@DeanGagaKennedy@AnimalMan65 So what if they're on board for the film is because they liked Cregger's previous two films? Is there anything wrong with that? Those films are great and once again, taste is subjective. Ain't nobody said Cregger is "the best in the genre". Where are ur comprehension skills lmaoo
@Drop_The_Colony@kakemakes Going back to the tweet below, we have yet to see the full Cregger film yet so many are so quick to judge. Cregger has had a great track record so far with his films and I believe that he can adapt RE's essence - the mechanics, in his film.
https://t.co/aMZ7fNQ1ec
@Drop_The_Colony@kakemakes What makes an RE game: survival horror built on strict resource management, spatial navigation puzzles, and biological threats. Not characters, not names - because if you really look deeper, most of the RE characters often lack traditional psychological depth, which makes it-
@Drop_The_Colony@kakemakes -hard to adapt to film. Also Capcom-Constantin's contract regarding film rights: The agreement legally prevents the live-action films from being set directly in the video games' universe, forcing creative differences and separate settings.
@Drop_The_Colony@kakemakes You're missing my point but I'll bite. The "modern" RE storyline that you're referring to which RE9 is a part of, introduces several major changes and perceived lore rewrite aka retcon. So with your logic, Zach Cregger's RE film is setting up the modern RE film storyline too?
@Drop_The_Colony@kakemakes lmao the ship isn't Umbrella, it was The Connections. The overarching antagonist of the RE series first explicitly introduced only in RE7. And if you remove Chris, who literally only appeared in the last 5secs of the game, it'll still be a great game without the RE name.
@SaintCP682@galaxygash Exactly, that's the one thing that we can't change. Given the years of backlash for the films (which the profits were insane) yet they're still going. In a way, yeah, I understand why Constantin keeps renewing the rights. It's a business after all.
@SaintCP682@galaxygash Filmmakers are required to alter specific plot points, settings, or character arcs. They can borrow elements, but they cannot legally adapt the game narratives beat-for-beat. So, with that, they can either do what Paul WS did, or what Zach Cregger, which imo is the right move
@SaintCP682@galaxygash Absolutely. However, you forget that when Capcom and Constantin signed the contract giving Constantin the rights to make live-action films, clause stated that direct 1:1 direct carbon copies of the games are not allowed.
@AdrielDee@galaxygash@Achatwithmyself So what is Resident Evil: Gaiden??? Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles??? Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City??? Resident Evil Survivor 2 Code: Veronica???? Like plsssssss let's all use our thinking hats here
@SaintCP682@galaxygash And if you lack comprehension skills, it has already been mentioned that Capcom rejected/rejects scripts that are too similar to the games because:
1. They absolutely can.
2. They want to protect their own IP and games.
@SaintCP682@galaxygash First of all, you're talking about a literal *30 seconds* TRAILER for a RE game. The reason why it was so well received because it had great atmosphere for its format and it was intended to build hype for the game. Remember, that trailer is 30 seconds, a film is 1.5 hours.
@galaxygash That part. And also imo I don't even think adapting the games directly would even work as most of them are mainly very gameplay-based games and even there are story bits, the characters lack cinematic character arcs. Just play the damn games lmaooooooo