By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Nintendo wants to enter the filmmaking biz.

spemanig said:
bigtakilla said:

More than likely I think we can put Star Fox in a grave for a little while. WIth the numbers it pulled I think that will be the game that misses the next generation. 

LoZ is far too obvious, and they got a long time before they are even going to release a next iteration of. The True Zelda NX will be lucky to see five years from 2017 (2022). The best boost to software would be if the movie releases close to it. 

Smash is the obvious first choice, and from their, the next game they will probably want to boost interest in is Xenoblade X (which will look to be coming out in around 2 years). However, with Smash you are introducing a TON of characters. There is also the question if they will just remake 4 and not have a new Smash on NX. So should it come first?.... SHould it come last, after everyone (or at least most) has been introduced?... It could work either way.

One thing is for certain, they will use one to boost the other.

I was thinking about that, and maybe you're right, but making a Star Fox movie would be like putting him in Smash. He's being represented, but it doesn't mean he has any games in the pipeline.

No it's not. You're looking at this business wrong if you think an entry in the franchise needs to release along side it. The movies aren't being made to boost one game. This isn't Ratchet and Clank movie tie in bullshit. It's supposed to build a brand independant of the games. The Avengers aren't being released to increase comic sales. They're being released to increase the number of people who care and know about Iron Man, Captain A, Thor, Ant Man, Hulk, etc.

Honestly, I know I said that sales don't matter for these movies, but your dreaming if you think Xenoblade is getting a movie ever, let alone XCX. Definitely not over Star Fox. You need to lower your expectations way down if you think Nintendo's going to waste money on a plot that won't appeal to anyone. The great thing about Metroid, Zelda, and Star Fox is that their stories are so shallow that they can basically do whatever they want with the movies. They can't do that with Xenoblade.

Also, I don't think (at least if the movie isn't bad) they'll be introducing a lot of characters in a Smash movie. Under my rubric, they'd be introducing Mario characters who need little introduction, Donkey Kong, Kirby, Captain Falcon, maybe Pikachu and Jiggly-Puff, and that's likely it. Thinking Smash 4 roster is thinking way too big for any movie. Think Smash 64, and even that is a bit much. I talked about Zelda and Falco, but I doubt those guys would be in the first Smash movie simply because there'd be way too many characters.

I wouldn't be suprised if the first Smash movie was only: Mario and Luigi (new), Samus (from Metroid movie), Link (from Zelda movie), Fox (from Star Fox movie), Donkey Kong (new), Kirby (new), Captain Falcon (new), Pikachu and Jigglypuff (new), and that's it. From that list, only three of the seven new characters can talk, meaning only three out of the seven characters need to have a real focus on them to introduce their characters. Anymore, and you're really stretching the amount actual plot you can fit into the narrative that doesn't revolve around building new characters.

What about Final Fantasy XV? Or Star Fox with its little Nintendo Direct video? Or Fatal Frame (in Japan)? Or Xenosaga (which series started a year before episode 3 released)? There are probably TONS of examples not being brought up. 

This isn't new.



Around the Network
bigtakilla said:

What about Final Fantasy XV? Or Star Fox with its little Nintendo Direct video? Or Fatal Frame (in Japan)? Or Xenosaga (which series started a year before episode 3 released)? There are probably TONS of examples not being brought up. 

This isn't new.

Those aren't related to this. Nintendo has been clear about this. The films are made to proliferate their IP, not to sell individual games.



spemanig said:
bigtakilla said:

What about Final Fantasy XV? Or Star Fox with its little Nintendo Direct video? Or Fatal Frame (in Japan)? Or Xenosaga (which series started a year before episode 3 released)? There are probably TONS of examples not being brought up. 

This isn't new.

Those aren't related to this. Nintendo has been clear about this. The films are made to proliferate their IP, not to sell individual games.

They go hand and hand. Why release a Zelda film in 2018 when a game isn't coming out until 2022? It makes no business sense.



bigtakilla said:
spemanig said:

Those aren't related to this. Nintendo has been clear about this. The films are made to proliferate their IP, not to sell individual games.

They go hand and hand. Why release a Zelda film in 2018 when a game isn't coming out until 2022? It makes no business sense.

No they don't. The movie aren't being made to sell individual games. They are being made to make their franchises household names again. You're looking at this whole thing with a tunnel vision Nintendo isn't suffering from. This isn't about their games. It's about their IP. It doesn't matter if a new Zelda doesn't come our for 20 years. They'll make a Zelda movie whenever they need to because it's about the Zelda brand. The movie is what they're selling at that point. That's the main Zelda product of that year. This stuff isn't secondary to the games just because they are supplementary to them.



spemanig said:
bigtakilla said:

They go hand and hand. Why release a Zelda film in 2018 when a game isn't coming out until 2022? It makes no business sense.

No they don't. The movie aren't being made to sell individual games. They are being made to make their franchises household names again. You're looking at this whole thing with a tunnel vision Nintendo isn't suffering from. This isn't about their games. It's about their IP. It doesn't matter if a new Zelda doesn't come our for 20 years. They'll make a Zelda movie whenever they need to because it's about the Zelda brand. The movie is what they're selling at that point. That's the main Zelda product of that year. This stuff isn't secondary to the games just because they are supplementary to them.

Do you know what synergy is? Nintendo will be using that, and it's a tried and true business practice. 

If one of the trailers for a Zelda movie is a Zelda game that looks almost exactly like it (and let's face it, we're at that point with consoles) it could do a LOT of good. They aren't going to keep two entertainment branches solo, I promise you. 



Around the Network

I think they should just do a Super Mario CG movie, which sets up a Smash Brothers movie.

Or maybe just go straight to Smash and work backwards. I'm not sure which order would work best.

These should be done with high quality Hollywood writers, bring in the LEGO Movie guys. They know what they're doing.

Smash Brothers movie should then set up like several different films.

Once they have the Smash CG series and more experience working on movies/marketing them, then I'd look into a live action Zelda trilogy type of deal.

joesampson said:
Jon-Erich said:

It's about creative control. Whenever a company licenses a franchise, unless certain stipulations are agreed on, the licensee often has the creative freedom to do whatever they want, which is why we had so many awful video game movies and cartoons. By doing it themselves, Nintendo has complete creative control and they can make sure soomething like the Super Mario Bros. movies never happens again.

You don't need to have complete creative control. Maybe just creative approval. Even then, just don't pick some hack writers/directors on the cheap. In my opinion a Mario movie made by Pixar or Dreamworks would be a huge commercial and critical success. If Nintendo wants to do this right they would license their IP to a reputable Hollywood studio like those. This would ensure that it is a success in the biggest markets like the US and Europe. 

For other Nintendo IPs Zelda, could be done well as either an animated or live action movie, with the right studio, writers, directors, and actors. Donkey Kong could also be successful with a Pixar/Dreamworks studio however it doesn't have quite the mainstream appeal/recognition as Mario and Zelda. The other Nintendo IPs like Kirby and Metroid would likely not have any natural mainstream appeal. They could be successful if done well but it would be because of the quality of the movie and not necessarily the appeal/popularity of the franchise. Like soundswave said about xenoblade, get the hell out of here. That's an adult swim mini series at best. 

But here's the thing about that. A lot of studios don't want to work with companies who stand over them and have to approve everything. This is why a lot of deals like that are not done. They might have certain stipulations in the contract such as the usage of certain source material or that a particular character has to be portrayed a certain way, but in most cases, a studio does not like being told what to do, even if they're working with someone else's property. This does not mean Nintendo won't hire outside directors or hire a special effects group like ILM but I imagine Nintendo would be taking the Marvel Studios approach and having a Japanese equivilent of Kevin Feige be the person in charge of most film projects.



Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com