Did you like it?

It was okay. It's clear that they had to change a lot to keep the rating PG, but it honestly could have been worse. I just wish Ratchet and Clank weren't instantly friends.

>>86767288
Bland as fuck. How do you have a movie with different alien creatures and space battles and still be boring? The humor is forgettable TV quality. I never played the games and never will now because of how dull this movie was. Absolutely no reason this needed to be in theatres. Should have gone straight to video.

File: elaris.jpg (45KB, 414x542px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 414x542px

>>86767288
Only thing worth liking.

>>86767288
Flawed, yes, but still enjoyable. Would watch again if bored and I got through my movie backlog. If they did the ORIGINAL story, I feel like it could be better.

>>86767288
Yeah, it was okay. But R&C I feel worked better as a game than as a movie.

File: tumblr_o6fah0LWGP1qlvbp1o1_250.png (116KB, 220x228px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 220x228px

I liked it.

>>86767288
yes i did.

>>86767288
Got to about 30 mins and turned to something else. Didn't really like the zero to hero story it portrayed. Also the lack of weapons I noticed, which was one of the selling points of the games.

I'm a huge Ratchet & Clank fan (Going Commando and Up Your Arsenal are both easy candidates for being some of my favorite games of all time), and I wanted to like this movie. I was excited for this movie. I had low expectations going in, I was cautious, but optimistic. But I was still let down. Why? Well buckle in, I ended up typing up WAY more than I expected so if you're going to TL;DR, do it now. But what I can say about the film is it's hard for me to imagine what sort of audience they were going for since it does little to appeal to either hardcore fans or casual movie going audiences. For starters, neither the comedy or action is strong enough to appeal to longtime R&C fans. And the narrative and characters weren't engaging enough to attract the attention of anyone, fans or non-fans alike.

Humor wise it was closer in style to that of the PS3 R&C games, which makes sense considering the movie shared the same writer as those games, T.J. Fixman. But while the PS3 games are considered weaker in comparison to the writing of the PS2 games, it was at least serviceable enough to get a few good laughs every now and then. The movie however, had maybe two or three good jokes in it's entire 94 minute runtime.

But in either the PS2 or PS3 games humor was mainly icing on the cake when it came to the most important part, the gratuitous and larger than life sci-fi action, and the movie did little to capture even a fraction of it, and I can offer a good and direct example as to why. During the big action scene at Metropolis (or "Aleero City", why they changed I can't say), every time a warbot was shot down, they just simply tipped over. This is a very noticeable problem when you remember that this is part of the R&C series, which has been known for it's fun and extravagant robot destruction physics. Unlike said games, you don't see robot limbs and gears go flying or their metal casings crack and dent, instead you just see robots toppling over flaccidly.

>>86776776
As far as being an adaptation goes, the movie feels watered down from it's source material in nearly every aspect. The jokes are less funny and more childish, as well as completely lacking any adult innuendo and euphemisms such as the ones found in the titles of over half the games in the series. The action is sparse and does little to convey the boisterous chaos and destruction that makes up the majority of gameplay time for most R&C games. Even the story and characterizations fall flat in comparison to what can be found in the games. While the stronger focus on an overarching narrative that characterized the PS3 games has been met with mixed opinions from long time R&C fans, said narrative was far more interesting and ambitious than anything the movie had to offer, which is especially disappointing since like mentioned before, it had the same writer on board. There were multiple moments in Tools of Destruction and A Crack in Time that felt considerably more "cinematic" than anything the movie had to offer. The comedy, the action, the narrative, the characters, all feel too 'safe' and unambitious, trying to appeal to everyone in a way that ends up appealing to no one instead.

Maybe I'm just being too harsh with this movie. After all is said and done, I wouldn't consider it to be completely terrible in the same way so many video game adaptations are. And it does stay truer to the source material than many others do, I have to give it credit for that. But the fact that they came so close to the Ratchet & Clank experience, but then took everything people love about the series and made it so sterile and bland feels more insulting to me than the Super Mario Brothers movie ever was, and no amount of big round Elaris booty can fix that.

>>86768966
No, play the games. They're funnier.

>>86777810
The PS2 ones and maybe A Crack in Time

I liked the movie, it just felt really different from the games.

>>86768966
You were supposed to play the games first, then watch the film... and then bitch about the film not being as good as the games.

>>86778405
Fuck that shit. I wouldn't expect a gamer to have seen Casablanca to play and review Casablanca The Game. And nobody should have to have played the games to enjoy a movie. Quit making excuses for shitty movies.

They could have gone for a rated M comedy, like Ratchet & Clank are supposed to be, but thought going for the kids was safer.

>>86778491
The games aren't even rated M you retard.

>>86767288
Ratchet and Clank spend most of the movie in different rooms.

I don't understand how the script got approved without anybody finding a problem with that.

>>86778491
>rated M comedy
We call that R-rated, honey. And I doubt a few dick jokes and cussing could have saved such a bland story. It probably would have made it worse.

>>86778695
This script became lost in production.
>write general story in treatment
>treatment is approved by movie distributor with changes
>treatment is written out as two scripts, one for the game and one for the movie
>game development team make changes during development
>animation studio makes changes during development
>movie producers demand changes after test footage
>test footage changes apply to movie and game, leading to further meetings for coordinating
>first cut of the movie comes back with more changes, coordination once more
>director is now more concerned with making the movie sync with the game and release on time as opposed to if the movie is actually good

File: 1419620617406.gif (725KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

725KB, 400x225px

>22
>Go to cinema with 22 year old friend
>Watch Civil War
>Come out and decide to double feature
>We both loved the games
>Go to R&C
>There's about 4 other people here
>1 adult man
>1 mother and 2 young boys
>Watch the movie
>No one is laughing, not even the little kids
>We're not even cringing, just horrifically bored
>Come out and instantly forget 90% of it

It's a good example in my mind of "boring" being worse than "bad"

>>86778850
But you thought seeing Civil War was a good choice.

>>86770926
If nothing else I hope they start putting Elaris into the games.

Nefarious and Qwark were gold.

File: rat.webm (2MB, 1280x538px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x538px

yes

I haven't even seen it yet but I'm a huge Ratchet & Clank fan and was hyped for this movie years ago...was kinda bummed out just hearing it was just okay or boring or meh. R&C had big potential for a movie and it sucks it didn't reach it's full potential because even the PS3 games that lacked the level of wit of the dialogue/cutscenes the PS2 games had were still enjoyable in their own right and apparently TJ Fixman was the writer for the movie but I've heard he ditched it midway because of some script issues with the director. I'll eventually watch it online though with very low expectations.

I didn't see the movie but I played the PS4 game, which to my understanding has the same story and even scenes from the movie, so I have a fair idea of what the movie is like.

I don't know what happened, but the series seem to lose all of its bite and edge. Go back and at least watch the cutscenes from the first game - that game pulled no punches, it had snappy dialogue, and wasn't afraid to get risque and harsh. That game was all about the character development and relationship of the titular characters: they go from liking each other, to hating each other, to regaining trust again and becoming a true duo. In the new story, they are friends from the get-go and both one-dimensional characters. Ratchet is no longer an asshole who has to learn respect, and Clank is just there and has no reason to exist other than his name being in the title.

One of the most insulting parts of the new story is the climactic moment where the bad guys blow up a planet, but then a minute later they say "all of the civilians were evacuated safely." I guarantee if a planet was destroyed in the PS2 games, everybody on it would have died.

>>86780237
The movie is actually significantly worse than the game. The game fixes a lot of the pacing issues and how Ratchet and Clank barely do anything together. If you've played the game you have literally no reason to watch the movie other than actively disappointing yourself.

>>86780125

>women playing vidya according to execs.

As someone who didn't play the games growing up and didn't have as much as a connection to the franchise, I liked it.

Parts that worked for me:
Qwark's entire arc
The fact that Nefarious, the entire time, had a beef with Qwark and Qwark alone- Ratchet and Clank were barely even on his radar.

The fact that Drek was legit obsessed with building a perfect world: it was more interesting to me than just "money money money".

What didn't work:
Ratchet and Clank did jack shit. The game's arc of Ratchet being a jerk sounds more interesting, but the direction of him being reckless could've worked if they had committed. It was never developed to a satisfactory degree.

Elaris was OK, but the other woman ranger character was pointless. So was Stallone and the other space ranger, come to think of it.

>>86780237
>One of the most insulting parts of the new story is the climactic moment where the bad guys blow up a planet, but then a minute later they say "all of the civilians were evacuated safely." I guarantee if a planet was destroyed in the PS2 games, everybody on it would have died.

That bugged me too on first viewing, but on a second viewing, it made sense.

Drek sold his plot to Qwark on the pretense that no one would get hurt. Making him responsib;e for blowing up an entire populated planet would've made Qwark's eventual redemption way too hollow.

>>86780868
>Making him responsib;e for blowing up an entire populated planet would've made Qwark's eventual redemption way too hollow.
The original game solved this by NOT giving Qwark a redemption arc. He's significantly more of an asshole in the games and Qwark revealing himself as a turncoat is one of the main motivators that drives Ratchet to actually do something.

>>86780928
Didn't they kinda go back on that later in the series, though? He went from being a genuine villain to being an incompetent and egocentric hero, which from what I understand most people prefer anyway.

>>86780990
Eventually, but in the first game he was mostly just a macguffin to drive the characters to do something, and once he was revealed to be evil they realized that they had to do something themselves since no one else would. In the movie, Qwark's development takes up most of the movie and leaves nothing for Ratchet and Clank to do other than exist because they have to. If Qwark was more 2D, it would've had room for the actual protagonists to do something.

>>86781066
I dunno. I feel like it should be possible to have an arc for R&C AND get in a well rounded Qwark, but I'm not sure how.

Maybe cut that sequence in the middle of the movie where they showcase weapons from the game for no reason.

>>86781200
That sequence was only a minute long. It wouldn't save nearly enough time.

>>86781215
Well then cut down the sequence with the old guy in the beginning, too.

I don't know, it felt like simultaneously too much fluff happened and yet the main characters did nothing.