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

But you were questioning why license it (as if expending money to pay for the license), but it is their own stuff =p

I liked the recent racing movies I saw, be them biographies or the Le Mans Ford "documentary".

Fast and Furious is a racing franchise and it earned a lot of money.

The Le Mans film was terrific, the first couple of Fast & Furious movies were entertaining, if nothing else. But these are not based on games. I saw Driver and Need for Speed, which was plenty for me. I love cars, racing and movies about them, and I'm a GT fan since 1997, but I still find this project meaningless for my above mentioned reasons. Hey, maybe they manage to make something entertaining out of it, who knows? I hope so.

Movies based in games for the most part have been terrible, still we got Sonic, Detective Pikachu and a few others that were great. We also had some fun ones even if bad like Mortal Kombat.

So the reason GT movie could be bad (or unnecessary) would have more to do with being based on a game than being a racing movie from your own admission =p (which isn't wrong by the way). I hope it ends up being great, but yes the stakes are against it. At least Sony started well with Uncharted, let's see TLOU and pray they don't destroy it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."