Castlevania movie drops whip for sword [Joystiq]

[DP ServBot]

Filed under: Culture (http://www.joystiq.com/category/culture/), Action (http://www.joystiq.com/category/action/)

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2008/07/castleignor.jpg (http://www.cc2k.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1327&Itemid=2)

Despite two-year-old assurances that "the whip is still in it (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/06/28/castlevania-movie-the-whip-is-still-in-it/)" it seems that, if an early script review is any indication, the Belmont's signature weapon has been knocked down to bit player in the Castlevania script by Paul W.S. Anderson, who has seen fit to make Simon live by the sword.

Here's the word from CC2K writer "Big Ross" who says "Though I said Vampire Killer is gone from this script, Simon does wield what is described as a chain whip in two instances. However, it is nondescript and in one of the occasions is wielded as an off-hand weapon. So what is Simon armed with throughout the film? A f***ing sword."

No, that doesn't sound particularly encouraging to us. But, hey, at least the rest of the script review is almost entirely negative.

[Via AICN (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37452)]

Read | Permalink (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/castlevania-movie-drops-whip-for-sword/) | Email this (http://www.joystiq.com/forward/1255567/) | Comments (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/castlevania-movie-drops-whip-for-sword/#comments)

http://imageads.googleadservices.com/pagead/ads?format=468x30_aff_img&client=ca-aol_weblogs_xml&channel=Joystiq_07_RSS&output=png&cuid=11-1255567&url=http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/15/castlevania-movie-drops-whip-for-sword/
http://feeds.joystiq.com/~f/weblogsinc/joystiq?i=UexCcj</img> (http://feeds.joystiq.com/~f/weblogsinc/joystiq?a=UexCcj) http://feeds.joystiq.com/~f/weblogsinc/joystiq?i=e5MFIj</img> (http://feeds.joystiq.com/~f/weblogsinc/joystiq?a=e5MFIj)
http://feeds.joystiq.com/~r/weblogsinc/joystiq/~4/335778317

More... (http://feeds.joystiq.com/~r/weblogsinc/joystiq/~3/335778317/)

[mailman187666]

its shit like this that makes people not like videogame based movies. They leave out the damn Vampire killer and now what else do we have? shoulda just stuck Alucard as the main character if that is the case. The less trademark things they leave out, the further it goes away from being based on the game *cough* Mario *cough*

[MrSparkle]

*cough* WHAT THE HELL!!! maybe they should change the name of the Belmont family to smith. Oh thats just crazy old richter smith hes always on it about vampires and upside down castles. Also maybe he should instead of fighting Dracula's army of demons and the undead fight communism. And they could change the title to Mr Smith goes to... oh fuck it this just sucks.

[CosmicMonkey]

If they want to make a Vampire film where the hero wields a sword that's fine, just don't call it Castlevania.

If you're gonna do something, do it properly and accurately, otherwise what's the damn point (other than the obvious answer of milking the IP for $£)?

[Jorpho]

And make it set in Modern Times! And Dracula's actually the head of an Evil Corporation! And instead of zombies, he just has an army of Robots! Powered by Nanotechnology! And Richter finds bottles of Vitamin Water!

[RadiantSvgun]

Lame! Thats part of Castlevania! What's next? Dracula being replaced by Fred Durst? Ugh....

[Icarus Moonsight]

First the fighter now this? Leave me alone people! *fetal position*

[Dreamc@sting]

Wow..hollywood continues to prove themselves...there are so many good IP's to turn into movies but they just butcher them...and what for? why take a game like Castlevania which has pulled in millions and change what made it sell so well and suck in so many fans?

Woooo go hollywood...you suck

[heybtbm]

I love Kotaku's headline for this story. It was almost Onion-esque.

FYI: They already made this movie...it was called Van Helsing, and it sucked.

[calthaer]

I am 99% sure that I will not be seeing the piece-of-crap movie that that reviewer just described. This "Anderson" tool needs to get together with Uwe Boll - they're made for each other.

[Oobgarm]

This Is Castlevania Movie

It Is Made Of Sword And Fail

[Push Upstairs]

Lame! Thats part of Castlevania! What's next? Dracula being replaced by Fred Durst? Ugh....

Fred Durst is more evil than Dracula could ever be.

[exit]

I've defended Anderson in the past and thought that Resident Evil was a great movie, since they actually tried to do something different with it and we didn't end up with another Mario Bros. movie. The sequels didn't follow the same suit (especially RE:A), but they were entertaining for what they were worth.

This however is complete bullshit, Simon Belmont without his whip? As stated above, they could just change Simon to Alucard and it would be passable, but they just want to be fucking idiots about it. Using the Castlevania name is just pointless now, they could just title it something else and leave the damn game alone.

[koster]

FYI: They already made this movie...it was called Blade, and it was ok.
Fixed. :)

[Icarus Moonsight]

Whoa... Simon is a black human/vampire hybrid? What game was this revealed?!?! I thought I have played them all. Apparently not. LOL

[E Nice]

Shh...don't give 'em anymore ideas on how to ruin a Castlevania movie.

[Rob2600]

Simon Belmont without his whip? As stated above, they could just change Simon to Alucard and it would be passable, but they just want to be fucking idiots about it. Using the Castlevania name is just pointless now, they could just title it something else and leave the damn game alone.

This shouldn't come as a surprise. Michael Bay did the same thing to the Transformers in 2007. He completely ruined the character designs, voices, personalities, and backstory. Supposedly, the Castlevania movie will be no different.

[Aussie2B]

I'm not surprised considering the popularity of the recent IGA games.

For what it's worth, though, Simon did use a sword in Haunted Castle. It's the best weapon in the game. Yes, I played that far, and I actually enjoyed it. :P I even beat it.

[Jorpho]

On the other hand, was there ever a movie in which a whip was actually used extensively as a combat weapon? Indy never spent much time actually whipping people. Batman Returns also comes to mind.

[Icarus Moonsight]

"Just the pussy I was looking for."

I'm sure this decision was reached through focus group research where the focus group consensus was "Whips are for pussies." C'mon, you know that's how it went down. ;)

[CosmicMonkey]

I'm sure this decision was reached through focus group research where the focus group consensus was "Whips are for pussies." C'mon, you know that's how it went down. ;)

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc268/SenatorJeffSmith/Raiders_of_the_Lost_Ark_2.jpg

Methinks Dr. Jones would disagree.

[Icarus Moonsight]

double time... whoops.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I disagree as well. I love Indy, Castlevania and Catwoman (not the movie! LOL). The lower than average population of a focus group is who they more than likely took the word of though. Go get 'em Dr. Jones!

[RadiantSvgun]

I love Kotaku's headline for this story. It was almost Onion-esque.

FYI: They already made this movie...it was called Van Helsing, and it sucked.


Whoa... Simon is a black human/vampire hybrid? What game was this revealed?!?! I thought I have played them all. Apparently not. LOL

Yeah, I'm missing that game too. @.@


I'm not surprised considering the popularity of the recent IGA games.

For what it's worth, though, Simon did use a sword in Haunted Castle. It's the best weapon in the game. Yes, I played that far, and I actually enjoyed it. :P I even beat it.

Haunted Castle is pretty fun, its not that hard once you memorize a few tricks here and there, but for the most part, its quarter stealing hard.

[rbudrick]

It gets worse. I just read that they are doing away with the sword and his main weapon will be farts. With his ass.

-Rob

[Icarus Moonsight]

Wario: It's a me! Wario!

Anderson: But, what happened to Simon?

Wario: He had a sack of garlic on his hip so I ate him. Let's make some money... err... movies! Yeah! wahaha! *atomic fart* (From a dessert vantage a mushroom cloud erupts over Hollywood) (Star Wipe) (Credits)

[TonyTheTiger]

I don't get it. It's not like a whip (chain or otherwise) is that hard to work with. Antonio Banderas shot people with a friggin' guitar for crying out loud. So it's not like they wracked their brains trying to figure out how to use the whip and couldn't come up with something. This is just a case of Anderson doing what he does best: cookie cutter filmmaking.

He makes movies from what's probably an instruction manual written by the same people who give us those "How to Draw Manga" books. "Whip? That's not a common weapon. And it's not mentioned in this how-to book at all! This book keeps talking about swords. I guess I have no choice. The book has spoken."

[Rob2600]

He makes movies from what's probably an instruction manual written by the same people who give us those "How to Draw Manga" books. "Whip? That's not a common weapon. And it's not mentioned in this how-to book at all! This book keeps talking about swords. I guess I have no choice. The book has spoken."

Hilarious! :)

[Zap!]

As much as I hate new laws, Congress has to propose a new law to the Constitution:

Ammendment 28: No one shall write, direct, produce, or star in any movie based on a video game, cartoon, toy, or book unless they were huge fans of the original when they were younger.

Had this been law, Michael asshole Bay would have been arrested for his mangling of Transformers.

[Jorpho]

Ammendment 28: No one shall write, direct, produce, or star in any movie based on a video game, cartoon, toy, or book unless they were huge fans of the original when they were younger.

Had this been law, Michael asshole Bay would have been arrested for his mangling of Transformers.

Except the Transformers movie actually got pretty good reviews and made enough bagfuls of money that the sequel got the go-ahead. OH SNAP

[Rob2600]

Except the Transformers movie actually got pretty good reviews and made enough bagfuls of money that the sequel got the go-ahead. OH SNAP

I don't care what the reviews said, Transformers (2007) was an abomination, both as an action movie and as a Transformers movie.

[Zap!]

Except the Transformers movie actually got pretty good reviews and made enough bagfuls of money that the sequel got the go-ahead. OH SNAP

And those reviewers were 50-75 year old men and women who obviously weren't obsessive TF fans in the mid-80's like us, so F'em. They should have no say.

[Jorpho]

And those reviewers were 50-75 year old men and women who obviously weren't obsessive TF fans in the mid-80's like us, so F'em. They should have no say.

And neither should the thousands upon thousands of people who bought tickets and DVDs, then? Or the people who read these reviews by 50-75 year old critics often enough to keep such critics in business?

It is one thing when a director (and writers, producers, etc) tampers with the source material and creates an abomination that has no merit as a movie, much less as an adaptation. But when the product is an undisputably resounding success by at least some standards, it is not time to start calling for constitutional amendments!

[TonyTheTiger]

As much as I hate new laws, Congress has to propose a new law to the Constitution:

Ammendment 28: No one shall write, direct, produce, or star in any movie based on a video game, cartoon, toy, or book unless they were huge fans of the original when they were younger.

Had this been law, Michael asshole Bay would have been arrested for his mangling of Transformers.

I vehemently disagree for two reasons:

1) I actually found that Bay made Transformers authentic enough. Big robots, boom! I don't see how it could have been made any more accurate without resorting to things that were stupid even back then (Megatron turning into a handgun for instance). Whether or not it was actually a good movie, that's a whole other issue. Personally, I think it's a fun popcorn flick. Which, in reality, is what Transformers has always been about anyway. We watch it for the "Big robots, boom!"

2) Honestly, I think die hard fans of the video game should stay the hell away from movies about that video game. Otherwise you end up with a fanboy circle jerk of a debacle. The first step to making a good video game movie is to...gasp...make a good movie. The problem isn't really that Anderson is screwing with Castlevania so much that he's just not a good filmmaker at all. Video game or otherwise. This movie could be called "Monster Assassin" and it would be the same cookie cutter nonsense as it would under the title "Castlevania."

In fact, this sort of ties into my first point. A lot of the people who scream for Michael Bay's head on a silver platter for "ruining" Transformers seem to have little idea of how to make the movie better outside of "OMG how did they not include this guy/weapon/music?"

I happen to think the biggest flaw of the film had nothing to do with the Autobots and Decepticons themselves. It had to do with the fact that they were trying to imitate Independence Day's structure of following different people from different walks of life in the disaster but appeared to have stopped half way through so that aspect fell flat.

[Zap!]

And neither should the thousands upon thousands of people who bought tickets and DVDs, then? Or the people who read these reviews by 50-75 year old critics often enough to keep such critics in business?

It is one thing when a director (and writers, producers, etc) tampers with the source material and creates an abomination that has no merit as a movie, much less as an adaptation. But when the product is an undisputably resounding success by at least some standards, it is not time to start calling for constitutional amendments!

Look, I don't hate TF the movie. It was pretty good, but it wasn't TF. Nothing like the old cartoon or comic book. Go on TF forums and see how much the hardcore fans like the movie. They don't. Michael Bay is in his mid 40's, and he was not a fan of TF in the mid 80's. He's even stated that (obviously, he was too old). He had no business directing that movie. Someone who was a hardcore fan like myself should have directed it.

BTW, the Constitutional Amendment was satire.

[Zap!]

I vehemently disagree for two reasons:

1) I actually found that Bay made Transformers authentic enough. Big robots, boom! I don't see how it could have been made any more accurate without resorting to things that were stupid even back then (Megatron turning into a handgun for instance). Whether or not it was actually a good movie, that's a whole other issue. Personally, I think it's a fun popcorn flick. Which, in reality, is what Transformers has always been about anyway. We watch it for the "Big robots, boom!"

2) Honestly, I think die hard fans of the video game should stay the hell away from movies about that video game. Otherwise you end up with a fanboy circle jerk of a debacle. The first step to making a good video game movie is...gasp...making a good movie first. The problem isn't really that Anderson is screwing with Castlevania so much that he's just not a good filmmaker at all. Video game or otherwise.

In fact, this sort of ties into my first point. A lot of the people who scream for Michael Bay's head on a silver platter for "ruining" Transformers seem to have little idea of how to make the movie better outside of "OMG how did they not include this guy/weapon/music?"

I happen to think the biggest flaw of the film had nothing to do with the Autobots and Decepticons themselves. It had to do with the fact that they were trying to imitate Independence Day's structure of following different people from different walks of life in the disaster but appeared to have stopped half way through so that aspect fell flat.


Why was Bumblebee a Camero? How did Bumblebee change from a beat-up, late 70's Camero to a brand new Camero in seconds? Transformers don't have magical powers, they can't do that. Why wasn't Sparkplug Witwicky a mechanic? Where was the Arc? TF came here 4 million years go. Why was TF history re-written? Where was Teletron 1? But you want to know the absolute WORST part? the guy who voiced Megatron in the cartoon was contacted, but Michael Bay said he didn't like his voice, and it wasn't mean enough. For that I can NEVER forgive him.

[TonyTheTiger]

Look, I don't hate TF the movie. It was pretty good, but it wasn't TF. Nothing like the old cartoon or comic book.

It had big robots named Optimus Prime and Megatron. They were leaders of warring factions of machines from a distant planet called Cybertron. They change into various Earth vehicles. Optimus Prime was voiced by Peter Cullen. The good robots befriended a teenager. Hell, they even played the cheesy transforming sound (which, by the way, was jarring and probably a bad inclusion).

...I fail to see where this is nothing like the old cartoon or comic book. They seem to have gotten all the major points down while including a few 'nods' in the meantime.


Go on TF forums and see how much the hardcore fans like the movie. They don't.

Hence my comment about the "fanboy circle jerk." Really, what were these hardcore fans expecting? I'm a hardcore Castlevania fan and I'd be appalled if I walked into a Castlevania movie and saw Simon walking slowly to the rhythm of the Belmont Power Strut while whipping random floating candles, killing one skeleton, two skeleton, three skeleton, one Medusa head, two Medusa head, a Merman, a boss, grabbing the glowing red orb, and moving on. I'd be both appalled and confused. Just like I'd be appalled and confused if I walked into a Zelda movie and Link didn't say anything other then "AAAAYYAAAA!!!!" And Megatron turning into a handgun appalled and confused me even at 7 years old. So, frankly, it's good that they gave that the boot.


Michael Bay is in his mid 40's, and he was not a fan of TF in the mid 80's. He's even stated that (obviously, he was too old). He had no business directing that movie. Someone who was a hardcore fan like myself should have directed it.

BTW, the Constitutional Amendment was satire.

Before you can adapt something to a target medium, you have to know what makes a good entry in that target medium in the first place. Unless you know how to make a good movie, you aren't going to make a good movie adaptation of anything, fan or not. The fact that someone is a hardcore fan of something in no way suggests that person is capable of adapting it to an entirely different medium with different "rules" and stuff. Why not reverse this? Do you think video game adaptations of movies would be better if the filmmakers themselves sat down to develop it? Something tells me the answer would be a resounding "no."


Why was Bumblebee a Camero?

Because Volkswagon refused to grant the use of their car in a violent action movie. And, wow, big big problem, right?


How did Bumblebee change from a beat-up, late 70's Camero to a brand new Camero in seconds?

Magic.


Transformers don't have magical powers, they can't do that.

You're seriously nitpicking and you know it. They can mimic vehicles. So the movie sped it up a bit. Big deal.


Why wasn't Sparkplug Witwicky a mechanic?

What was he? I don't recall them mentioning his career.


Where was the Arc? TF came here 4 million years go. Why was TF history re-written? Where was Teletron 1? But you want to know the absolute WORST part? the guy who voiced Megatron in the cartoon was contacted, but Michael Bay said he didn't like his voice, and it wasn't mean enough. For that I can NEVER forgive him.

"The guy who voiced Megatron"? I do hope you know Frank Welker's name. Besides, what you're proposing are pretty minor details perhaps with the exception of Welker. I can't even come close to taking it seriously when you complain about when the Autobots showed up or Sparkplug's job. The movie would be in no way improved if they included everything you listed.

I don't get how Bumblebee as a Camaro and Sparkplug perhaps not being a mechanic somehow make the movie unlike the source material when it did include all of the most important aspects.

But you did prove my point that die hard fans have to stay the hell away from film adaptations.

[Rob2600]

I agree with White Knight. As a fan of the original Transformers cartoon series and movie, I thought the new movie was a waste of time and money. The Transformers were barely in the movie and barely spoke. Also, their robot forms were completely idiotic looking and they took too long to transform. The whole thing was stupid.

This thread is already off topic as it is, so I'll refrain from listing the many other things that were wrong with the movie.

[Jorpho]

He had no business directing that movie. Someone who was a hardcore fan like myself should have directed it.

And then they might have ended up with a product that would have made no sense to the public at large and subsequently only made a tenth of the profits. But gee, they would have pleased all those legions of Hardcore Fans, and that's what counts, not making hundreds of millions of dollars, right?


I'm a hardcore Castlevania fan and I'd be appalled if I walked into a Castlevania movie and saw Simon walking slowly to the rhythm of the Belmont Power Strut while whipping random floating candles

Ooh, how surrealist! (But then, from what little I know of the Resident Evil movies, they can be kind of surrealist too.)

[boatofcar]

Hence my comment about the "fanboy circle jerk." Really, what were these hardcore fans expecting? I'm a hardcore Castlevania fan and I'd be appalled if I walked into a Castlevania movie and saw Simon walking slowly to the rhythm of the Belmont Power Strut while whipping random floating candles, killing one skeleton, two skeleton, three skeleton, one Medusa head, two Medusa head, a Merman, a boss, grabbing the glowing red orb, and moving on. I'd be both appalled and confused. Just like I'd be appalled and confused if I walked into a Zelda movie and Link didn't say anything other then "AAAAYYAAAA!!!!" And Megatron turning into a handgun appalled and confused me even at 7 years old. So, frankly, it's good that they gave that the boot.


QFT. Awesome post.

[Icarus Moonsight]

If it was a little less played with it wouldn't be so bad. I can understand using a mace or a flail, hell, even the leg of a table to crush a skeleton. But the Vampire Killer whip is a main plot device of the franchise if not THE main one. If they make his sword the Vampire Killer then I guess that will pass for many people. Maybe tie it in with another beloved story like it was once Excalibur or something and it changes form and function to suit it's current purpose. Even still, I'll have secret wishes that the sword can break into connected segments and resemble a whip like the Ivy Sword from Soul Calibur. :D

[Berserker]

One can't help but wonder if these guys intentionally fuck with crucial elements of game/cartoon series just to gauge how popular the movie might be by way of how big of a negative reaction they get from fans.

Really though, there's no excuse not to have the whip. It's totally possible to just CG a whip in and have it do all kinds of neat and normally impossible things that would add a lot from a visual-panache standpoint, which must appeal to Anderson who seems to go for visuals-over-substance most of the time, and in that regard there'd be much more possibilities there than you would get from simply giving him a sword instead.

There just seems to be no foreseeable benefit to such a decision, especially when taking into account how it's going to twist in the craw of most people whom you'd want to see your movie.

[Push Upstairs]

You guys get your panties in a bunch over a missing whip when you clearly have forgotten the "Captain N" interpretation of Simon Belmont.

Would you rather have *him* on the big screen?

[Rob2600]

You guys get your panties in a bunch over a missing whip when you clearly have forgotten the "Captain N" interpretation of Simon Belmont.

Would you rather have *him* on the big screen?

Actually, I would prefer him on the big screen. It'd be hilarious...and he used a whip! :)

[TonyTheTiger]

Actually, I would prefer him on the big screen. It'd be hilarious...and he used a whip! :)

I agree. In fact, Captain N's Simon was really really awesome. And, if you think about it, is a breath of fresh air from the traditional dark brooding tough guy vampire hunter. Simon in Captain N is more like the constantly improvising Indiana Jones where at any given moment he thinks "Holy shit, I'm gonna die."

And you better believe that if I were directing a Castlevania movie, there'd be at least one point where Simon pulls out a mirror and admires himself. I would just have to do it.

Come to think of it, when I think of what Simon's personality should be like, I think Captain N. Mainly because when I think of every other Belmont I think of the steadfast tough guy. Simon as an arrogant, slightly cowardly, and somewhat bumbling vampire hunter of all things provides a nice divergence from the norm.

[Garry Silljo]

You people are insane. The Captain N Simon is absolutely horrible. There is no reasonable grounds to believe that version of Simon could conquer even one level of Castlevania. He'd go in, see some enemies, see that the place hadn't been dusted in ages, and run away. I don't mind if Simon is full of himself, like overly cocky about his abilities, but instead they took the approach of giving Vanity Smurf a whip.... no.... just no.

[TonyTheTiger]

You people are insane. The Captain N Simon is absolutely horrible. There is no reasonable grounds to believe that version of Simon could conquer even one level of Castlevania. He'd go in, see some enemies, see that the place hadn't been dusted in ages, and run away. I don't mind if Simon is full of himself, like overly cocky about his abilities, but instead they took the approach of giving Vanity Smurf a whip.... no.... just no.

But isn't that interesting (if not a little campy)? I remember when Roger Ebert explained why Indiana Jones is a better character than Lara Croft. He said it's because sometimes it's fun to watch a hero not be very heroic and improvise his way through trouble all the while being scared shitless. I'm not saying that's something I'd like to see every Belmont do, but one out of 6 or 7 could make for some good fun.

[boatofcar]

Once again, I agree with Tony. The Captain N version of Simon would be a riot.

[kainemaxwell]

What a way to drop the ball. There's so much more they go do with a whip in a movie then a sword that we haven't already seen one way or another.

[Kaine2071]

Hope you never drop them balls boy 'cos damn do I love that squeaky voice of yers. Come give grandpa some sugar!

[Push Upstairs]

Simon as an arrogant, slightly cowardly, and somewhat bumbling vampire hunter of all things provides a nice divergence from the norm.

So you want Hugh Grant to play Simon Belmont?

[TonyTheTiger]

So you want Hugh Grant to play Simon Belmont?

I'm thinking more Simon Pegg.

[Garry Silljo]

I'm thinking more Simon Pegg.

Well he does have experience with the undead. That's a plus.

[TonyTheTiger]

I genuinely think it would surprise movie goers. While everyone is conditioned to think of the personality traits of D, Van Helsing, Blade, etc. when they're presented with a movie about the greatest vampire hunter ever, to sit down and get two hours of conceit and buffoonery from the hero (all while being set to a pretty serious backdrop, mind you) would just astound people. Didn't Shigeru Miyamoto once say something about giving people the things they don't know they want?

[calthaer]

No, the reason the Transformers movie is bad is not because they "mangled" the license. They did OK in that regard as far as I'm concerned.

It's bad because there is bad character development. There are too many people running around that aren't well-developed - like that blonde chick and her fat hacker sidekick. We see them a few times in the movie, but - who are they and why should we care? The bad guys hardly have any dialogue whatsoever, so it's hard to really hate them. Compare that to lines like "Such heroic nonsense - BAM!" and you come up way short.

That, and there's just ridiculous nonsense in there. Secret map to the megacube BURNED INTO SOMEONE'S BIFOCALS!!!!1 ON EBAYS!!!! OH NOES!!! And the Autobots sneaking around the parents' lawn while the mom tries to talk to the son about masturbation? Seriously. I thought the way that Transformers hid was...y'know...to turn into cars and such - not try to hide their thirty-foot-tall bodies behind the shrubbery.

Universal Soldier had a better plotline than that. And I'll bet it's going to have a better plotline AND better acting than the Castlevania movie.

[Dr. Dib]

How did this topic go from the Castlevania movie to Transformers?

Anyway, as someone said before the problem with taking out the Vampire Killer is that it has been a main part of the Castlevania in nearly every game. It would basically be like remaking Star Wars, keeping the main plot intact, but leaving out the force. You're leaving out a major plot point.

Though here we may be starting to worry a lot for nothing. Am I disappointed that they took out the whip? Well yeah, I don't really think it can be considered a true Castlevania movie without it, but if they use the sword, call it the Vampire Killer, and keep the backstory intact I think it could be passable. Sure it wouldn't be the same as the game, but it might still be a good movie. We won't know it until we see it.

The problem with adapting anything from its original format to a new format is that the hardcore fans are going to take a "they changed it now it sucks" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks) attitude if they change anything big or small. We simply have to realize that Hollywood really doesn't care too much about us. The hardcore fans probably make up a small part of moviegoers anyway and they are going to see the movie so they can complain about it. The people making the movie are just in it for the money. I doubt many care about their original source material.

But so long as this doesn't get as changed as much as Dragon Ball I think it could be okay.

[kainemaxwell]

If the "Vampire Killer" ends up being some sword, then I'll be pissed.

[Garry Silljo]

It would basically be like remaking Star Wars, keeping the main plot intact, but leaving out the force.


Actually it's more like leaving out lightsabers and replacing them with whips.

[TonyTheTiger]

How did this topic go from the Castlevania movie to Transformers?

Anyway, as someone said before the problem with taking out the Vampire Killer is that it has been a main part of the Castlevania in nearly every game. It would basically be like remaking Star Wars, keeping the main plot intact, but leaving out the force. You're leaving out a major plot point.

Though here we may be starting to worry a lot for nothing. Am I disappointed that they took out the whip? Well yeah, I don't really think it can be considered a true Castlevania movie without it, but if they use the sword, call it the Vampire Killer, and keep the backstory intact I think it could be passable. Sure it wouldn't be the same as the game, but it might still be a good movie. We won't know it until we see it.

The problem with adapting anything from its original format to a new format is that the hardcore fans are going to take a "they changed it now it sucks" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks) attitude if they change anything big or small. We simply have to realize that Hollywood really doesn't care too much about us. The hardcore fans probably make up a small part of moviegoers anyway and they are going to see the movie so they can complain about it. The people making the movie are just in it for the money. I doubt many care about their original source material.

But so long as this doesn't get as changed as much as Dragon Ball I think it could be okay.

You know what? They could change it all they want. Or they could keep it the same. The real problem is that Paul Anderson is not talented. You could give him the script to Citizen Kane and he'd find a way to inject his textbook "Directing For Dummies" style into it. The fact that the whip is being replaced by a sword isn't so much indicative of Hollywood not caring about keeping things the same but more about how Anderson finds it impossible to work with anything that isn't the most standard fare. He has no vision for anything besides cliches.

[Flashback2012]

I've yet to see the live action TF movie and little motivation to ever do so. Even though I was a fan of the cartoon and toy line, I'll not cop to the "Hollywood is raping my childhood" excuse. From what I've seen in pre-release photos and trailers and what I've heard in subsequent word of mouth on what I should expect, it doesn't appeal to me and I'd just as soon vote with my wallet and not subscribe to what they're offering.

In regards to the Castlevania movie, something seems amiss if the main character is not brandishing a whip. I'd say it's about as appealing to me as watching Finding Nemo set in the Sahara desert but I understand that's not the same parallel. I don't have a problem with him having a sword, just that it shouldn't be his primary weapon in the movie. Hell, he should have a whole slew of weapons on his person like the dagger, crucifix, holy water, etc. and that they should utilize each of those in the movie.

What I'm failing to understand is that it's proven that execs in Hollywood get a hard on for movies that are nothing more than a CGI wankfest (case in point TF). To me, it would seem the whip would be THE ideal weapon for a movie like this as a primary weapon for Simon. It's going to take a copious amount of CGI to bring both the denizens of Castle Dracula to life such as skeletons, werewolves, medusa heads, etc. as well as help establish the mood and ambience of the movie. Understanding that, you'd think they'd realize that they could pull off several scenes in the movie that involved zany, over the top uses of the whip for a variety of CGI shots. Everyone knows they LOVE their bullet time effect in Hollywood and you could have tons of that with a whip.

Meh, I can't say I've much faith in this movie even if they left the whip in. I'm willing to bet it'll go over like a lead balloon in the theaters and end up as part of a two-pack with the Dead or Alive movie and available at dollar stores across the country. :p

[TonyTheTiger]

What I'm failing to understand is that it's proven that execs in Hollywood get a hard on for movies that are nothing more than a CGI wankfest (case in point TF).

To be fair, Transformers couldn't have been anything but.


It's going to take a copious amount of CGI to bring both the denizens of Castle Dracula to life such as skeletons, werewolves, medusa heads, etc. as well as help establish the mood and ambience of the movie.

See, this is why I don't think keeping movies so close to the game is necessarily always a good idea. I think having random skeletons and zombies around would actually be a bad thing. It's way too cheesy to have the hero run through a village beating the shit out of random monsters. You'll end up with Van Helsing.

People need to realize that out of all entertainment mediums, video games are probably the hardest to convert. A game is, most of the time, built around the need to have the player do something. So hordes of enemies make sense. Movies have different rules. You can't really do "OMG SKELETONS" and keep the film from having a tone akin to The Mummy. Which might not be a bad thing if that's the goal. But if you want to do a more serious film and not make Dracula come off as "Bwahahahaha!" then you'd have to scale back on the video gamey stuff.

[E Nice]

People need to realize that out of all entertainment mediums, video games are probably the hardest to convert. A game is, most of the time, built around the need to have the player do something. So hordes of enemies make sense. Movies have different rules. You can't really do "OMG SKELETONS" and keep the film from having a tone akin to The Mummy. Which might not be a bad thing if that's the goal. But if you want to do a more serious film and not make Dracula come off as "Bwahahahaha!" then you'd have to scale back on the video gamey stuff.

Well, it's not like Castlevania has the deepest of storylines. Once every hundred years, or sooner whenever a wizard does it (in Castlevania, literally), Dracula is resurrected and evil things terrorize countryside and maybe kidnaps some people and along comes hero with a whip to take out the Count. It would perhaps make for better B-rate horror flick, especially given it's environment and theme, than trying to come up with some type of deep story.

[TonyTheTiger]

Well, it's not like Castlevania has the deepest of storylines. Once every hundred years, or sooner whenever a wizard does it (in Castlevania, literally), Dracula is resurrected and evil things terrorize countryside and maybe kidnaps some people and along comes hero with a whip to take out the Count. It would perhaps make for better B-rate horror flick, especially given it's environment and theme, than trying to come up with some type of deep story.

Don't get me wrong. I think it's very possible to convert the game to film. Really, all you would need is a guy named Belmont with a whip, a guy named Dracula, and a castle to make it "accurate." Everything else in the movie would come from various embellishments. In the hands of a more capable director a Castlevania movie could kick ass. In the hands of Paul Anderson, though, we're going to get something between Van Helsing and Underworld.

[Jorpho]

Well, it's not like Castlevania has the deepest of storylines. Once every hundred years, or sooner whenever a wizard does it (in Castlevania, literally), Dracula is resurrected and evil things terrorize countryside and maybe kidnaps some people and along comes hero with a whip to take out the Count. It would perhaps make for better B-rate horror flick, especially given it's environment and theme, than trying to come up with some type of deep story.

When you put it that way, it does indeed sound very much like Uwe material.


In the hands of Paul Anderson, though, we're going to get something between Van Helsing and Underworld.

If it means more Kate Beckinsale in leather, I'm on board.

[TonyTheTiger]

B-movie material or not, I find it amazing that Dracula is the most filmed character in movie history and yet has so few good movies under his belt. And most of those good movies are notably campy in one way or another. Forget making a good Castlevania movie. Make a good Dracula movie and just have a guy named Belmont kill him.