Well, Halo 2 I guess. Yeah it's shallow, but there are some social and political issues that are discussed in the series.
    In the paperback novels, maybe. If you're just playing the games and watching the boring, overwrought cutscenes, the story is clumsily presented and largely incomprehensible. I even read this forum post that claims to summarize the Halo universe, but there was pretty much no point in Halo 3 where I knew what my objective was or why. The cutscenes only interrupt the flow of the game and try (poorly) to explain sudden changes in the setting. Whatever social and/or political issues the game was supposed to have are fully drowned out by the action-focused gameplay, the terrible writing and poor voice acting.

    I'm just saying that maybe Roger Ebert and his ilk might give games a chance if intellectually vapid titles like Halo were not considered to be the state of the art.

    Azio on
  • Options
    APZonerunnerAPZonerunner Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    God, every time he opens his mouth about games I just want to punch him in the face. Asshole.

    I am so, so glad that the 'next generation' of movie critics that'll come when he either retires or drops dead will be those brought up on games and so with a bit more respect for them, because right now talk like this is in the way of games being viewed as a more mainstream thing, even if the tides currently are changing.

    APZonerunner on
    APZonerunner | RPG Site | UFFSite | The Gaming Vault
    XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
  • Options
    SaddlerSaddler Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Ebert's assumption that most video games are mindless action with little worthwhile storytelling is basically correct. The best stories I've ever encountered in a video game are at best on par with the writing of a good Stephen King book.

    This is also true of 90% of the movies he reviews.

    Saddler on
  • Options
    FreddyDFreddyD Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Azio wrote: »
    Shit, did you play Halo 3? Well, Halo 2 I guess. Yeah it's shallow, but there are some social and political issues that are discussed in the series.
    In the paperback novels, maybe. If you're just playing the games and watching the boring, overwrought cutscenes, the story is clumsily presented and largely incomprehensible. I even read this forum post that claims to summarize the Halo universe, but there was pretty much no point in Halo 3 where I knew what my objective was or why. The cutscenes only interrupt the flow of the game and try (poorly) to explain sudden changes in the setting. Whatever social and/or political issues the game was supposed to have are fully drowned out by the action-focused gameplay, the terrible writing and poor voice acting.

    I'm just saying that maybe Roger Ebert and his ilk might give games a chance if intellectually vapid titles like Halo were not considered to be the state of the art.
    I think a a game can present a good narrative without a lot of dialogue and cutscenes. Like Bioshock, ICO, or even Half Life. The environments, interactions, and even the gameplay can all tell a story, and those constructs play to the advantages video games have over other types of media.

    So, while I wouldn't compare titles like Halo or Gears of War to Heinlein or Phillip K. Dick, they engage you and make you feel like you are doing something meaningful in a place that could actually exist. Films that can accomplish that have no problem selling tickets.

    FreddyD on
  • Options
    CervetusCervetus Registered User regular
    edited November 2007
    Kami wrote: »
    EDIT: Hahah Cerevetus, we spoke of the same review, but different portions. <3

    Actually, I'm wondering if we're talking about the same thing and I just got it wrong. >.>

    Cervetus on
Sign In or Register to comment.