Slashdot Mirror
Coppola Slams Godfather Game
greysky writes "Gamespot cites an interview on AMC where Coppola reveals that he is upset with Paramount for making his Godfather movies into a video game. He's quoted as saying 'I knew nothing about it. They never asked me if I thought it was a good idea...I think it's a misuse of film'. The interview is set to air on AMC this Sunday."
The game should be based on part III so that way the fewest number of people will care about them ruining the movie.
Hey, look! It's Bono's brother.
If the movie studios piss off enough important people, maybe people will be less quick to sign over their rights and let them run the show.
As someone who has never seen a God Father movie, all I can say is I suppose it sucks for him, but it's not really up to him. If God Father belongs to Paramount, they can do whatever they like.
Really the whole idea of a godfater game is kinda dumb. The best they will be able to do is just make a mafia game so they could just name it something else and avoide the whole "games based on movies suck" negitive image it will get right from the start. Even if this game turnes out super great and is the best game of the year they are still going to have that wall to get over. The movie basis is going to knock the score down no mater what. I'm sure the first thought that crossed everyones mind even fans of the movies was "not another movie converted to a game" :)
Is it that difficult to be original? Do you have to use an existing story? Why would you want to replay the story you've seen 100s of times on TV. Just make a new mafia game, with a new story.
Anyone played the game called Mafia? It was a great game with a good story, set in 1930. So fund a sequal to that game to be set in 1980. I'm sure it would be much more succesfull than a simple remake of a Godfather movie into a game.
...but wasn't the original "Godfather" a book? This is not Coppola's baby, but Mario Puzo's. Even given that Puzo's dead, what is Coppola shooting his mouth off? When they do the film version of "Apocalypse Now", I'll listen.
He adapted the story from a (admittedly inferior) novel by Mario Puzo.
Anyway, if he denounces the project it probably means it's going to be a great game. Based on the last six or eight films he's made, his artistic judgement has gone into the toilet.
Frequently, the people that understand a work of art least of all are the people that created it in the first place. This game may very well suck, but that isn't because it's inherently a bad idea to adapt Godfather, and it isn't because Francis Ford Coppola would know how to do it correctly.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
I never found much of a problem with Godfather III other than the fact that it had Coppola's no-talent daughter in the role intended for Winona Ryder (who is infinitely hotter and almost inifinitely more talented), and that it was kind of boring. Other than Zaza's move against the other families and his assassination, it was nothing compared to the previous movies in terms of action. The final hunt at the opera house was spoiled by the fact that, elsewhere, a "killer cannoli" was being used as a plot device. Oh, and involving the Pope was a definite no-no in terms of keeping the film believable. After all, Michael Corleone was, for all non-romanticizable purposes, just another lowlife.
Otherwise, it wrapped things up nicely. Mike ignored his true family (wife & kids) because of his responsibilities as Godfather all throughout the trilogy, tries to step back into his role as father and husband in the third flick, fails (he's "pulled back in"), and is ultimately rewarded with a long, lonely life and solitary death, long after those he loved, such as his daughter, suffered and died for him. He started in the first film with potential for normalcy (didnt want anything to do with the family business) and brought everything crashing around himself by taking the role and responsibilities of someone with no possible clean way out. If he had died on the steps instead of his skanky incestuous monkey of a daughter (as so many people insist would have been the better ending), it would have been a much worse film.
Okay, maybe it's a little worse than I say it is, but hoonestly, I don't regret having seen it. It did an okay job of capping off its two excellent prequels.
"'I knew nothing about it. They never asked me if I thought it was a good idea...I think it's a misuse of film'"
I don't believe it! An MPAA member ignoring the will of content creators? I would have expected a relationship at least as rosy as RIAA members maintain with their artists...
"...I think it's a misuse of film?" Where exactly is he Coppola quoted as saying that anywhere but slashdot.org? To the "flamebait" up there...you're right. If the rights belong to Paramount, Coppola, regardless of what his status as a film maker is, doesn't really have a say in any of this. He can, however, bitch all he wants.
Was when Sophia Coppola got plugged.
I applauded. Her acting was _that_ bad.
The opposite of progress is congress
What you're saying is, "Lighten up, Francis?"
The opposite of progress is congress
In the early 90s, The Godfather was released for Amiga, Atari and DOS. Check em out at Moby games and the Amiga version specifically at Hall of Light
And meta-mod "flamebait" down. The actors received their pay for their work. They did not retain creative control.
And you reallly should see the Godfather. It was an excellent movie.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Actually, what I hated about Enter the Matrix more than anything is that it got some decent-scoring reviews. Expecially from those hacks from IGN. "Above average" was used in that review. Either way, though, a lot of people would have bought it without reading any reviews. Just shows the state of the industry:
Licenses > Franchises >>> Gameplay.
A few of my friends sorta kinda liked the game too. I thought it sucked.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
Read this fascinating article at failmath.com.
But perhaps it's worth noting that this isn't the first game inspired by The Godfather. In the early '90s, U.S. Gold made a sideview shooter. I remember playing it on the Amiga. (There was also an IBM-compatible version.)
It was pretty, but the gameplay was very limited ... and, as my Mom used to say, it was as slow as molasses in January. :)
Peter
They should have made him an offer he couldn't refuse.
This game may be little more then a shallow attempt to cash in on the Godfather brand / franchise, but without control of the Godfather IP, it is out of Mr Coppola's hands. The best he can do is try to convince die hard fans to stay away from the game.
This is what happens when a director / author / whatever does not hold the rights to a franchise. It is also why I tend to admire George Lucas. Regardless of what you think of George Lucas' films, he has maintained an iron grip on his creation. So Coppola either was never in a position to have that kind of control over the franchise (in which case he has no real grounds to complain), or he sold those rights for a paycheque (in which case he sold his rights to complain right along with it).
That aside, What content creators fail to realize is that its ultimately the fans that decide the fate of the franchise, not its creators. If this game sells well, and it is well received by the fans, then it will become part of the greater franchise.
END COMMUNICATION
Judging past history, this game will sell moderatly as best. With a few expections (such as Goldeneye for the N64) games based on movies are seldom that much of an success.
If the Gameplay sucks, not even the franchise makes it sell. If it's moderatly good, it's easy money obviously.
"Franchise" games usually have nice graphics but not that great gameplay, I blame on the amount of money involved... And if the ingame story is badly done and is ungodfatherlike, then the fans surely get's furious too.
Just to be clear, Coppola adapted Mario Puzo's book, it was not Coppola's original work so your Lucas / Star Wars analogy is off. Coppola was just a worker, he did an excellent job and deserves a hell of a lot of credit for that, but that's it.
The situations caused by artist rights and license holders are strange. On one hand we get the delay of the home edition of the animated Heavy Metal movie, where the license for the songs used weren't covered for home video distribution. On the other, we get the studio being able to create an entirely different creation based on the work of a director without his permission, even though the likenesses of any of the actors would have to be individually secured.