The quote could have been, “Spielberg would want to do it, and no.”
I really don’t like this idea. The series has always been “pseudo mature”, by which I mean it portrays itself as being for older audiences, but doesn’t have any real meat on them bones. It’s all fluff and aesthetics around good gameplay.
They should just stick to the games imo
What? Like maybe the open world ones were light on story, but there’s plenty of lore in the Zelda universe to do all sorts of interesting things.
The games just might not be cinematic enough in their telling but a proper screenplay can tell the story better.
🖕
I was assuming it would be animated, but I lost hope when they said it would be live action.
I’m not sure what the point of an animated version would be… it would be like watching someone else play the game.
Don’t think any move would be a good idea, Link doesn’t really have a defined character because in the game you’re Link. In any movie they’ll need to define his character and it’ll probably not match most people’s expectations because everyone imagines Link’s character to be different.
Well excuse me, Mr. poster, but he does have defined personality. It was (poorly) defined every Friday on the Super Mario Super Show.
Obviously said in the “well excuuuuuuuse me princess …”
I just hope that when “Kakariko” is inevitably said in the movie, it gets pronounced right
Is this bait? Like “gif” vs “jif”, or is there really a non obvioua way to pronounce it?
In my head I always think ka-ka-REE-ko, but your comment makes me think it’s ka-KA-ri-ko?
It could go either way. Personally I think the “REE” is the correct pronunciation based on my (non expert) Japanese lessons many years ago.
Both of your pronunciations read the same in my head.
The first good videogame movie was Wreck It Ralph.
It’s nice that the recent Sonic and Mario movies didn’t suck, although there’s always a good chance they’ll return to form.
I think Wreck It Ralph was a success because it explicitly wasn’t based on a real video game, more just the idea of video games, with cute little references to real games. Starting off with original IP means you don’t have an incredibly dedicated fanbase that can pick apart all the inaccuracies in your lore and character portrayals, which lowers the stakes a ton.
Making a Zelda game is risky because there are a ton of people out there with preconceived notions of how Zelda and Link are supposed to be portrayed, how the world is supposed to be portrayed, and the history of that world. If they get any of that wrong, those people are gonna be big mad. The stakes are much higher there.
The games have to get their continuity repaired once a decade or so as-is, and Link and Zelda get personality overhauls with each console generation. This is the perfect series to adapt because it’s so variable to begin with.
They’re canonically different Links and Zeldas though. Gannon is the only constant.
Well, mostly the same Ganon; he was slain and reincarnated in at least one timeline. Even the main incarnation can have his characterization can vary quite a bit, though, such as the more byronic personality seen in Wind Waker compared to the more agressive and brutal depiction in Twilight Princess.
Making a Zelda game is risky because there are a ton of people out there with preconceived notions of how Zelda and Link are supposed to be portrayed,
Throwback to the shit fits G*mers threw when The Wind Waker was announced
Plus it’s always been a game with a much more serious tone. Not sure they can really rely on a Jack Black/Jim Carrey vibe to save what might otherwise be a very bland movie.
Their best bet might be a Link’s Awakening type thing, both in tone and style. If it’s live action then gods help them because I can’t see anything working there.
There is at least plenty of Zelda styles to go for.
Considering how Spielberg butchered Ready Player One, I hope they find someone more respectful.
The source material wasn’t good in the first place.
That’s a fine opinion to have, but it doesn’t justify leaving out the coolest parts of the book, or ruining Art3mis’s character, or changing Shoto’s name.
what was the coolest part of the book? it’s been 10 years and I only saw the movie once and forgot about it.
Wade gets arrested on purpose to be indentured at IOI so that he can infiltrate their security and set up strategic items in the Oasis to allow him and his friends to get to the final gate, which the Sixers were protecting with an impenetrable energy shield.
Ahh I kinda remember that, that wasn’t in the movie?
No, in the movie, it’s Samantha that gets arrested, not on purpose. She’s able to influence things from the inside but only by chance, not as a calculated risk.
I finished it as a hate read, hilarious for all the wrong reasons. Just a packet of clichés wrapped around nerd nostalgia. I absolutely lost it when a chapter was literally just reciting an 80s movie word for word. 🤣
I know it though Mike Nelson’s bookclub podcast. It was funny hearing him relieved not to have been mentioned as an important piece of 80’s pop culture.
I know someone who’s whole identity is that he never grew up after the 80s. He was insufferable in that lead up to that movie.
It might have worked around the era of Twilight Princess; there was enough continuity in the series that it had consistent lore, the games were trending toward cinematic, lots of cut scenes and character arcs and such. Not sure a movie is going to play well in the “We physically cannot care about this story” era represented by BotW and TotK.
Honestly, I don’t think there was ever a time when Zelda had lore that spanned outside the borders of the individual games. Or at least, where lore like that was considered important or taken seriously. The whole timelines thing always seemed to me like a kind of after-thought.
The Legend of Zelda has a lot more in common with Final Fantasy. There’ll be a lot of similar things in between each game, but each game is self-contained.
There was a span between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess where each game treated previous ones as established history. The handheld games have always done whatever; Link’s Awakening is a direct sequel to Link to the Past which is all a dream, it’s directly in the text of that game. The Oracle games take place outside Hyrule, Minish Cap takes place in Hyrule but the distant past, so we can largely ignore them as side stories.
Ocarina of Time, especially given how tremendously popular it was, became an anchor point for the series. Majora’s Mask is a direct 20 minutes later sequel which is almost like Link’s Awakening. I subscribe to the fan theory that it’s Link’s dying fever nightmare. Wind Waker and Twilight Princess both treated Ocarina of Time as historical events that literally happened, even if they mutually ignored each other. I think that’s why they did the multiple timelines thing, just to reconcile WW and TP.
You can just feel them wanting to shrug off the timelines thing from there; Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks are direct sequels to Wind Waker, Link Between Worlds is a direct sequel to Link to the Past of all games, Skyward Sword is a far past prequel, and then Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are a reboot of the series.
But from about '98 to '05 or so, it felt like a series and not a franchise.
Wanna hear my juiciest Zelda conspiracy theory? There are several pages of lore at the beginning of the manual for A Link to the Past, I have the North American version of this, and I don’t know how much of it was written by Nintendo themselves and translated or how much of it was written by Nintendo of America (I know Ganon’s last name “Dragmire” was made up by NoA) but the whole thing retroactively reads like a design document for the rest of the series. Seriously go read it and try not to think “Holy shit this was written in 1990.”
I agree, I think the whole “official timeline” thing was 100% a fan created mythos which Nintendo saw was gaining traction and played into to make more money. It’s pretty clear that most of the games had very little connection to one another beyond the basic concept of the core theme (the hero saving the world from a great evil) repeating itself.
Each game tells you where they are in the timeline in relation to the other games since the beginning (except the Capcom ones). If you think the fans made it up, you straight up did not read.
Each game tells you where they are in the timeline in relation to the other games
They setup the new world in preparation for the main theme, sure. At its deepest level that was always just (up until Skyward Sword when Nintendo began monetising fan-created lore) the echo of a myth throughout time and reality. The fans so desperate to make a direct linear connection between the conclusion of one game and the traditional introductory cut-scene of the next are so far down their rabbit hole they seem completely unable to accept the much more logical explanation that it’s just a convenient way for Nintendo to recycle the same basic narrative structure that has been used in almost every single game.
It is my understanding the whole three timelines splitting at Ocarina of Time was made up by Nintendo for Hyrule Historia. Fans wanted the series overall to make sense as one mythos, Nintendo is physically incapable of caring about this story. This came to a head with BotW being specifically designed to not fit in any of the three timelines; it’s in the far future, there are Rito and Zora around, etc. and then TotK directly contradicts Ocarina of Time.
Majora’s Mask picked up with the Hero of Time after he returned from the adult timeline, it clearly shows that it’s the same character. Then Wind Waker’s opening scene showed the same Hero of Time beat Ganon then disappear and then Ganon comes back ; the king of red lion also says he was hoping the Hero of Time would return, but that never happened, and instead he found the new hero of wind. And then Twilight Princess shows Ganondorf was arrested for trying to betray Hyrule before he could execute his plans, but then he still got the Triforce of Power ; and the Hero’s Shade is confirmed to be the Hero of Time whose achievements were not remembered (because he erased them by going back in time) and he couldn’t pass on his skills. It’s hard to pretend that those games are not connected when it’s right there in the opening and the cinematics and it even uses the same name (hero of time). WW and TP ignored each other, but that’s because they were the different timelines.
The timeline split wasn’t invented years later to fix that. The OoT timeline split was explained by Aonuma immediately between Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, precisely because people were wondering if the two games contradicted each other - Aonuma is the one who pointed out that returning to the past created a second timeline, and he explained that right when they released Twilight Princess. It was all right there in the games as they were coming out, Hyrule Historia simply confirmed it years later for the release of Skyward Sword, that wasn’t made up by fans. The only thing that Hyrule Historia did that the fans didn’t expect was the third split, with the fallen timeline. That one still doesn’t have any coherent explanation, that’s the part that Nintendo is probably trying to ignore, that the fans don’t like, and that makes some people think it’s made up nonsense.
BotW was a breaking point where they decided to do something different and not use the timeline and put it in the far future, but the Rito and Zora are not a contradiction, all it needs is the confirmation that the Rito already existed before the Zora turned into them. And that happens in Twilight Princess HD, the remake where they added a texture for Hyrule Castle with a relief showing a Rito. So the Rito did exist even in the TP timeline. TotK doesn’t contradict Ocarina of Time, it’s not the same event, it’s a different Ganondorf - we already knew there was more than one guy called Ganondorf (it’s a different one in Four Swords Adventure). There’s a gap of about 300 years between the events of TotK’s past and OoT.
If you want a fan theory, I think TotK and the Ouroboros symbol it uses as its logo shows that this Zelda is the one who creates her own timeline by going back to the past. She creates the split 300 years before Ocarina of Time, and that leads to the fallen timeline, at the end of which BotW happens. Without her, things play out differently and result in other events that end up in a civil war and into OoT centuries later, but with her, Ganondorf is sealed and the events play out as described in Link to the Past, which are slightly different from OoT. It resolves the fallen timeline and the fact that OoT was intended to be the war described in LttP, but it ended up playing out differently, and they never explained that other than “uh, Link died in that version” in Hyrule Historia.
I love Zelda but a movie would be too weird. I like the “voiceless” Link. It puts the players thoughts as the response instead of a script.
what if it’s like botw/totk where everyone is fully voice acted, except for link who just waves his hands around every time has to explains something and everyone just repeats what he says.
Would be cool if they made the movie where Link doesn’t talk at all. I can’t think of any movies with a dumb protagonist, it wouid be a first. They’d also need to find an actor who is really good with acting with their face and body language.
Probably won’t happen, though. We’re going to get Link who talks and a reference to “Well excuuuuuuuuuuuuUUUUUUUUUUUUUssse me, princess!”
“They’d also need to find an actor who is really good with acting with their face and body language.”
I immediately thought of Mr. Bean lol
This summer…
BEAN
IS
LINK
This Summer Chris Pratt Is…
He’s so cool
God Don’t. Just. Don’t
The Legend of Zelda: The Monkey’s Paw
Have him not speak through the whole film and at the very end dub in this.
A Zelda movie goes against the core concept of Zelda games
How so?
Miyamoto created Zelda to fulfill a childhood fantasy of being a hero wandering the woods, going on adventures, collecting treasures, and rescuing a princess. It was intended to allow every player to be able to experience and fulfill that same fantasy. As a lifelong Zelda player, I’ve always felt that I become link and embody that hero that we dream of while playing in our backyards. I think that’s why link never had dialogue. He’s not a character, he’s us. I think it’s also why the franchise has always been titled Zelda, not link (for the most part). To give him a voice, and a character that we the player isn’t in control of, destroys that gift of fantasy embodiment that Miyamoto gave to us. Link instead becomes a super hero lost to a world saturated by marvel characters
Yeah having link talk in a movie would totally ruin it
You guys know link has been animated… never mind it’s not worth ruining it for you. I’d like to forget as well.
I think most of us do know, and that’s one reason why it’s being poo-pooed.
Doesn’t “Link” literally also mean a link to the player? Maybe apocryphal, but I’ve heard it for years
Well said.
Sigh. Just don’t. Please. It’s gonna be slop like the Mario movie, or Minecraft or doom or resident evil or alone in the dark… etc
Nothing but greed and profit fuelling this project.
The mario movie seemed really well done to me but I dont really watch many cartoons anymore. Cant really argue with the profit motive though it probably has that
The mario movie was great. The animation was really good and it was funny
It could be slop. It also could be fantastic. Some video game adaptions have turned out well.
- Arcane
- Detective Pikachu
- The Last of Us
- Fallout
- Cyberpunk Edgerunners
- Tetris
Wasn’t the Mario movie pretty well-received among fans, though? The Resident Evil films were also very successful, despite not being popular with the game’s original audience.
I think it was well received with children? Most adults I know who saw it basically shrugged, said it was fine, and then eagerly awaited Super Mario Bros Wonder instead.
Fine is high praise for videogame adaptations.
Sure, but “fine” is not really what I want for a Zelda movie, personally. And judging by the apprehension of a lot of the Zelda fanbase, they seem to have similar sentiments.
Also I’m not really sure why my other comment is getting downvoted, it was just what I observed in my circle of family/friends/coworkers. Apologies to any long time Mario fans I offended.
After decades of stuff like Bob Hoskins Mario Bros, a million Resident Evil movies, and whatever Uwe Boll was making, it’s honestly the best we can hope for.
Based on the trailers I legitimately think the Minecraft movie was written by AI
You thought the Mario movie was slop?? The target audience (kids) really liked it and it was faithful to the games…
My kid and I watched it when it first released.
He barely remembers it, except Rainbow Road and “Mario characters”. And he loves Nintendo stuff.
It wasn’t “slop”, but it was not very memorable. The worst thing a film can be is forgettable.
What? The movie NEVER got close to the source material! I mean since when is Toad a street musician, and just one guy? Since when does Big Bertha have massive tits? Why did they treat Spike as one of the koopa kids? Where were the other 6 koopa kids? You just took Iggy, and paired him with Spike (for some reason) and said fuck off to the other 6? And why is King Koopa clearly a parody of donald trump? And why did he destroy the world trade center towers???
I would certainly hope if you’ve read this far that you get what I’m doing here…
Boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder!
Anything with Jack Black in it is corporate slop and I respect our kids enough to not want to expose their developing brains to that kind of garbage.
The movie was okayish at best, but at least Jack Black was the best part of it.
Also, anything with Jack Black is slop? Even School of Rock? Tenacious D? Weird: The Al Yankovic Story?
After making Jumanji, yes his work has become absolutely shallow and artistically void of anything to say but give me money.
School of rock is a classic but he fucking killed Tenatious D after not liking a joke about a killing a dictator. Yes he’s become corporate slop.
Tenacious D is not dead. Jack Black has confirmed that they will be back someday, they’re just taking a break.
It’s one thing to make those kinds of jokes here on Lemmy where the audience is almost all leftists who will cheer. But for a celebrity with a platform, you have to be aware that saying things like that will get them in trouble. It was honestly a shitty no-win situation all around and I don’t blame Jack Black for needing to distance himself for a bit. At least the band is not dead, this will blow over in due time and they’ll come back when it’s died down.
The Sonic movies were pretty decent. Not super amazing, but the bar is so low for video game movies you might as well consider them masterpieces.
However, I do not trust Nintendo to make a good Zelda movie.
Is Zelda going to say anything? Unless I’m mistaken, if he does you’ll get nerd fans just as upset as Dredd or Master Chief taking off their helmets.
They won’t as long as he doesn’t take off his helmet.
He’ll speak.
WELL EXCUUUUUUUSE ME! PRINCESS!
As a huge Halo fan, I wasn’t even upset that Master Chief took his helmet off. No one ever said he’s supposed to be treated like Mohammed or something. I think people were more upset about the fact he spent the majority of the show not wearing any armor at all, because the writers thought a Halo soap opera was a good idea
I didn’t even watch season 2. Season 1 was so colossally bad.
Season 2 was a bit better and the last couple episodes were unironically great, which is why it was kinda surprising they cancelled it. It was just starting to get good
Or that he… ‘slept with’ (raped*) a prisoner?
Edit: redundant grammar
But… You just… You know that… You know that Zelda is the princess and Link is the guy right? Or was this on purpose since you mentioned upset nerds?
😉
You cheeky cunt. 😘
GOTTEM
