At this point I'm going to Ladbrokes and betting against everything Kotaku promotes. They are like Jim Cramer of the gaming industry.
The most frustrating thing about this article is that it completely ignores that good movies targeted at kids still have to be good. Personal complaints aside, the new Mario movie was reasonably good for adults and great for kids. Pixar keeps churning out things that are fantastic on many levels. Bluey is an amazing show that can resonate with kids and parents. I don’t for a minute buy the elitist bullshit of “well you’re not a kid so you can’t comment.” Muppet Treasure Island holds the fuck up as an adult so this writer can fuck right off.
What's also weird is Minecraft is 15 years old at this point. That means you've basically got a huge age range (kids to adults) within the target audience. Why isn't it targeted at the entire fanbase?
I've been playing Minecraft off and on since the Beta. I usually play the "All the mods" packs when they launch.
I do not understand how people get so emotionally invested in an IP.
If it isn't a good movie who cares? Just spend your time doing something else.
Can't speak for everyone, but the reason that I care when one of my favorite IPs has a terrible movie, is because the terrible movie ensures that a good one will never be made.
They did a great job with Fallout, and now they are making a second season.
Then there's Borderlands.
I still haven't seen it, but I already know that the Borderlands movie I would have loved will never exist.
And in some cases, the IP getting a shit movie or show can tell the game developers "well, time to drop the entire brand for 15 years".
The Wing Commander and Dungeon Siege treatment.
Just reiterating what others have said but... if you have an IP you like and want more of it in the future (regardless of medium!) then its success in any other medium will likely impact whether or not you get more.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where:
Money matters more to most IP holders than the IP itself
New IP is seen as risky
Those in charge don't have to take responsibility for their failures
If there is a commercial failure of an IP, there is a good chance that its failure will be seen as the IP generally failing or falling out of poluarity instead of the failure to best utilize the IP that likely occurred. As a result, priorities will often shift away from the IP to something else in all mediums (ex. ASOIAF/GOT). Unless the IP is absolutely gangbusters in all other mediums, it will suffer. Similarly, success will likely lead to more utilization of the IP in any medium.
It's unlikely that the IP owner will sell or license the IP in the near future because at one point it was popular and new IP is hard to make. It would be better to hoard IP and maybe try again in a decade when they need a trick up their sleeve. Plus, another failure might damage the IP even more.
Admittedly, I'm not attached to any brands or IP in particular and so I'm not invested really. I just makes me a little sad when some IP I thought well of has this happen... or when the person who benefits from the IP turns out to be a person I'd rather not give money to. Occasionally I'll ponder what might have been if things had gone differently and feel a little bad.
If there is a commercial failure of an IP, there is a good chance that its failure will be seen as the IP generally failing or falling out of poluarity instead of the failure to best utilize the IP that likely occurred.
For example, when EA released Tiberian Twilight and it was absolutely awful and didn't sell, they said that people just didn't want RTS games anymore and shelved the entire C&C franchise. That was fourteen years ago and we haven't had a new C&C since then that wasn't mobile shovelware.
I mean, if you're going to make a movie based on a video game, shouldn't you aim it at The demographics that most commonly played that video game?
You mean 5-12 year olds? Cause that’s what they did
I feel like Minecraft has kind of lagged in popularity with the current crop of 5 to 12-year-olds compared to some of the newer games, like Roblox.
if it isn't meant for me, that's totally fine.
That also means it's not my fault when the thing that isn't meant for me doesn't get a audience, right? Right?
It will have an audience.
Why didn't they just make it a fucking animated movie?
I'm probably in the minority here but the realistic style is the least of my issues with the movie. I've only played modded minecraft and shaders give it that weird realistic look too lol
By this logic: "The Borderlands movie isn't meant for you."
Apparently it wasn't. I don't remember where I saw it, I think maybe a Kyle Bosman video, but Gearbox/Randy Pitchford basically said they made the movie to pull in people who hadn't played the games.
I've said this before: Randy Pitchford isn't very smart.
It seemed like it would be a cheesey movie with some dry humor and I was okay with it up until the girl character called Jack Black "a massive toolbag." Thats not what I expect from a movie oriented to children, and that made me immediately drop any interest I had left. Then the rest of the trailer somehow got worse with the llama scene, whatever that was.
They should have made the movie animated in the same style as all their commercials, with the characters in a Minecraft style skin based on their real world appearance. Have them start and end in real life, whatever. But boy is this not going to be good.
This looks like the 90s Mario movie all over again. Or the Sonic movie -- before they fixed Sonic. Like, even the Resident Evil and Tomb Raider movies are probably better than this and those movies were generally very inaccurate to their source material, and not well receieved.
Showed this to my kids. Their reaction was:
Kid 1: bruh
Kid 2: Is that the guy from Peaches?
I wouldn't watch it even if the trailer was really good but....I'm gonna shit on it for looking awful, not being targeted towards adults. That opening green screen shot looks AWFUL. I said in another thread it reminds me of those old car commercial edits with the Mark guy. The perspectives of the camera vs the background don't seem to fit
who tf is it for then
Its proof-of-concept. They're trying to get a movie out that's entirely tied to the brand, without spending a meaningful amount of money on scripting, art direction, location scouting, or talent. This is the future of AI Movies in a nutshell.
Great article, because it applies to anyone who reads it.
Reminder: Jack Black broke up Tenacious D to try to save this thing
and...
"Oh, no see, you're mad, but you see this version of the franchise isn't for you. It's for a new crowd that was alienated by the previous version and you need to be nice and let them have their..."
Shut the fuck up, if it's a version of a thing made for people who are defined by not liking the thing, it's not going to get the other crowd to like the thing, it's just going to piss off the people who do like it...
But the movie looks bad. That's why people are mad.
It's meant for whom, exactly?
Children probably
Most of my favourite movies from when I was a kid are still great movies for me as an adult.
I would bet my next paycheck this is not the case for any kid who grows up seeing this movie. A good kids movie should age with you.
Children deserve better movies than this soulless green-screened cash grab.
They also deserve better games than Minecraft IMO, but that's a different conversation.
Of course not.
I have taste.
They could be pulling a 'sonic movie' move here, releasing a terrible trailer to gather heat and information.
Though the sonic movie only had Sonic to change
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.