The enigma of the video game movie adaptation

My initial thoughts on the announcement of an upcoming Sonic the Hedgehog movie were positive, not only is he my all time favourite video game character. He is also a character that could easily be translated onto the big screen, he has already done it on the small screen, and Sonic is an awesome character, who has a world and supporting characters around him which can be explored. Because if there is one advantage Sonic has over most other child friendly video game characters, and that is slick looks, personality and attitude.

I became a little more sceptical when I learned that it was going to be a cross over between CGI and live action, which to me seems to imply the possibility of an animated Sonic in the real world. Which is intriguing in itself, but I'm not sure if it will work. Either way, the movie is still a bit of risk, video game movie adaptations don't have a very good reputation and although Sonic can translate well into a television series does not mean he'll do so in a movie. The average Sonic does not sell more than a few million  copies, even if die hard Sonic fans like myself, go see the movie, it will have to attract other audiences who are either unfamiliar with the franchise or aren't fans of it.

But, I can see the film being made on a reasonable budget, and most people know who the Sonic character is, he is very marketable, and if the film turns out good, with word of mouth. I'm sure it will attract many people to buy a ticket.

There's a reason why video game movie adaptations have a bad reputation, a lot of them have been pretty bad (Street Fighter is without doubt one of the worst movies of all time), and for the most part they're not very faithful to their source material. However, they're not all bad. Mortal Kombat, while it has dated badly is still entertaining and watchable. Whilst unfaithful, the Resident Evil films are good popcorn flicks, the same can be said for Prince of Persia. The Super Mario Brothers is a guilty pleasure of mine (it's best to think of it as a standalone), the first Tomb Raider was decent. And Final Fantasy: The spirits within is very underrated, not only was it ground breaking for its time but it also had a very good and meaningful story.

And  the biggest hurdle for a video game adaptation is the story and its content. This is not to say the same is not the case for other movies, but the first and foremost important thing in a video game is the gameplay, so there is rightly and obviously going to be more of a focus on the gameplay than the story. One of the reasons why good books can adapt into films is precisely because they have a narrative structure with deep enough characters for us to care about.

As soon as you switch on the power button and pick up the controller, regardless of the story, the video game becomes a sport, you're the hero, so there is very little emotional connection with the character you control and those around them.

But even with these hurdles, video game adaptations should be better than what they have been. You have to wonder whether those who make them have ever actually played the games for themselves. But there ultimately needs to be a compromise between persevering with the source material and pleasing the faithful fans at the same time. While making something which is very entertaining and escapist. Because let's be honest, no one wants to watch a boring Sonic movie where there isn't a super cool speed chase.

It was not that long ago when comic book movies were more often than not laughed at and quite often bombed financially at the box office, but now that has all changed due to technology, higher budgets and better talent getting involved.
It will be much harder for video games to make the transition, but I have a good feeling that may all change with the release of Warcraft next year, a film with a high budget and the talent attached to it. If that is a critical and financial success I hope it is, it could possibly be the turning point for movies based on video games.