| PAOerfulone said: Unless they go the LOTR/Harry Potter route and make it a series of multiple films, each between 2 1/2 to 3 hours in length, covering an entire story arc, I still think Zelda would work better as a TV series than a movie. There is A LOT of lore, world-building, story-telling, and characters to cover in Zelda. Especially in some of the later 3D games like Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, Breath of the Wild, and Tears of the Kingdom. They can't condense a standard Zelda story down to a single 90-120 minute movie. They'd need a LOTR-length trilogy just for something like Ocarina of Time! First film - Prologue, 1st half/Child Link section; Second film - 2nd half/Adult Link section. Third film - Final battle w/ Ganondorf, epilogue establishing the Adult and Child timelines that'll lead to Wind Waker/DS games and Majora's Mask/Twilight Princess respectively. If they did it as a TV series, then they would have more room and air time to work w/ by dedicating each part or chapter in a game to its own 45-60 minute episode. Using the Ocarina of Time example again. You could have Episode 1 - Prologue and Young Link intro, Deku Tree, and meeting Zelda. Episode 2 - Kakariko Village, Death Mountain, meeting the Gorons and Darunia. Episode 3 - Zora's Domain, Jabu Jabu's Belly, meeting the Zora and Ruto. Episode 4 - Sidequests, world-building, meeting Malon and Epona, and you end w/ Link being sealed in the Sacred Realm and Ganondorf claiming the Triforce and laying waste to Hyrule as the credits roll. Episode 4 - Link wakes as an adult, meets Sheik, returns to Kokiri Forest, completes the Spirit Temple. And every episode after that could be dedicated to that specific dungeon and part of the world so that each part of Hyrule gets its own episode. You get a Darunia/Goron episode. Then a Ruto/Zora episode. Then a Saria/Kokiri episode. Then a longer Nabooru/Gerudo episode which could also show Ganondorf's origin story. And so on. And this way, you take more of the focus and attention off Link (since I'd imagine Miyamoto and co. would still try to make him silent as much as possible and that would be SIGNIFICANTLY harder to pull off in a movie format) and put it more on Hyrule and the people living in it. I'd love to see them do a movie obviously, but I think a TV series makes more sense for Zelda. But either way, I'd feel much more confident and comfortable if they did it animated as opposed to live-action. Would a live-action Zelda movie make more money than an animated Zelda movie? Absolutely. It would also be a lot easier to fuck up than an animated movie, especially w/ casting. If you don't get it absolutely right on the money, it's going to alienate A LOT of hardcore Zelda fans, who are going to be the majority of the audience for this film. Even if Zelda is more popular than people give it credit for and we're underestimating it, it's still nowhere near the level of mainstream popularity as Mario or Pokemon. It's more geared towards dedicated gamers and nerd culture - People like us. We're the ones who are largely going to determine its box office performance. If the Mario movie's viewing audience ratio is a 50/50 tie between the mainstream casual audience and the dedicated gaming audience. It would be something like 70/30 - gamers, for Zelda. And if it doesn't hit the mark or if it's a disappointment, gamers are gonna tear it to shreds. And that'll cripple a lot of its chances w/ the general, casual audience because they're not nearly as familiar or care as much about Zelda as they do Mario and go see it anyway. Even if they don't play the games like we do, they still know who Mario is, have fond memories of him from childhood, or will take their kids to see it because they know they enjoy it. That portion of the audience is going to be MUCH smaller for Zelda. So by and large, they have to make sure the film meets OUR standards, OUR expectations, and pass OUR viewing tests, if it's going to have a chance of catching on w/ the mainstream audience through word of mouth. And I just think it's going to be much easier for them to do that in an animated format than a live-action one. It may not make as much money, but you know what? AS LONG AS THEY GET IT RIGHT AND THE MOVIE IS GOOD OR EVEN GREAT... It's going to make a fuck-ton of money anyway!!! And I have A LOT more faith in an animated studio like DreamWorks to get an animated Zelda right than I would for just about any live-action studio to get a live-action Zelda right. The only one that I think would have a shot would be New Line Cinema if they got someone like Peter Jackson, or a director and team who loves and cares for Zelda as much as Jackson and his team did for LOTR to helm the project. But other than that, I think animation is the way to go - TV or movie series. |
I am hoping for a harry potter / LOTR route, if that ain't on the cards, then I agree I personally would rather see it as a TV series if it's only going to be one movie.
| Soundwave said: Now that Nintendo has tasted that sweet, sweet box office $$$$ ... no way do they go TV for Zelda I don't think. Frankly movie theaters and the theater industry need Nintendo too, you can only rely on superhero movies so much, theater chains desperately needed something beyond just that to come along and boost revenues, and voila along comes Mario. |
And if they are not they should be looking at it.
Titled - Smash Bros End Game :P
