MovieChat Forums > Mortal Kombat: Rebirth (2010) Discussion > PURISTS MAKE THE WORST MOVIE FANS

PURISTS MAKE THE WORST MOVIE FANS


The problem with this MAGNIFICENT promotion trailer is that you have these MK PURISTS who refuse to want to deviate from anything EXACTLY matching the storyline of the video game. May I remind you nit wits that they've already made a Mortal Kombat 1 and 2 in the 90's that both bombed TERRIBLY, and to add insult to injury, they were both MUCH closer to the video game storyline than this demo trailer is. Just because you follow something exactly doesn't mean that it will be an instant success. Sometimes, you have to update the subject matter to appeal to the MASSES. If you gave the usual MK fan boy 10 million dollars and told him to make an MK movie that would appeal to TODAY'S audience, it would WITHOUT A DOUBT bomb TERRIBLY. It would appeal to NO ONE but OTHER MK fan boys, who make up a pathetic minority of the general population. In order for this movie to be a "hit", it needs to appeal to a combination of at least SOME fan boys, plus the population majority. The bottom line about this movie is that it's not about being devoted to fan boys, who collectively assembled, could not even cover the costs of making the movie, it's about getting PAID, mixed with pleasing the AVERAGE MK fan, plus hopefully SOME of the fan boys. I'm 44 yrs. old and still remember the first DAY when the FIRST MK video game console was wheeled into the bowling alley where I played video games after getting out of high school. I'm a definite fan of the game, but not a fan boy purist. I'm willing to see what this director is going to do with the video game concept. Like I said before; the 2 movies that came out in the 90's about this game flopped terribly, plus they were both terribly made, even though they both followed the original game's story line much closer than this "rebirth". I must say that this rebirth demo trailer moved me much more than when I originally saw the trailers for the movies back in the 90's. I hope this movie gets made, and I think it will do much better than EITHER the original movie, or it's sequel did in the 90's.

reply

[deleted]

You read it, and so did I. Therefore someone has in fact read it; your post alone nullified your point. A paradox, if you will.

The following is my opinion, nothing more. I thought that eight minute short was awesome and I'd love to see it made into a full length movie.

I think that any story that was based on one type of medium which is adapted to another never crosses over to the liking of the truest. Does that make sense?

Look at all the video games that come out after a blockbuster movie (Iron Man, Harry Potter, etc.); very rarely do they do well. Same can be said about books made into movies, video games made into movies, so on and so forth.

However, the short sighted, narrow minded thought process of the general public doesn't see the big picture. I would love to be able to find the words that would make it possible for you to see things from my point of view, but writing persuasive speeches has never been my strong suit. But something tells me that even the greatest writer or most eloquent speaker couldn't change your point of view, Bioparadoxous. I read another thread about Mortal Kombat, and you make your points very personal and combative, no pun intended.

Fact of the matter is, movie makers are creative minds; and lucky for them, they also get paid to do what they love. But no rational businessman will ever create a product that will produce negative net profit. From their point of view, they want to create a product while pleasing as many people as possible, and make money. It's unfortunate, but it's true.

While you believe that the Mortal Kombat story is a great basis for creating a story, as is, most people would beg to differ. I can appreciate the artistic aspect that this eight minute short has delivered, and want to see something different. It's not 100% realistic, but what movie is (with the exception of those that are based on a true story)? It has a dash of realism (meaning that it's not over the top hocus pocus, but just normal people in an abnormal circumstance), yes certain aspects are not REALLY REAL, but I don't want "really real", as I stated earlier.

I guess my point is, things change. Life continues to move forward. If you don't like the movie, I appreciate your opinion, but at the same time, there's nothing wrong with people not seeing things from your point of view. That's what makes the internet so great. Everyone can voice their opinion, share ideas, and the like. But making snide remarks never helped anyone. It’s quite hypocritical of you, Bioparadoxous, to criticize someone and then turn around and do the same thing.


reply

i beat you anything you don't know what pussy feels like. go get a job

reply

Whoa. I think you read way too much into Bioparadoxous' post.
Plus you have no way of knowing if he read the original post so the whole "You read it, therefore your post alone nullified your point" is bogus.

One more thing, about the whole movies to video games not doing well thing. It has nothing to do with not being able to please fans. It's simply because the majority of the time the adaptation is terrible. Even if it were to stand on it's own as an original movie/game/comic/tv show it still wouldn't do well. If you've played any of the movie to video games and seen any of video games to movies adaptations recently you'd understand that. The majority of them are terrible storylines (whether deviated from the original story or not) bad acting, bad directing, terrible...well pretty much everything.

It very rarely has anything to do with making more money by appealing to a bigger audience because I can guarantee you if any of these so called "mass audience" movies or games were just made better (ie, better stories, better acting or in the case of games better gameplay etc) they'd make a hell of a lot more money. The Dark Knight and Iron Man is a testament to that. The game Batman Arkham Asylum is also a testament to that. If any other Batman game that had the same story but in every other aspect failed, it would flop. Terribly.

We live in a world where we can look up people's opinions on something within 2 seconds. If I'm in a shop and I'm about to buy a game that I have no clue about it but need to make a purchase immediately. What do I do? I bring out my phone and look up reviews of the game online. BAM! The game is terrible. I look at another game. So on and so forth. It has nothing to do with having to change the original story to make it appeal to a wider audience. They can easily keep the story, maybe change some things (as is innevitable when any new artist is given artistic power) and still make a lot of money. The original Mortal Kombat proved that.

Which brings me to my question. I'd just like to say to the original poster, What made you think the original Mortal Kombat was a flop? The first movie was a huge success. It even broke records. That's why they decided to make a sequel in the first place.
Maybe you should do some research before you decide to insult and slander a franchise and it's fanbase.

That all said I actually loved the Rebirth clip. It's a nice idea to take the MK universe and completely change everything.
There are a few things that are just ridiculous though.
The major thing I didn't like is the fact that it doesn't feel like Mortal Kombat. I like realism just as much as anyone else but it seems like they've taken it too far. Once you take away the fantasy and mythology, we're not talking about Mortal Kombat anymore.
Another is kind of based on the same "Not feeling like MK" thing but it's the characters designs. Look at Baraka. I mean really look at Baraka. Even if it wasn't MK and some random movie, if I seen that character in a movie I'd piss myself laughing. It just look ridiculous beyond belief.
Same with Reptile.
The rest I think are ok but after seeing what they've done with the more fantasy characters I dread to think what they will do to some of the others.

reply

I agree with you 100%.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Wow, you're really on a roll here with tons of clever jokes...

As for the subject, I agree with OP (except for the wall of text and random capitalization, and his statement that both movies bombed - the first one did quite well actually).

I mean, we've already seen the mythical side of the Mortal Kombat story, with magic and realms and that kind of stuff. Why not have a breath of fresh air with another type of Mortal Kombat.
Another thing, why do people assume that this is going to be absoloutely no magic? All we know about the story is that Jax/Sonya are persuading Scorpion into joining an "underground tournament". We have no idea where it is being held, just like the first movie where they ended up fighting on a mystical island where there were strange creatures and people obtained powers.

This short clip is simply the intro to - no, you know what? It's not even that. It was actually made as a demo by the director to show WB what he could do with the franchise. Hell, the full script is probably not even completed-

How about all you just take a chillpill and wait for some sort of official *beep* announcement.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

True and false.

I've often said that gamers do make the worst movie fans because they do hate any deviation from the original source material. When Silent Hill was announced, people lost their minds over the fact that the Harry Mason role was going to be a woman instead. I too have often said that the problem with making live action theater* movies on video games is that, for them to be successful, they have to appeal to a larger audience than the fans of that game.

But

This trailer just went too far in removing itself from the game setting if it were to be a feature film. While I can dig on the idea of toning down the fantastical elements of MK, taking them completely out means that you have a movie with little to no fan appeal and, to the non-fan, the MK name isn't going to mean anything so little to no appeal to the general public. Why should I, as a fan of the games, care about a movie whose only similarities are that the characters have the same name and some superficial similarities (and, to top it off, took the "dark and gritty" route which has become REALLY played out?)?


It's a balancing act. You have to leave enough of the game setting to get the game fans into the theater without making the movie completely inaccessable to the general public. You have to make the movie appealing enough to bring in the general public without abandoning the core parts of the game that bring the game fans in. If this movie were made in the theaters, it would flop worse than the second because it appeals to neither. The general public doesn't have any idea who these people are and you've already seen the reaction of the game fans.

As a sidenote, the first did well because they essentially made "Enter The Dragon" with super powers thus keeping the balance.


*I put the qualifier there because Advent Children proved that there is an alternate route to making these movies. Animate them and then skip the theater route. This way, the costs are lower and you can market directly to the fans.

reply

Locate Kevin Tancharoen's audio interview. He states that [if] WB finances his movie, there WILL be special effects in it that will compliment the game's storyline. They will be toned down from the first two movies and made to be more "believable", but they WILL be implemented. The "Rebirth" video was a $7,500 PITCH. It was just to show that Tancharoen had what it took to make a contemporary adaptation of the movie if he was granted the money and backing to do so.

reply

Fair enough but I'm talking about tone as opposed to special effects. While special effects are a part of the tone, you would still have a movie that was completely removed from the core elements and tone of the game.

It's like if you made Silent Hill into a love story. You could write it really well and have completely believable characters and, at the end of the day, it would still be a case of "Why is this called Silent Hill?"

I think that the best way to make my point is for you to watch another fan trailer called Grayson. It's a little darker in tone and a little more dramatic than the Adam West Batman series that it is supposedly a sequel to. However, after watching it, it is still completely believable as taking place in the Adam West Batman 'verse.

With this, I would watch the trailer and say "Okay, they've slapped the names on the characters and they're having a tournament (Since we're doing the dark and gritty realistic route, why wouldn't they just surround the place and shut it down? Even if it were in a foreign country, you could either invoke extradition treaties or you could just tail the people and pick them up individually.) but there really isn't any reason to call it Mortal Kombat"

In the end, regardless of setting, Mortal Kombat has been placed in a fantasy setting where gods watch over a tournament that determines the fate of the realms. Going from that to a realistic setting with serial killers in dingy back alleys just isn't going to pull people in.

reply

Here's a word of advice, if it gets made into a movie...DON'T GO SEE IT. If it is not made under the "principles" that you obviously to hold so highly in regard, then it's a decision that you've already made. You don't agree with the director's philosophy behind the plot's updates and changes, then don't go see it. It's THAT simple. This is America, and you have the right to disagree, and the right not to follow. Please choose both those rights if the movie ever comes about. I'd rather see you do THAT, than to go see it, then condemn it based on views that you had months, or YEARS before the movie ever saw the light of day.

reply

I wouldn't as it is now.* And, unlike most IMDB members, I wouldn't even go on the movie's board and trash it.

But it hasn't been made and the discussion is about whether gaming purists are the worst movie fans and whether this would be a good direction to take a remake in. So I've been treating this as the theoretical discussion that it is.

*Given that the first Resident Evil movie had a completely different script before Paul Anderson decided to make it about his wife, things change.

reply

I was just wondering ,

who owns the rights of the mortal kombat franchise ?

and why hasn't "lions gate" picked this up yet : P .

reply

It's all WB; threshold is just butthurt about their new plans for an MK movie.

I have tasted the FLESH OF FALLEN ANGELS!

reply

I'm fine with some deviations from the source material, but there has to be a limit somewhere. Taken as an original concept, it's a decent short film, but it's barely recognizable as Mortal Kombat.

Honestly, would you call what the director did to Baraka and Reptile slight deviations? I wouldn't, they have almost nothing in common with the characters in appearance or background. But that only makes sense, you can't make them realistic, so he shouldn't have tried. Plus, the urban, American environment felt too different from the style of most of the games, as well as making several of the hero characters into cops.

If you're going to make Mortal Kombat realistic, only use the characters that can be presented as realistic without completely changing who they are. Many of the original characters can be translated, such as Liu Kang, Johnny Cage, Kano, and Sonya. Even Scorpion and Sub-Zero could be made realistic. They couldn't keep their powers or supernatural aspects(Sub-Zero's ice powers and Scorpion being undead), but they could still be depicted as ninjas from rival clans with the reason for their rivalry retained.

reply