Does any body think theres a way they can start over?

I will make an RE movie one day, you'll all see. I'll put some sort of message up there so you guys all know it was me.

Any suggestions?

Spike991 wrote:

Any suggestions?

It should take place in the year 2213 and a new company called Trololo Crop. is at the height of the power, and they are making a new virus called "T- Insert Clitche Virus Name Here" which turns all innocent humans into pychotic, immature trolls that browse 4-Chan and leave nasty comments on YouTube videos. The only person who can save the day is a robotic Jill and Claire, teaming up to stop the evil that is trolling.

I meant on how to let everybody know I made it?

I'll put, For ResidentEvilForums.net at the end.

Spike991 wrote:

I meant on how to let everybody know I made it?

I'll put, For ResidentEvilForums.net at the end.

Oh.....well that works too.

When I saw the poll on this thread all i could think is an honest big WTF!

That aside as long as the current RE movie franchise keeps making money and up till they conclude Alice's storyline and they will have too because Milla is not getting any younger there won't be much of a chance of a Reboot. But nothing is forever. Eventually there will most likely be one

I support resident evil reboot. Maybe they could even rename it BIOHAZARD. Anderson has got to go!!!

pacdredogg wrote:

I support resident evil reboot. Maybe they could even rename it BIOHAZARD. Anderson has got to go!!!

They are still named Biohazard in Japan. Changing the name now would propably only confuse movie goers and alike.

Mass Distraction wrote:

pacdredogg wrote:

I support resident evil reboot. Maybe they could even rename it BIOHAZARD. Anderson has got to go!!!

They are still named Biohazard in Japan. Changing the name now would propably only confuse movie goers and alike.

What are they gonna call the reboot then? Can't call it just "Resident Evil" because paul andersons first movie is already called "Resident Evil". What are they gonna call it? Resident Evil: revolution? Resident Evil: Reconstruction? Resident Evil: Resurrection? That's even more confusing. I would call it Biohazard. You have better ideas?

pacdredogg wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

pacdredogg wrote:

I support resident evil reboot. Maybe they could even rename it BIOHAZARD. Anderson has got to go!!!

They are still named Biohazard in Japan. Changing the name now would propably only confuse movie goers and alike.

What are they gonna call the reboot then? Can't call it just "Resident Evil" because paul andersons first movie is already called "Resident Evil". What are they gonna call it? Resident Evil: revolution? Resident Evil: Reconstruction? Resident Evil: Resurrection? That's even more confusing. I would call it Biohazard. You have better ideas?

Every single reboot ever has used the original name of the series. Without the name that would sell the whole thing might fall under.

The Spiderman movies got a reboot and were called Spiderman, the Batman movies have rebooted numerous times and now that the Tomb Raider and Devil May Cry series are being rebooted, they are still called Tomb Raider and Devil May Cry. The name sells, man.

I don't see the point now tbh. The games are already so movie-like that making movies that follow their plots would seem redundant.

Sithis Malkira wrote:

Well, does anybody think they can remake the movies like the games ? IDK maybe by starting with ZERO and moving up. Go from ZERO , to the incedent at the mansiion , then leon and claire , etc. Let me know if you heard anything of them maybe starting it or considering it ... thanks

Really doubt that that will happen, actually the reason why capcom approved P.W Andersons script was that it was an alternative to the game story. If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games, maybe in a very distant future when flying cars are invented, the chance of a RE based films to be realised will grow, otherwise capcom has absolutely no interest in realising films fully based on the games at least not until the game story ends. but hopefully the future release of the Anderson films will stop at what it is right now, cs enough is enough . . .

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games

They converted the original story of RE games into books, why not movies?

Since Nite isn't here, I'll just say what he always says because it makes a whole lot of sense. Books are made into movies and the movies don't stray from the original plot much. Did any of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings books loose popularity because of the movies?

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games

They converted the original story of RE games into books, why not movies?

Since Nite isn't here, I'll just say what he always says because it makes a whole lot of sense. Books are made into movies and the movies don't stray from the original plot much. Did any of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings books loose popularity because of the movies?

Really? then why did capcom decline the remakes ? u think if the remake release wouldnt harm the game popularity, they wouldnt have released it ??? Why would someone play old games when it can be watched on the screen, as fro the books uve listed, first of Tolkiens fairy tale classic had its high way before films, it became classic and even if u base 1000 films on it, it will still outshine em (like 4 ex Homers Iliad, Troy will never be as famous). Not a big fan of Potter, ive seen films, but never had an interest of reading any of the books, Id rather spend my time reading Dostoevsky, from which you can get something useful, then to waste my time on something useless as potter and as far as im concerned (im ight be wrong) it was most popular with kids under 12, i think thats the key of its success, cs child stories will always be best selling.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games

They converted the original story of RE games into books, why not movies?

Since Nite isn't here, I'll just say what he always says because it makes a whole lot of sense. Books are made into movies and the movies don't stray from the original plot much. Did any of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings books loose popularity because of the movies?

Really? then why did capcom decline the remakes ? u think if the remake release wouldnt harm the game popularity, they wouldnt have released it ??? Why would someone play old games when it can be watched on the screen, as fro the books uve listed, first of Tolkiens fairy tale classic had its high way before films, it became classic and even if u base 1000 films on it, it will still outshine em (like 4 ex Homers Iliad, Troy will never be as famous). Not a big fan of Potter, ive seen films, but never had an interest of reading any of the books, Id rather spend my time reading Dostoevsky, from which you can get something useful, then to waste my time on something useless as potter and as far as im concerned (im ight be wrong) it was most popular with kids under 12, i think thats the key of its success, cs child stories will always be best selling.

There are lots and lots of books turned into movies that didn't affect the popularity of the original material. Besides, if someone has not bought an older RE game by now, they are not going to. It's not really gonna affect the market, it's not like Capcom is releasing them in disc format anymore. Besides, if I enjoy a game I play it. There's a difference in interactivity between a movie and a game.

On that note, there is alreade talks about rebooting the movie series. It doesn't need a remake, though.

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games

They converted the original story of RE games into books, why not movies?

Since Nite isn't here, I'll just say what he always says because it makes a whole lot of sense. Books are made into movies and the movies don't stray from the original plot much. Did any of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings books loose popularity because of the movies?

Really? then why did capcom decline the remakes ? u think if the remake release wouldnt harm the game popularity, they wouldnt have released it ??? Why would someone play old games when it can be watched on the screen, as fro the books uve listed, first of Tolkiens fairy tale classic had its high way before films, it became classic and even if u base 1000 films on it, it will still outshine em (like 4 ex Homers Iliad, Troy will never be as famous). Not a big fan of Potter, ive seen films, but never had an interest of reading any of the books, Id rather spend my time reading Dostoevsky, from which you can get something useful, then to waste my time on something useless as potter and as far as im concerned (im ight be wrong) it was most popular with kids under 12, i think thats the key of its success, cs child stories will always be best selling.

There are lots and lots of books turned into movies that didn't affect the popularity of the original material. Besides, if someone has not bought an older RE game by now, they are not going to. It's not really gonna affect the market, it's not like Capcom is releasing them in disc format anymore. Besides, if I enjoy a game I play it. There's a difference in interactivity between a movie and a game.

On that note, there is alreade talks about rebooting the movie series. It doesn't need a remake, though.

Actually, 9 times out of 10, whenever a book gets turned into a movie, the books become even more popular. People write books based on movies some times. Movies can sometimes boost popularity of some games such as Mortal Kombat and Silent Hill. More people watch movies than play games or read books. Even comic books at this point! Look at Watchmen, when the movie came out, everyone read the comics. Before that, I didn't even know who the Watchmen were. The Help is another good example; never heard of the book, but when the movie came out every girl and her mother and her mother's mother wanted to read it after seeing it. Back to my point: if someone watches a movie based on another form of media, book, game, or comic, people will flock back to the source material to compare and contrast. I started reading Harry Potter books after I saw the first one, I read Lord of the Rings after I saw the first film as well. It's normal for people to do that.

To assume that something will lose popularity by converting it to the most popular and influential form of art, is ridiculous.

Mercy wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

If there will be like films 100% based on games then the actual games will loose its popularity, and once again if someone wants to brush up on the story, he/she can easily replay the games

They converted the original story of RE games into books, why not movies?

Since Nite isn't here, I'll just say what he always says because it makes a whole lot of sense. Books are made into movies and the movies don't stray from the original plot much. Did any of the Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings books loose popularity because of the movies?

Really? then why did capcom decline the remakes ? u think if the remake release wouldnt harm the game popularity, they wouldnt have released it ??? Why would someone play old games when it can be watched on the screen, as fro the books uve listed, first of Tolkiens fairy tale classic had its high way before films, it became classic and even if u base 1000 films on it, it will still outshine em (like 4 ex Homers Iliad, Troy will never be as famous). Not a big fan of Potter, ive seen films, but never had an interest of reading any of the books, Id rather spend my time reading Dostoevsky, from which you can get something useful, then to waste my time on something useless as potter and as far as im concerned (im ight be wrong) it was most popular with kids under 12, i think thats the key of its success, cs child stories will always be best selling.

There are lots and lots of books turned into movies that didn't affect the popularity of the original material. Besides, if someone has not bought an older RE game by now, they are not going to. It's not really gonna affect the market, it's not like Capcom is releasing them in disc format anymore. Besides, if I enjoy a game I play it. There's a difference in interactivity between a movie and a game.

On that note, there is alreade talks about rebooting the movie series. It doesn't need a remake, though.

Actually, 9 times out of 10, whenever a book gets turned into a movie, the books become even more popular. People write books based on movies some times. Movies can sometimes boost popularity of some games such as Mortal Kombat and Silent Hill. More people watch movies than play games or read books. Even comic books at this point! Look at Watchmen, when the movie came out, everyone read the comics. Before that, I didn't even know who the Watchmen were. The Help is another good example; never heard of the book, but when the movie came out every girl and her mother and her mother's mother wanted to read it after seeing it. Back to my point: if someone watches a movie based on another form of media, book, game, or comic, people will flock back to the source material to compare and contrast. I started reading Harry Potter books after I saw the first one, I read Lord of the Rings after I saw the first film as well. It's normal for people to do that.

To assume that something will lose popularity by converting it to the most popular and influential form of art, is ridiculous.

Then why didnt capcom do so long ago? i think people that run multi billion dollar company can make a decision that will serve best their interests. Silent Hill needed a popularity boost??? the film of the same name was a hit before its release major reason of which was that it carried the name of one of the most popular games in the gaming history. and Resident evil is not a book, so the affect of a Film will be different then a book based film. Before calling someones thought ridiculous just read what u write. I personally consider learning about Tolkien from a film ridiculous, and if u learn about classical literature from films, then i would suggest you to watch films with more depth than harry potter, like 1984 for ex.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Then why didnt capcom do so long ago? i think people that run multi billion dollar company can make a decision that will serve best their interest.

Capcom did. They made 5 Resident Evil movies and are still going because its making a ton of money.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Silent Hill needed a popularity boost??? the film of the same name was a hit before its release major reason of which was that it carried the name of one of the most popular games in the gaming history.

I never said it needed a popularity boost. Silent Hill came out in 1999, the first Silent Hill movie was released in 2006. I don't know what you're talking about to be honest.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

and Resident evil is not a book,

Really? Wow, the more you know, I suppose.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

The affect of a Film will be different then a book based film.

How? In what way? The Resident Evil films strays pretty far from the source material, but it still has the name"Resident Evil." If you didn't know about the game and just watched the movie, one would feel inclined to buy the game if they enjoyed the movie. Just like watching "Watchmen" made me feel inclined to read the comic or watching Harry Potter made me want to read the books. When someone make a movie on something, people tend to pick up the original source material, when

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Before calling someones thought ridiculous just read what u write.

Maybe you should read what I write, because you're omitting most of my post. And I was saying the assumption that making a popular game into a movie will make it lose popularity is ridiculous, because film is possibly the most powerful form of art there is. Not everyone plays games, but everyone watches movies.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

I personally consider learning about Tolkien from a film ridiculous, and if u learn about classical literature from films, then i would suggest you to watch films with more depth than harry potter, like 1984 for ex.

Okay, firstly, I didn't learn about JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Ring because of the movies, I said I read the books because of the movies, I didn't learn about them because of the movies. I only read The Hobbit prior to the films. I thought Harry Potter was stupid, I saw the first movie, read the first three books then thought it was stupid.

To suggest I watch classic films to learn about the classic books is a pretty bad suggestion, look at Frankenstein. The book is nothing like the film. I could go on about this, but I won't.

Mercy wrote:

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Then why didnt capcom do so long ago? i think people that run multi billion dollar company can make a decision that will serve best their interest.

Capcom did. They made 5 Resident Evil movies and are still going because its making a ton of money.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Silent Hill needed a popularity boost??? the film of the same name was a hit before its release major reason of which was that it carried the name of one of the most popular games in the gaming history.

I never said it needed a popularity boost. Silent Hill came out in 1999, the first Silent Hill movie was released in 2006. I don't know what you're talking about to be honest.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

and Resident evil is not a book,

Really? Wow, the more you know, I suppose.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

The affect of a Film will be different then a book based film.

How? In what way? The Resident Evil films strays pretty far from the source material, but it still has the name"Resident Evil." If you didn't know about the game and just watched the movie, one would feel inclined to buy the game if they enjoyed the movie. Just like watching "Watchmen" made me feel inclined to read the comic or watching Harry Potter made me want to read the books. When someone make a movie on something, people tend to pick up the original source material, when

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

Before calling someones thought ridiculous just read what u write.

Maybe you should read what I write, because you're omitting most of my post. And I was saying the assumption that making a popular game into a movie will make it lose popularity is ridiculous, because film is possibly the most powerful form of art there is. Not everyone plays games, but everyone watches movies.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

I personally consider learning about Tolkien from a film ridiculous, and if u learn about classical literature from films, then i would suggest you to watch films with more depth than harry potter, like 1984 for ex.

Okay, firstly, I didn't learn about JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Ring because of the movies, I said I read the books because of the movies, I didn't learn about them because of the movies. I only read The Hobbit prior to the films. I thought Harry Potter was stupid, I saw the first movie, read the first three books then thought it was stupid.

To suggest I watch classic films to learn about the classic books is a pretty bad suggestion, look at Frankenstein. The book is nothing like the film. I could go on about this, but I won't.

Did what? released a film that is 100 % remake of a game? guess u havent read even the title of the thread
---
"Movies can sometimes boost popularity of some games such as Mortal Kombat and Silent Hill" - doesent this mean that Silent Hill Film boosted pop of silent hill game? it happened very much vice versa. So that you could Understand, I said that SH film did not boost the pop of the game and it never needed it, game on the other hand did boost films fame.
---
guess i do . . .
---
if you cant understand the difference, it will take me too long explaining it.
---
and what did i omit? u called my though ridiculous. Im not saying that my truth is The Truth, but u can disagree with it and state ur opinion with much different form, and calling someones though ridiculous is a bit impolite i think.
---
U just said that ur reading Tolkien cs of movies(i wrongly assumed that u havent heard of JRR until movie, So i apologize 4 that, but reading cs of films doesn't color u golden either), so actually my suggestion is very useful for you, so that u know Anna Karenina came out this year so maybe you should take a look at it, so it inspires you for reading the actual book, and maybe youll do the same thing you did with HP and read some other books of Tolstoy, but im pretty sure you wont find them stupid. Also Great Gatsby is on its way. but if you keep doing that you're gonna miss out whole lotta good books.

So in the end facts are facts, if Capcom considered an absolute on screen remakes of RE more appropriate for them they would have done it, not giving it to PWS Anderson, who turned a great story into a Milla Jovovich PR campaign.

You know, I wouldn't mind if they had like a mini tv series (one season) but introduced completely new characters for the series only. Perhaps base it on the Raccoon City indecent and have the stars completely normal civilians trying to survive. No one like Alice who is just straight up crazy and unkillable. I wouldn't mind if they mentioned some of the game characters but movies and/or tv shows based on video games tend to never do it justice.

They don't need to make a 100% rendition of the games because of two reasons: there's already a 100% rendition of the first game, it's called Resident Evil remake on the GameCube, and two, the films are very popular, to go back and do that would be pointless.

Alright, I didn't understand what you meant when you said "…the film of the same name was a hit before its release major reason of which was that it carried the name of one of the most popular games in the gaming history." The grammar threw me off. But you can't argue with the fact that more people know about Silent Hill because of the movies. Ergo: popularity.

But please, explain the difference between the movie of a video game and how it affects the audience, and a movie based on a book and how it affects the audience from fans of the franchise and how it affects an audience new to the franchise or series. If someone likes the book and they find out there a movie on the way, they go out to see it. If someone really likes a video game and they made a movie based on the video game, you're going to see it, right? How many Resident Evil movies did you see?

I'm sorry if I came off rude, truly I am. But, to say that a book or a video game will not gain more popular if it gets converted into a film—again, the most powerful form of art for many reasons, which I'm prepared to get into if inquired—it won't affect it's popularity, but it will in fact decrease it, that seems ridiculous.

Also, if I want to read good classic books, I'm not going to watch the movies. I'm more than capable of picking and choosing my reading material. Rarely are movies better than the books, I liked The Last of the Mohicans better than the book and No Country for Old Men. Again, look at Frankenstein.

Quote :

So in the end facts are facts, if Capcom considered an absolute on screen remakes of RE more appropriate for them they would have done it, not giving it to PWS Anderson, who turned a great story into a Milla Jovovich PR campaign.

Exactly. They would have made it already, but they didn't, and they won't, because the movies are making a ton of money. And honestly, Resident Evil isn't some masterpiece of a story anyway, not to say that Anderson's films are better by any means. Honestly though, we won't get any film that's true to Resident Evil unless its the CG films.

Mercy wrote:

They don't need to make a 100% rendition of the games because of two reasons: there's already a 100% rendition of the first game, it's called Resident Evil remake on the GameCube, and two, the films are very popular, to go back and do that would be pointless.

Alright, I didn't understand what you meant when you said "…the film of the same name was a hit before its release major reason of which was that it carried the name of one of the most popular games in the gaming history." The grammar threw me off. But you can't argue with the fact that more people know about Silent Hill because of the movies. Ergo: popularity.

But please, explain the difference between the movie of a video game and how it affects the audience, and a movie based on a book and how it affects the audience from fans of the franchise and how it affects an audience new to the franchise or series. If someone likes the book and they find out there a movie on the way, they go out to see it. If someone really likes a video game and they made a movie based on the video game, you're going to see it, right? How many Resident Evil movies did you see?

I'm sorry if I came off rude, truly I am. But, to say that a book or a video game will not gain more popular if it gets converted into a film—again, the most powerful form of art for many reasons, which I'm prepared to get into if inquired—it won't affect it's popularity, but it will in fact decrease it, that seems ridiculous.

Also, if I want to read good classic books, I'm not going to watch the movies. I'm more than capable of picking and choosing my reading material. Rarely are movies better than the books, I liked The Last of the Mohicans better than the book and No Country for Old Men. Again, look at Frankenstein.

Quote :

So in the end facts are facts, if Capcom considered an absolute on screen remakes of RE more appropriate for them they would have done it, not giving it to PWS Anderson, who turned a great story into a Milla Jovovich PR campaign.

Exactly. They would have made it already, but they didn't, and they won't, because the movies are making a ton of money. And honestly, Resident Evil isn't some masterpiece of a story anyway, not to say that Anderson's films are better by any means. Honestly though, we won't get any film that's true to Resident Evil unless its the CG films.

Really? if u read my first post carefully u will understand that ive stated the same thing, actually you should read the post of person that started this thread :"Well, does anybody think they can remake the movies like the games ? IDK maybe by starting with ZERO and moving up. Go from ZERO , to the incedent at the mansiion , then leon and claire , etc. Let me know if you heard anything of them maybe starting it or considering it ..." this thread is not about the films loosely based on the game, its about an absolute remakes and capcom stated on that idea that releasing a film remake will either decrease sales on games or will turn film into a box office flop, so i guess ur not following the idea of the thread, u've just read my post and wrote a reply.
---
well to chew that line up for you, it ment that the Film SH was a hit before it was released because it had a name of one of the most popular games in history, which is Silent Hill the game. (hope u get it now. Its a complex structure of the sentence, but i think a person in his/her early 20ies that has experience with international literature, should not have a problem with understanding it. If that grammar throws you off, than you're gonna have a system error, when reading something really complex like Thus Spoke Zarathustra). And actually i can disagree with that, Silent Hill was one of the most popular game on PS and PC, Just Like Resident evil, or even Counter Strike(on PC). Everybody knew that game, but some of em havent played it and actually after the movie came, some of my friends, who were thick skinned Shooters and didnt have an experience in HorSur, said "if silent hill is similar to the film then im not playing it cs its a crap", therefore movie had actually decreased its fame, while before movie came out, everybody was planning to see it, cs everyone knew that it was based on super horror game. (i consider SH film a slap into face of Toyama, Just as RE films are a slap into face of Shinji Mikami)
---
"But please, explain the difference between the movie of a video game and how it affects the audience, and a movie based on a book and how it affects the audience from fans of the franchise and how it affects an audience new to the franchise or series" - I never talked about the affect on the audience, what i meant was that the film release affects differently on the sales of the product on which its based, and yes it will take me too long explaining you the difference between the book sales and video game sales, just take it so that book publishing and video game industry are two different banks of river, so any additional actions committed on them, will have different affect on their economic state. and as for the amount of RE films watched by me, well i have seen all xept Retribution, but i've never spent a dollar on em, never been in a movie cs of re, as one of the most popular Russian channel NTV, that has "subchannels" NTV Kinokhit(NTV moviehit) and NTV Premiera (NTV premiere), shows RE quite frequently, so being fanatical about RE, doesnt mean that ill go and spend money on such a crap as RE films(the only film that i've seen in the movie was RE1, simply cs it carried name of RE, but after learning that its a fat fail, i watch RE movies only on TV), and im not in an anticipation, like reading TV program and preparing for RE with chips and beer, i just have a tv and Pc in the same room so when im working in 3d, plying games, just surfing on the internet or even now writing you the reply i have tv turned on, so if i bump into RE ill watch it.
---
Film based on the game might work as a good campaign or anticampaign for the game, just read again my friends though on SH. And SH movies use RE movies up the as. . . But if we talk about 100% remakes of game, it will decrease either sales of games or sales of movie tickets, cs there's simply no use (4 a newcomer, cs fans might do so) in replaying something that u've seen, just as there's no use seeing something u've played, as far as im following thats the reason behind Capcoms declination of Games On Screen remakes.
---
u can read and watch whatever you want, its not my business.
---
I agree with the fact that CGI is the only cannon RE, and woth watching. As for story, as god of zombie movies Romero said it was one of the best zombie stories he had ever seen, and feels honored to serve as an inspiration for em. RE is a brilliant story with so many powerful, charismatic characters, and more games are released, more they develop the stories behind em, especially behind the RE big four, Chris/Clair Redfield, Jill Valentine and Leon S. Kennedy.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

movies and/or tv shows based on video games tend to never do it justice.

There are lots of examples that actually do justice to the games, Prince of Persia and Silent Hill for example.

ChrisRedfieldRE156 wrote:

capcom stated on that idea that releasing a film remake will either decrease sales on games or will turn film into a box office flop

Can you provide a link? All I have ever heard is Capcom choosing Anderson's script over Romero's.

Btw. How is the Anderson films boosting the game sales either? People who only know Resident Evil from the movies go to the games expecting an action fest with Alice and call bullshit when a minor character like Jill is suddenly the main character. Silent Hill was at least loyal to the original game and if people like your friends say that stuff is not for them, then they are propably right. You can't force a horror game to a shooter fan. If I had seen the RE movie series before playing any of the games I would never even want to play them. As you can see, it works the other way around too.

I wouldn't say the "Big Four". Its more like the "Big Three" consisting of Chris, Leon, and Ada.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

movies and/or tv shows based on video games tend to never do it justice.

There are lots of examples that actually do justice to the games, Prince of Persia and Silent Hill for example.
.

Never seen either but I heard the Silent Hill movies got bad ratings, especially the newer one. I'd still like to see them though.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

movies and/or tv shows based on video games tend to never do it justice.

There are lots of examples that actually do justice to the games, Prince of Persia and Silent Hill for example.
.

Never seen either but I heard the Silent Hill movies got bad ratings, especially the newer one. I'd still like to see them though.

I haven't seen the second one yet but the first one is propably the best videogame to movie adaptation to date. Sure it wasn't a straight up copy of the game's plot but it retained the feel and overall plot pretty well.