• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

News Nintendo officially announces live-action Zelda film, produced by Shigeru Miyamoto and Avi Arad, directed by Wes Ball

Tall Valley Nerd said:
AM I the only one who cant imagine how the live action can look like every time i try i end imagining a punch of cos players running in a generic grass field fighting a very silly and fake looking CGI Bokoblin
Click to expand...

This is why while everyone is caught up with the Director, Cast, and Producers (naturally), I'm over here worried about the Art Director / Creature Design / SFX studio / and Costuming

Art Direction will be what makes or break the look of the world, Creature Design will be able to translate Zelda enemies in to something lifelike and real, WARDROBE / Costumes will make the difference between:

This
c-mUu5CyZjFaMiRra-er5vhwUSMKj6Cv4scqANCXDGE.jpg
or this
zelda_dark_link_cosplay.png


Ignore the eyebrows in the second, but a great example that textures need to be there and it needs to feel LIVED in
 
thelegendofcap said:
This is why while everyone is caught up with the Director, Cast, and Producers (naturally), I'm over here worried about the Art Director / Creature Design / SFX studio / and Costuming

Art Direction will be what makes or break the look of the world, Creature Design will be able to translate Zelda enemies in to something lifelike and real, WARDROBE / Costumes will make the difference between:

This
c-mUu5CyZjFaMiRra-er5vhwUSMKj6Cv4scqANCXDGE.jpg
or this
zelda_dark_link_cosplay.png


Ignore the eyebrows in the second, but a great example that textures need to be there and it needs to feel LIVED in
Click to expand...
This is the most important that I’ve said elsewhere that’s gonna make or break many’s first impressions when they show it.
 
0
boodream said:
But the moment you listen to the stock market on mobile games and movies, your company's philosophy is potentially threatened on all other subjects.
Click to expand...

This is kind of nonsense.

They were under pressure from shareholders to move into mobile for many years before they finally caved in and did so - and even then it was purely because of the disaster that was the Wii U forcing their hand. Now with their console business back in good order guess what - mobile stuff is being basically ignored / dropped.

Shareholders had zero to do with their move into theme parks or IP expansion - it was Iwata who first stated these desires literal decades ago.

If you attribute everything to shareholder demand then you should also include things like Amiibo / Classic console range. Oh and also the Switch itself while you're at it seeing as these were also new ideas / areas of business Nintendo moved into........

Not every business move is shareholder led. In fact in the case of Nintendo there are more times they go out of their way to ignore shareholders demands rather than listen to them
 
The Legend of Zelda series has released games in a variety of styles, but it will be interesting to see how they make it into a movie.
Considering that it's live action, it shouldn't be Tww, Botw, Totk, or style.
If they are going to try these styles in live action, it would be foolhardy.
Then again, it could be something similar to OoT or TP.
That said, there's a lot that would have to be trimmed down to make it into a movie, so maybe it'll be its own story.
 
0
neil said:
Someone at “Slash Film” thinks the director is a good choice

www.slashfilm.com

Wes Ball Is A Fantastic And Fascinating Choice To Direct A Legend Of Zelda Movie - SlashFilm

The director of the upcoming Legend of Zelda movie has proven he has the chops to bring Link and Hyrule to life.
www.slashfilm.com www.slashfilm.com
Click to expand...

This was a great read! The director gets a lot of credit and lot of blame for things in an army-sized effort that is movie making so it puts things into perspective to me. I just might watch Maze Runner to get a feel for Wes.
 
Mr_F_Snowman said:
This is kind of nonsense.

They were under pressure from shareholders to move into mobile for many years before they finally caved in and did so - and even then it was purely because of the disaster that was the Wii U forcing their hand. Now with their console business back in good order guess what - mobile stuff is being basically ignored / dropped.

Shareholders had zero to do with their move into theme parks or IP expansion - it was Iwata who first stated these desires literal decades ago.

If you attribute everything to shareholder demand then you should also include things like Amiibo / Classic console range. Oh and also the Switch itself while you're at it seeing as these were also new ideas / areas of business Nintendo moved into........

Not every business move is shareholder led. In fact in the case of Nintendo there are more times they go out of their way to ignore shareholders demands rather than listen to them
Click to expand...
Your post is basically trying to make me say thing I don't say to avoid to awnser to what I'm actally trying to say, congratulations.
 
Last edited:
I dunno if I'm on board with this but I'm more optimistic than I was about the Mario movie. These choices make it sound like they're going for something more bearable for adults, and I'm sure the Nintendo folks will restrict the crew's most grimdark impulses. Two wrongs could end up making a right here, who knows. If it sucks it might still be interesting, at least, which is more than you can say about the Mario flick.

Story seems like a big question mark. Zelda's got more of a story than Mario but it's largely just "we need you to go through these dungeons and grab the magic dealies" and I don't know how you make that watchable in 100 minutes. I'd guess they'll have to do something at least semi-original, though still in the Zelda vein.
 
0
boodream said:
Your post is basically trying to make me say thing I don't say to avoid to awnser to what I'm actally trying to say, congratulations.
Click to expand...

Sorry but what? Wasn't trying to get you to say anything I was simply explaining an aspect of your post that was incorrect.

Weirdly I am unable to read and understand your inner thoughts through the medium that is the internet so me apparently triggering you in some way was not intentional.
 
Mr_F_Snowman said:
Sorry but what? Wasn't trying to get you to say anything I was simply explaining an aspect of your post that was incorrect.

Weirdly I am unable to read and understand your inner thoughts through the medium that is the internet so me apparently triggering you in some way was not intentional.
Click to expand...
As you yourself say, Nintendo’s foray into the mobile market was purely driven by the shareholders. When Nintendo makes a deal with Universal for the parks or the Mario movie at about the same time as the famous partnership with DeNa, they are also not in a position of strength at all.

These are incursions into industries that are not those of Nintendo and even if we can think of good it has strictly no connection with other points that you develop such as for example amibos or thé Switch which are in the core business of Nintendo and which have a direct relationship with the games it manufactures.

I point out that diversifying as it was a decision taken under duress and that if such important strategic choices can be forced, it can affect even the core of Nintendo know-how one day. You are free to disagree with this, but when you respond directly by quoting a message it is normal that I expect it not to extrapolate on elements that I do not mention.
 
boodream said:
But the moment you listen to the stock market on mobile games and movies, your company's philosophy is potentially threatened on all other subjects.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this statement at face value, but I also think pursuing expansion of their IP reach across mediums does not have to be viewed as purely profit and/or shareholder-driven (that may not be your position, but I have seen it expressed around forums).

I'm reminded of Nintendo's mission statement:

Putting Smiles on the Faces of Everyone Nintendo Touches.
Click to expand...

Its corny, but earnest. An aspect of their top leadership I actually appreciate in Nintendo from the Iwata era til now! And its ofc platform-agnostic.

A fun movie with the family or a good mobile game can accomplish that mission. In the case of both, the barrier of entry is much lower for most people.

Personally, I want them to keep pushing hard into movies, mobile games, live events, competitive events, tv shows, etc. As long as they find the right partners and are uncompromising on quality control. Given the mission, and if you believe in your organization's ability to get it done, should strive for it.

And yes, agreed, as long as its not taking away their primo development talent off their core competency, i.e. creating top-class games. I'm under the impression, for instance, that the real-deal Mario Kart team was occupied for years on Tour. Which if true, is kind of a shame becuz, hey wheres ARMS 2?!

Anyway I'd like to see Nintendo aggressively use these Switch windfall revenues to create partnerships, new entities and hire new capable personnel well-suited to the areas they want to expand into. Expansion of R&D expenses has also been welcome.

===

Cheers to Neil on sharing that article on the director Wes Ball :coffee:

Led me to check his, uh X for any hyped excitement and came across this gem of a repost:

 
thelegendofcap said:
This is why while everyone is caught up with the Director, Cast, and Producers (naturally), I'm over here worried about the Art Director / Creature Design / SFX studio / and Costuming

Art Direction will be what makes or break the look of the world, Creature Design will be able to translate Zelda enemies in to something lifelike and real, WARDROBE / Costumes will make the difference between:

This
c-mUu5CyZjFaMiRra-er5vhwUSMKj6Cv4scqANCXDGE.jpg
or this
zelda_dark_link_cosplay.png


Ignore the eyebrows in the second, but a great example that textures need to be there and it needs to feel LIVED in
Click to expand...
I'll be honest, I'm not totally certain which is supposed to be the good one 😓

I'm guessing the right side but in a tacky way the left side kinda looks more appealing. Maybe its the lighting.
 
uncleoptimus said:
I'll be honest, I'm not totally certain which is supposed to be the good one 😓

I'm guessing the right side but in a tacky way the left side kinda looks more appealing. Maybe its the lighting.
Click to expand...

Personally, they both have issues and things that I like about them haha I was mostly using them as examples for the tunic itself.

But thing that bothers me about the left one is how wimpy, texture-less, and plain the tunic looks (like an oversized t-shirt) and how clean he is overall. But the art direction, atmosphere, and colors are beautiful.

The right one I prefer that aged and rugged look to the tunic as well as the detail and shape, but it could use more color. I definitely have issues with the make-up and ears but it's a cosplay at the end of the day.
 
boodream said:
When Nintendo makes a deal with Universal for the parks or the Mario movie at about the same time as the famous partnership with DeNa, they are also not in a position of strength at all.

You are free to disagree with this, but when you respond directly by quoting a message it is normal that I expect it not to extrapolate on elements that I do not mention.
Click to expand...

I can extrapolate on elements you do not mention if they are relevant - you ignoring them simply because they do not fit your chosen narrative is quite literally the point

Any business, whether privately owned or public will look to diversify and grow, this often means moving into new markets or making new product. This is especially pronounced if your current, historical success in one area suddenly craters (like it had with the Wii U). You don't have shareholder's telling you to do these things it comes from competent management (in this case from Iwata).

Do you also suppose it was shareholder duress that took them from a playing card company to making video games? From making ultra hand grabbers to game boys? Obviously we know the answer is a resounding no.

Nintendo has a massive cash reserve. Is basically debt free. Has little to no interest in large scale M&A and most of its major investors are institutional Japanese banks and business who are quite happy living off the fat dividends Nintendo pays.

If you are looking for a company susceptible to shareholder pressure Nintendo is at the bottom of the pile
 
uhhh businesses make deals with each other all the time. Nothing to do with "strength or weakness".
 
0
I'm still upset that it's live action, and about who's involved but I'm getting a little more hyped the more I think about it.

I also hope that Link talking in the movie gets Nintendo to reconsider how they approach him in the games. He doesn't need to talk a lot but his silentness and lack of emotional responses is holding back the narratives, at least in the last two games.
 
0
ziggyrivers said:
To my understanding, Sony is only distributing (theaters)
Click to expand...

Sony is co-financing it. Nintendo probably doesn't want to finance an entire $250-$300+ million dollar production (factoring in marketing costs too) themselves, way too much risk. Nintendo is some where just above 50% from what it sounds like, Sony would be the rest (probably like 45%) plus distributing it.
 
Machrider said:
Sony is co-financing it. Nintendo probably doesn't want to finance an entire $250-$300+ million dollar production (factoring in marketing costs too) themselves, way too much risk. Nintendo is some where just above 50% from what it sounds like, Sony would be the rest (probably like 45%) plus distributing it.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. Speaking of financing and budgets, I presume Nintendo will be very tight lock with the film's budget. Recently, movies have had very big budgets, so I presume Nintendo will be very keen in having a very controlled budget for the film, and maybe invest more in marketing.
 
Mr_F_Snowman said:
I can extrapolate on elements you do not mention if they are relevant - you ignoring them simply because they do not fit your chosen narrative is quite literally the point
Click to expand...
Mr_F_Snowman said:
If you attribute everything to shareholder demand then you should also include things like Amiibo / Classic console range. Oh and also the Switch itself while you're at it seeing as these were also new ideas / areas of business Nintendo moved into........
Click to expand...
So talking about diversification and talking about the Switch, which is Nintendo's core business, are the same thing? I'm sorry, the relevance of this kind of digression must be too dazzling to be within my modest grasp.

Nintendo made certain choices under duress; there are, for example, a ton of easily searchable archives in which Iwata states his hostility to diversification into mobile games. It's less a question of diversification itself than of the risk of damaging the company own heritage and know-how, as he put it. Mobile games with lootboxes, for example, run completely counter to the values that Nintendo claims to convey. And yet, before they could back down, it happened.

In the same way, since this is the initial subject of the thread, my purpose here is less to say that the adaptation of Mario or Zelda is a bad thing in itself than to express a certain mistrust regarding the potential impact this may have on their core business. A basic example: hearing that a particular Mario game is or will be "inspired by the film", or hearing that "if Link talks in the film, he'll have to talk in the games", would seem to me to call into question EPD's own artistic freedom and philosophy.

I'm not trying to serve any particular "narrative", nor am I posting here for the pleasure of being disagreeable or self-satisfied,
 
0
I will be counting the frames of block-pushing action featured in this film and rendering judgement accordingly
 
You guys made me realize I don't have a Zelda t-shirt :(

Amazing, since weeks ago I bought a Crash Bandicoot t-shirt at Burlington. (don't blame me, it was under $5 and it looked phenomenal)
 
0
It’s been a few days, so at least some of the Great Fairy dust has blown over now. I’m both extremely interested, yet also cautious on this.

Avi Arad? I mean, sure he was involved in the Uncharted movie, and more recently Morbius, which from the sounds of it aren’t great. But on the flip side, the dude has been involved with all the Spider-Man movies since Sam Raimi, so his rap sheet is both a mix bag, sprinkled with some goodness.

Derek Connolly is an interesting choice in that site he’s been involved with the Jurassic Pratt Trilogy, which I’m not a fan of, but also rewrote the script for Kong: Skull Island, and worked on Pacific Rim: Uprising. If you ask me, the dude just needs proper direction to make a good screenplay.

And this is where the Nintendo part comes in. They’re have full creative control during the entire process from casting, costume design, props, location shooting, etc, etc.

Wes Ball is probably the most exciting choice of the three given he appears to be an up and coming director, and the new Apes movie will be a good test bench after the Maze Runner trilogy, which I’ve honestly never watched.

I’m part of #TeamWaitAndSee
 
Last edited:
Multiverse said:
www.eurogamer.net

Sony making Super Mario Bros. movie, leak suggests

Sony Pictures is developing an animated Super Mario Bros. film, a string of leaked emails suggest.The movie studio - wh…
www.eurogamer.net www.eurogamer.net

They had deals with Sony in the past.
Click to expand...
yes, I'm aware of that. and they never went anywhere. though that's probably why Avi Arad was still in Nintendo's rolodex. but now, with a billion dollar movie in the pocket and Nintendo funding over 50% of the Zelda movie, Nintendo isn't stuck with Sony, Sony is stuck with Nintendo
 
Multiverse said:
www.eurogamer.net

Sony making Super Mario Bros. movie, leak suggests

Sony Pictures is developing an animated Super Mario Bros. film, a string of leaked emails suggest.The movie studio - wh…
www.eurogamer.net www.eurogamer.net

They had deals with Sony in the past.
Click to expand...
Just because they had deals in the past does not mean they (Nintendo) had no choice but to remain w/Sony since they couldn’t get out of an apparent ~50-55% funding split. Don’t even get me started on the questionable take about theme parks.
 
So my three worries:

#1 - Cast. I just don’t think you can cast anyone recognizable. The obvious choices for Link would pull me out of it immediately.

#2 - Budget. I worry none of this will be practical, and if producers decide on known actors, they’ll eat up too much of the budget. You don’t need actors to sell this movie; it’s one of the most recognizable brands on the planet. Just needs to look good.

#3 - Length. I feel like the Sony side wouldn’t mind going over 2 hours, but Mario being 90 minutes may have Miyamoto and co. thinking to keep it brief. PLEEEEEASE give this movie room to breathe. Build tension but also give the movie room to include Zelda’s more whimsical elements.

Extra #4 - And for the love of god no constant quips.
 
Last edited:
ILikeFeet said:
yes, I'm aware of that. and they never went anywhere. though that's probably why Avi Arad was still in Nintendo's rolodex. but now, with a billion dollar movie in the pocket and Nintendo funding over 50% of the Zelda movie, Nintendo isn't stuck with Sony, Sony is stuck with Nintendo
Click to expand...
Tentacle-tropes said:
Just because they had deals in the past does not mean they (Nintendo) had no choice but to remain w/Sony since they couldn’t get out of an apparent ~50-55% funding split. Don’t even get me started on the questionable take about theme parks.
Click to expand...
The point being, they chose a sweet deal over quality and commercial success. Anyway, I don’t entirely agree with that particular point from Grace. But it is very likely that Arad cornered Nintendo into a deal they couldn’t refuse. Especially after the intial Mario deal didn’t materialize. So, like Miss Grace said, Nintendo fell back into the Hollywood trap like the first Mario movie.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom