Icalasari: ** [[http://movies.ign.com/articles/100/1006589p1.html Asteroids]]. Either it is going to take a life of its own and only be like the game [[InName in name]], or else it will flunk.
I typed this up, but then realized that it may not quite fit. So, should it go in or not?
----
[[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=flh6r5sl&trope=VideoGameMoviesSuck From YKTTW]]
Game Guru GG: This Trope's name sucks. It should be called Bollverize, after Uwe Boll and pronouced like Pulverize. I believe he has gained the level of noteriaty of such people as Thomas Bowdler, Carl Macek, and Ted Woolsey to define this trope.
----
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: I think I'd put ''Mortal Kombat'' into the exceptions pile, myself. Sure, it wasn't Shakespeare or anything, but it was a pretty decent martial arts flick, and, IMHO, the differences between it and the game (Raiden as ObiWan vs. active fighter, for example) serve to strengthen it. If they'd have stuck close to the game, we'd have ended up with ''Mortal Kombat: Armageddon'', which, I think we can all agree, sucked hard and long.
{{Phartman}}: I think you mean ''Annihilation''.
{{Ununnilium}}: How's that? Also edited the main entry to remove some of the unrelentingly negative tone.
Later: Where would ''FinalFantasyVII: Advent Children'' fall on this? I haven't actually seen it yet.
Roland: I'm not sure it applies, since it's more a 'thank you!' to the fans than movie. It's not a theatrical release at any rate, but I'm pretty sure, despite being cool to watch, it'd have done badly.
{{Tanto}}: Or the result of Square's executives saying, "Hey, these FFVII fanboys will buy ''anything!'' Get someone on the exploitation trail, toot sweet!"
Do we have {{Fanboyism}} yet?
{{Lale}}: I've been wanting to make a trope that would include both real-world Fangirls and Fanboys, but I can't think of a title. Oh, and I assume you mean "toute de suite"- French for "right away," or "immediately"?
{{Tanto}}: Bah. I'm an American, dammit! I'll spell it how I want!
...Or not.
{{Ununnilium}}: {{Fanperson}}?
{{Lale}}: Don't think it has the same connotations.
{{Ununnilium}}: Of course not. But it's funny, and it fits.
{{Lale}}: I agree that it fits, not that it's funny.
{{Tanto}}: I'm with Lale on this one. Fanperson is functional, but that's all it's got going for it.
The masculine form can be used in a gender-neutral fashion in English. If worse comes to worst, just use Fanboy with a clarification in the entry, and maybe set up Fangirl to redirect there. It's an easily grokkable term, and it's already in the vernacular.
{{Ununnilium}}: The problem is, mind, that the Fanboy stereotype and the Fangirl stereotype are pretty different.
{{Tanto}}: Then why are we trying to mash them into a single entry?
{{Ununnilium}}: Good point.
{{Semiapies}}: Maybe just "fans"? :D Personally, I think folks are slightly too harsh on ''Street Fighter'' and ''Final Fantasy - The Spirits Within'', but hey. :)
{{Earnest}}: How about FanIsShortForFanatic? It's long, but the etymology for it is true at least.
----
{{Ununnilium}}: And now I'm reading that ''FinalFantasyVII: Advent Children'' ''did'' get a theatrical release, in Japan. >.>
Raul Julia derves a Trope named after him, a sort of kick-ass performance in a miserably average movie. Like half of what Christopher Walken does.
----
{{Coolnut}}: Moved the ''Tomb Raider'' entry to "somewhere in the middle". At least the first one made lots of moolah.
{{Tanto}}: Uh, no. Both the ''Tomb Raider'' movies were disasters. We don't care about financial success or a lack of it for purposes of this entry -- people will watch ''anything''. This entry is about their failures as movies. Moving it back.
{{Coolnut}}: Fine. :) Should I (or someone else) make a caveat of "suck regardless of financial success" (after all, ViewersAreMorons) on the main page?
TheGunheart: No, they're definitely "somewhere in the middle". They're just stupid disposable fun and actually bear some resemblance to the games, which is a hell of a lot more than I can say about Uwe Boll's films.
----
EricDVH: Oh come on, The Spirits Within wasn't a bad movie at all. I mean:
# Yeah, so the movie had almost nothing to do with the games, but the GAMES have almost nothing to do with the games (FFX-2 is an anomaly)!
# The plot is pretty bizarre and nonsensical, but it still made more sense than practically any japanese live action movie I've seen (and a great deal of western action movies), plus it held by the RuleOfCool to the letter.
# The film was completely free of awkward acting, and the characters were _at least_ as good as any other inhabitant of an action blockbuster.
# Its graphics might not have been utterly identical to reality, but they certainly weren't "uncanny valley" material either. If most people didn't know that they weren't real, I truly doubt they would have noticed (I mean, look at the typical responses to ''Revenge of The Sith'', the LOTR movies and -my personal favorite, due to almost no footage of the actors actually appearing onscreen- ''Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow''!).
I think the only reason it failed was because of an "Aah! It's from those freaky Japanese/gamers and it ISN'T for kids!'' reaction mixed with "They're hardly using actors onscreen at all, AND THEY BRAG ABOUT IT". If they'd removed the phrases "Final Fantasy" and "Squaresoft", hidden behind an American/European studio and put in a few seconds of greenscreened live-action footage, it likely would have done pretty well.
{{arromdee}}: In Sky Captain, the footage of the actors did appear onscreen. They CGIed everything ''except'' the actors.
And LOTR doesn't count. UncannyValley doesn't apply when the character isn't supposed to look enough like a human.
----
{{Tanto}}: ''Advent Children'' isn't a movie; it's a masturbatory shopping list for ''FFVII'' fanboys.
Later: Deleting it for that reason. The movie really has no appeal beyond ''FFVII'' fandom.
{{arromdee}}: I put it back. It's clearly different, because all of the other examples are considered bad movies even by fans of the games. Besides, the movie is a sequel to the game and the movie and the game are aimed at the same audience, so you'd expect people who hate one to hate the other. It's like saying ''The Empire Strikes Back'' is a bad movie merely because it's aimed at people who like the original ''StarWars'' and people who are not fans of ''StarWars'' have little reason to watch it.
MisterSix: Or, rather, it's like saying that Attack of the Clones is a good film because the hardcore Star Wars fanboys like it. As a ''film'', Advent Children is appalling. It has no structure and an incomprehensible plot, and is basically just a series of REALLY KEWL scenes strung together, padded out with guest appearances by characters who are there not to serve the plot, but simply to make the fanboys squeal. It's fun to watch but it still ''sucks'' as a film. At least ''Resident Evil'' and ''Silent Hill'' actually got fairly positive reviews in the non-nerd press.
{{Tanto}}: MisterSix said it better than I could. Taking it out, again.
{{arromdee}}: Advent Children is a sequel. It just happens to be a sequel to a game instead of to another movie, so instead of having to see the other movie, you have to have played the game. The fact that people who haven't played the game don't like it doesn't make it bad if the movie is a sequel--sequels require you to have seen the previous installments all the time. It's just that this is an unusual case of the sequel crossing media.
If you've never heard of the Matrix, then the Animatrix is incomprehensible. But we don't call the Animatrix "bad anime" simply because someone who watches anime but not live-action movies (and therefore hasn't seen the Matrix) won't understand it. It's a sequel that crosses between live action and animation the same way Advent Children crosses between game and CGI-animation.
{{Tanto}}: Okay, but that in no way changes the fact that Advent Children is completely terrible ''as a movie'', sequel to a game or no. It's just a bunch of squee-bait for FinalFantasyVII fanboys.
{{Ununnilium}}: Okay, so basically, what you're saying is "Advent Children sucks!" "Does not!" "Does too!" I say we split the difference and put it in "Somewhere in the middle".
{{arromdee}}: It's more specific than that. If people think something sucks because it's a sequel and they aren't familiar with the original, that ''shouldn't count as sucking''. "It's just for FF7 fanboys" basically admits that, yes, that's exactly what is going on--if you don't know the original (FF7), you think the movie sucks. So it shouldn't count.
Attack of the Clones isn't really a good comparison. Lots of people who have seen the original Star Wars still think Attack of the Clones sucks.
{{Tanto}}: Are you even listening? It doesn't matter that it's a sequel. '''As a movie, it still sucks, sequel or no.''' It lacks plot. Its characterizations are awful. It includes characters and scenes that have ''no storytelling purpose whatsoever'' except to titillate fanboys. This is the very definition of sucking. You can (and are, as I understand it) claim that these problems do not matter, but you would be (and are) completely wrong.
I ''do'' know the original, and I still think it sucks. And so do many other people. It's called the FinalFantasyVII Complication for a reason.
{{Ununnilium}}: And many other other people really like it, apparently. (I, personally, have never ''seen'' it, so.) I'm officially putting it in "Somewhere in the middle".
{{Meshakhad}}: I may be one of the few people who never played FFVII, but liked Advent Children. It is a pure action flick, and its fight scenes are truly awesome.
TheGunheart: It's an action film that runs entirely on RuleOfCool. The story doesn't ''need'' to make sense.
----
ShireNomad: Any reason not to add a parody section? I really want to link [[http://www.destructoid.com/minesweeper-the-movie-37770.phtml these]] [[http://youtube.com/watch?v=fWL6j0SvqV0 two]] videos somewhere.
----
DaibhidC: Does anyone know the origins of a quote that goes something like: "''Tomb Raider'' was an excellent adaption of the video game. It was much truer to the game than any previous video game adaption. Unfortunately, by the time they realised no-one expects a video game to have a proper storyline, it was too late." I've got a feeling it was Terry Pratchett, but I can't find it online.
DaibhidC: Found it.
-----
Can we agree that the Hitman entry needs to be rephrased and moved into the horrid category?
{{Bob}}: No. It was a good movie. It wasn't a 100% faithful adaptation, but it was a decent movie. The example might still need rewriting, as it's a little to positive, but the movie is an exception to VideoGameMoviesSuck.
{{UnknownTroper}} Umm... no. It has an IMDB rating of 6.4 and a Rotten Tomatoe rating of 13. I will admit that it is no more stupid than totally-retarded-action-movie-number-63453453, but that's only because it's ditto 63453456. It's overacted or underacted, has a bizarrely stupid plot and very little to do with the game on which it is based. It's horrid.
GentlemensDame883: What about the comments saying it was superior to the RE films, then??
{{Bob}}: ''Resident Evil'' is marked as an exception because, despite the AdaptationDecay and the stupidity of the plot, it is genuinely entertaining. Exactly the same reasoning apply to ''Hitman'', especially as it has a ''higher'' IMDB rating than any of the ''Resident Evil'' movies. I'm putting it back into the exceptions.
Also, Rotten Tomatoes, quite frankly, sucks. Their rating of 56% for ''[[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/legend_of_1900/ The Legend of 1900]]'' makes them nothing less than an unholy abomination.
{{Unknown}} - By these parametres, both the Mortal Combat and the FF-AC movie need to be moved to the "Exceptions".
{{Bob}}: I added ''Hitman'' to exceptions because I based my judgement on comparing it to ''Resident Evil''.
I've rewrittten the article. Is this okay? I expect some debate over the placement of some examples.
{{UnknownTropes}} - Heh heh heh. I'm willing to get behind that. Maybe move Street Fighter to the "so bad it's bad" examples area.
-----
{{Malimar}}: Does the DungeonsAndDragons movie count? It's certainly the worst movie I've ever seen (possibly tied with QuestForFire), and it's based on a game, but not technically based on a video game. Thoughts?
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: You know, that is true. We could almost change this article to TheProblemWithLicensedMovies, and throw in examples like D&D and The Haunted Mansion, huh?
{{Malimar}}: Hm. All licensed movies would probably be too broad. Not in the sense that it would be too broad a category, but that it would be so broad as to be false. Unless I have no idea what 'licensed' actually means. But comic book movies are often good (for every LeageOfExtraordinaryGentlemen, there's a VForVendetta, and for every bad {{Batman}}, {{Superman}}, or {{Spiderman}}, there's a good one. And so on), and movies based on books are often better than the original (FightClub being the canonical example, where even the book's author agrees the movie is better, but possible examples also including LordOfTheRings and TheChroniclesOfNarnia might wind up being so. Of course, then there are bad movies like Hitchhiker'sGuideToTheGalaxy). And I bet it doesn't count as 'licensed' if the original work has been out of copyright for centuries, so movies made from {{Shakespeare}}'s plays probably don't count either way. It occurs to me, contemplating that list, that the good movies tend to be the ones which stuck to the plot of the original, and the bad movies are ones where the original had no plot, or where the movie changed it significantly. TheyChangedItNowItSucks, or AdaptationDecay? Either way.
If that was way TL;DR (and I bet it was), this is the important part: I suggest simply changing it to GameMoviesSuck. That will expand the category to include DungeonsAndDragons and {{Clue}} (which I heard sucks, but haven't actually seen it) and probably some others that are off my radar (most likely because they weren't very good), but won't expand it so much that it becomes false more often than it is true.
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: Hey, ''{{Clue}}'' was awesome. OK, it was SoBadItsGood, but I think it was that way on purpose.
----
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: Yanked the following ConversationInTheMainPage:
** I've never played the games, but aren't magical mushrooms (well living, talking ones) an integral part of the experience?
** Also, I would like to point out that the movie is still a good movie in of itself, it just failed at being an adaptation of the game.
----
SevenSeals: Took out this:
* ''The Warriors''. A good movie that portrayed how a small group of people were able to stick together when a whole city was out to get them and how bad ass fist fighting was instead of gun fights (one character beats the other character with his knife VS a gun!). The video game that followed it captures the essence of the movie very well and has some of the actors from the movie provide the voices.
This trope is about video game movies, not movie video games. That would be TheProblemWithLicensedGames, and if someone wants to add it there, be my guest. (I'm not familiar with the game, so I'm not comfortable just copying it over.)
----
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: Edited the message about loving ''Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within'' if you've never played the game. I know plenty of non-gamers, and I've never met anybody who actually likes that POS. Well, I should say that I've never met anybody in meatspace that likes it. I've had people on the internet try to convince me that it's better than the entire ''LordOfTheRings'' trilogy put together, and the only reason people hate it is because [[TrueArtIsForeign Americans are just too stupid to understand it]]. Of course, the latter were gamers too (given certain values of "gamer"), so... SoYeah.
Ninjacrat: You might want to avoid editing topics you are embittered about.
{{HeartBurn Kid}}: I'm not bitter about the movie; it was just a bad movie. I'm just rather bitter about some people's Japanophiliac tendencies. Besides, I was purposefully neutral in tone, putting that if you don't like the games, YourMileageMayVary (since, apparently, there is somebody that didn't play the games that did like it). The way it was originally worded, it made it sound like the fact that it's on the page at all was just fanboys shouting, "TheyChangedItNowItSucks," when that's just not so.
Ninjacrat: Your bitterness against a nebulous 'them' is why I suggested avoiding the topic.
---------
Dusk: for the Pokemon example under the SoBadItsGood category, which pokemon movie is being reffered to? there've been around 10 and the only one ThisTroper remembers clearly does not fit the desctiption given.
----
CharredKnight: Deleted because its useless, inaccurate (Ken is never protrayed as stupid), and racist since its clearly coming from a Japanophile who has ignored all the bad adaptations they have made.
----
{{Haven}}: Okay, that ''MaxPayne'' trailer looks seriously badass. I think they could even get away with whatever that angel thing is (I'm willing to bet it's a hallucination or metaphor or something, but if not...well, it'll be dumb, but it doesn't look like it'll ruin the film).
There's people out there who actually like the Resident Evil movies? Honestly it's like watching someone's horrendous Mary Sue fanfic in action. It gets even worse when you consider that George Romero was going to adapt it at one point.
----
MarlinClock: Idno about the rest of y'all, but when I watched Double Dragon that was a "So Bad it's Good."
Firefly: I'd wondered why Scarface: The World is Yours didn't show up here... Then I remembered that this is explicitly ''not'' a movie adaptation, but rather an exercise in '{{WhatIf}}?'.
The upcoming Ghostbusters game might well be a special case because, from what I've read, it is considered to be the 'third movie' in terms of storyline progression. And having key members of the original cast reassemble to work on it can't hurt. Some amusement could be had in reading why Activision supposedly dropped this project in the first place (Atari swooped in to pick it up again)...
----
[[ZeldaTheSwordsman]]: I think the Sonic OVA was one of the good ones.
{{Milu}}: I personally thought Sonic was too much of a [[{{Jerkass}} dick]] in the OVA. His video game incarnation is infinitely more likeable.
----
{{KJMackley}}: I moved the Film/MortalKombat example to full exceptions because I think the general consensus is that the first one is still a decent movie beyond SoBadItsGood or GuiltyPleasure. Just because some things were changed from the video games doesn't mean it sucks as a movie, that is just TheyChangedItNowItSucks.