Universal Studios has announced plans to bring hit Xbox 360 shooter BioShock to the big screen.
The film will be directed by Gore Verbinski, whose previous credits include the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy and The Ring. John Logan, who wrote Gladiator, The Aviator and Sweeney Todd, is in talks to produce the screenplay.
As reported by Variety, Verbinski is jolly excited about BioShock's unique setting and storyline. Apparently he's particularly inspired by the Big Daddies and the Little Sisters, plus the art deco stylings of Rapture.
"I think the whole utopia-gone-wrong story that's cleverly unveiled to players is just brimming with cinematic potential," he stated. "Of all the games I've played, this is one that I felt has a really strong narrative."
Verbinski has already been consulting with Ken Levine, the game's creative director, but it's not clear if he'll have an official role in the film's production.
Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick was responsible for negotiating the deal with Universal. "One of the things we decided early on is that we didn't want to go through a producer. It's terribly important to us to have a meaningful influence on how this project is produced. We didn't want any insulation between us," he commented.
According to Variety this is the biggest videogame-movie deal since 2005, when Universal and Fox signed up to produce a Halo movie. That project has since fallen in the toilet, but Zelnick is promising that won't happen with BioShock.
"The reason I structured it the way I did is to make sure it gets made," he said.
A release date for the film has yet to be set, but Verbinski said he wants to begin pre-production as soon as the script is ready. Meanwhile a sequel to the original videogame is also in development, and due to arrive late next year.
On one side "booo, no game will ever be made into a good film because it hasn't happened yet"
On the other side "SWEET!"
For what it's worth, they could have a far worse director signed up, and Logan looks to have written some good stuff. That gives me a lot of confidence.
It could work if they don't try to copy the game's story, but instead try to show the fall of Rapture. Show it when it was all happy and intact then show it slowly going to shit.
So considering other video-game to movie translations this should be about "Big daddy" a cyborg cop in the year 2020, who fights crime with "Little sister" the AI that lives inside his hover ferrari?
So, any takes on how badly this will be magled in the transition from game to movie?
It could be an awesome film, and people would still find something to piss and moan about. It's got a good writer and director, and a big studio behind it (so I'll guess they won't just be spending a pittance). That's as good a start as any.
On the other hand, if they can get a half-decent actor to play Fontaine this time, it may yet have a chance of not sucking. Everything he said in the game made me cringe, and not for the reasons it was supposed to.
Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick was responsible for negotiating the deal with Universal. "One of the things we decided early on is that we didn't want to go through a producer. It's terribly important to us to have a meaningful influence on how this project is produced. We didn't want any insulation between us," he commented.
That alone gives me a little hope.
But for all those "but it won't be like the game!"
Well, no shit. First of all, it's an entirely different medium. Second of all, how many people bought Bioshock? Assuming that they made the game for the fans only, they'd barely sell more tickets than game copies. If they're interested in making money at all, it will be geared toward a more general audience. I don't imagine snobbish gaming elitism has a huge role in movie production.
Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick was responsible for negotiating the deal with Universal. "One of the things we decided early on is that we didn't want to go through a producer. It's terribly important to us to have a meaningful influence on how this project is produced. We didn't want any insulation between us," he commented.
That alone gives me a little hope.
But for all those "but it won't be like the game!"
Well, no shit. First of all, it's an entirely different medium. Second of all, how many people bought Bioshock? Assuming that they made the game for the fans only, they'd barely sell more tickets than game copies. If they're interested in making money at all, it will be geared toward a more general audience. I don't imagine snobbish gaming elitism has a huge role in movie production.
I don't think anyone is arguing against that point. We are merely stating that its not going to be a good movie.
@vgreminders - Don't miss out on timed events in gaming! @gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
0
Options
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
edited May 2008
For all the problems BioShock might have, "bad setting" is not one of them. With the writer and director they've chosen, I think this one has potential.
It will be nothing like the game, of course, but that's hardly a bad thing.
"It belongs to the game designers!" Says Ken Levine
"NO!" says the writers, "It belongs to the writers!"
"NO!" says the studio, "It belongs to the Producers of the movies!"
Of course it'll be different - why would they rehash the same plot? Everyone and their dog already knows the big twist.
Call me naive, but I see some potential here.
Darius Black on
Quick, quiet, confident
Comfortable, permanent
Undisputed, every tense
Not a trace of what went left
More equal than the best
Unparalleled success
Everybody, V-impressed
On one side "booo, no game will ever be made into a good film because it hasn't happened yet"
I wasn't actually expressing my own personal opinions. There've been some abominations that should never have been attmepted, but I'm not writing everything off myself, nor will I predict "it'll suck because it's a game being made into a film" as some people seem set on doing.
Because they lack imagination.
I'm the type that NEVER beats games, but I just got a 360 last month and played through Bioshock in about a week. I'm sure I'm not telling anyone here anything new, but man, that game is AMAZING. I couldn't put it down.
As long as the movie takes place in Rapture, I'll be pretty happy. I think the kickass setting was the main reason I got so hooked.
"The film industry" is quite a broad statement.
A new Batman film? But the last ones sucked! That'll never work.
Basically, people write it off on principle, because it's a game being converted into a film. That's completely ignoring the fact that you have a big studio putting a good director and writer onto it. That shows they're supporting it, not just chucking a few dollars and hoping to cash in from the fans. That's a much better start than most get.
Calling Mortal Kombat a "good" film is kind of stretching it.
As someone graduating with his BS in film, I feel that Mortal Kombat is a good film and I can provide detailed analysis on a shot by shot basis as to why.
This is one setting that could be so awesome if done right - I just have a feeling it won't.
More than likely it will end up with the little sister being the rapping granny, and the big daddy will be played by Chris Tucker. Half of the movie will involve hilarious scenes were they can't understand what each other is saying.
If they can get the atmosphere right for this movie I'll be all over it. Something that I loved about Bioshock is that I actually FELT like I was trapped underwater in this seemingly hopeless situation.
Look, people didn't like Silent Hill because they cocked up some of the delivery and messed around with the story. Personally, I can see that, but I loved how they completely nailed the atmosphere. What I see here is far more confidence from the studio, and I'm really tired of the "lol little sisters will be 20ft cyborgs and Ryan will be a castle made of jelly!!!" predictions.
I'll always point to Silent Hill as an example of a game "done right" as a film. Sure, the ending was a little "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot," but overall that was good stuff.
A GIRL HAS HER SKIN RIPPED OFF AND FLUNG AT THE PROTAGONIST! That was BAD. ASS.
And as good a director as Christophe Gans is, I feel that Gore is better.
Fawst on
0
Options
Triple BBastard of the NorthMARegistered Userregular
edited May 2008
Man...I can't help but get giddy over this. Bioshock was born to be a movie. The fact that Take-Two isn't going through a middle-man producer is keeping my hope afloat.
Posts
But, you know. It's going to be difficult to film. They're going to have their work cut out for them.
Sometimes I Stream Games: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/italax-plays-video-games
Video game movie, enough said. Plus, movies in general are horrible these days, so thats two strikes off the bat. I'm not gong to bet against you. :P
Big Daddies gone wild.
Do you even have to ask?
Only Man.
It could be an awesome film, and people would still find something to piss and moan about. It's got a good writer and director, and a big studio behind it (so I'll guess they won't just be spending a pittance). That's as good a start as any.
I really, really want to believe.
On the other hand, if they can get a half-decent actor to play Fontaine this time, it may yet have a chance of not sucking. Everything he said in the game made me cringe, and not for the reasons it was supposed to.
Now playing: Teardown and Baldur's Gate 3 (co-op)
Sunday Spotlight: Horror Tales: The Wine
That alone gives me a little hope.
But for all those "but it won't be like the game!"
Well, no shit. First of all, it's an entirely different medium. Second of all, how many people bought Bioshock? Assuming that they made the game for the fans only, they'd barely sell more tickets than game copies. If they're interested in making money at all, it will be geared toward a more general audience. I don't imagine snobbish gaming elitism has a huge role in movie production.
I don't think anyone is arguing against that point. We are merely stating that its not going to be a good movie.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
It will be nothing like the game, of course, but that's hardly a bad thing.
"It belongs to the game designers!" Says Ken Levine
"NO!" says the writers, "It belongs to the writers!"
"NO!" says the studio, "It belongs to the Producers of the movies!"
I can't remember who made this..
Oh god, thats perfect. Welles is looking kind of Shatner in that pic, though.
Man, they just need to go back in time and get both Price and Welles, because they'd be freaking perfect for this film.
Call me naive, but I see some potential here.
Comfortable, permanent
Undisputed, every tense
Not a trace of what went left
More equal than the best
Unparalleled success
Everybody, V-impressed
Calling Mortal Kombat a "good" film is kind of stretching it.
I wasn't actually expressing my own personal opinions. There've been some abominations that should never have been attmepted, but I'm not writing everything off myself, nor will I predict "it'll suck because it's a game being made into a film" as some people seem set on doing.
Because they lack imagination.
That sums up the film industry better than it does pessimists here, methinks.
As long as the movie takes place in Rapture, I'll be pretty happy. I think the kickass setting was the main reason I got so hooked.
A new Batman film? But the last ones sucked! That'll never work.
Basically, people write it off on principle, because it's a game being converted into a film. That's completely ignoring the fact that you have a big studio putting a good director and writer onto it. That shows they're supporting it, not just chucking a few dollars and hoping to cash in from the fans. That's a much better start than most get.
As someone graduating with his BS in film, I feel that Mortal Kombat is a good film and I can provide detailed analysis on a shot by shot basis as to why.
The second... not so much.
More than likely it will end up with the little sister being the rapping granny, and the big daddy will be played by Chris Tucker. Half of the movie will involve hilarious scenes were they can't understand what each other is saying.
Second one has more entertainment value if you are the sort of person who likes watching bad movies and mocking them with friends.
First one is by no means a great movie, but its not bad enough to reach the level of MK 2, or even Street Fighter.
And as good a director as Christophe Gans is, I feel that Gore is better.