Castlevania Dungeon Forums
The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Ratty on May 09, 2013, 09:25:06 PM
-
Killing the essence of what it really is I mean. Assuming LoS hasn't already killed off the original series forever...
As most of us know Paul W. S. Anderson has been trying to make a Castlevania movie for years now. (No idea who actually has the rights and reins now, it's gone back and forth so much.) And as most of us also know a movie by him or others would be unlikely to resemble the series canon in any real way. As I recall a previous treatment by Anderson was set in modern day New York for example. Anderson's terrible Resident Evil series has next to nothing to do with the games of the same name but they have allowed Resident Evil as a brand to not only remain in the public consciousness but to grow.
But how much has the heavy action, low (if any) horror influence of these movies hurt the games? Both from influencing the creators and shifting audience expectations of the brand? For some reason, the RE games have seemingly given up on actually being horror titles. And I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the success of the movies allowed Capcom to believe that's what the audience wanted, and maybe it really is. Though I would doubt that's the only reason if so, big companies seem to think genericizing all games, even ones in firmly genre-grounded series, to appeal to the widest possible audience is somehow a good idea these days. Maybe the next Madden will have FPS multiplayer for maximum penetration of the all-important demBROgrapic.
But I degress, changes to our beloved franchise would be inevitable in a film for budgetary and storytelling reasons. And probably so Anderson's wife could Mary-Sue if he winds up running the show. You can't build elaborate castle sets or even convincing CGI ones on the cheap, and the lone protagonist defeating monsters set-up would have to be changed for a general audience. There would have to be a love interest, because every American action movie MUST have a romance, and a comedy sidekick. No matter how much they're obviously tacked-on. Dracula and his minions would have to be adjusted to fit into a post-Twilight world.
If the movie(s) were successful this might make a general audience more aware of the brand name Castlevania, but would it really help game sales, and what would its creative effect be on future games? Of course since it seems Konami is probably not interested in reviving the original canon after MercurySteam lets go of the reins, the entire question may be moot.
PS- On the Resident Evil movies I would be tempted to say something like "the money of people with low standards and poor taste is just as green as everyone else's".
But a guy who's happily watched as much schlock as I have has no room to talk.
-
I think it would just bury it.
Castlevania is a little more delicate than most others when it comes to attempting to seriously execute it, especially as another form of media.
We know it can be done, but in order to take it to the next level would require such skill far beyond Paul W S Anderson's. Whereas Resident Evil could work as a run n' gun zombie shooter, what can Castlevania honestly transition into?
Castlevania is pretty stuck in it's genre, a one man army taking on the legions of the undead lead by Dracula of all things. In order to properly pull this off with any seriousness you really have to work at it. Honestly the only other direction they could possibly take with this is just full parody mode and hand it off to Pixar for a kid friendly fun filled monster mashup adventure. Not saying that wouldn't also be interesting, but I would prefer some sort of seriousness to it.
Capture for me the visual and audio spirit of Super Castlevania IV on the big screen, and you will win me over.
Personally I think Simon's Quest holds perhaps the biggest movie potential, other than Dracula's Curse of course. Simon's Quest has a wide aptitude for expansion to include a larger cast, with many "NPCs" able to take up some roles. The ferry man, the towns people, the Crystal Knight perhaps given a bigger role. Hell you could make up new character that fit right into the setting. A crazy merchant is always welcome. Perhaps a Zead like character for Death's part. There is a LOT you can do with this. I can see comedy working it's way in easier like this than any other game. You have such a wide variety of expansion and established things to work with.
Open the damn thing with Simon and Dracula's final battle, and a possible short montage of the castle trek. That will get the audience's attention. Then tell of the aftermath, the curse, and go from there. Simon battles the undead bosses, Carmilla, Death, etc etc etc while traveling the countryside on a varying set of backdrops. Finish it off at the castle ruins with Dracula wraith, and burning the count 'forever'. Looks great in my head.
Honestly this doesn't sound as hard as I thought. Too bad it'll never happen though.
-
We can dream at least
-
As far as I know, Anderson no longer holds the reins on the movie. But I'm not so sure about that info.
I personally am too afraid of any Castlevania movie coming out because it is a double edged sword. A successful movie might not be true to the game and a flop would make things worse in terms of game sales.
-
Personally I think Simon's Quest holds perhaps the biggest movie potential, other than Dracula's Curse of course. Simon's Quest has a wide aptitude for expansion to include a larger cast, with many "NPCs" able to take up some roles. The ferry man, the towns people, the Crystal Knight perhaps given a bigger role. Hell you could make up new character that fit right into the setting. A crazy merchant is always welcome. Perhaps a Zead like character for Death's part. There is a LOT you can do with this. I can see comedy working it's way in easier like this than any other game. You have such a wide variety of expansion and established things to work with.
Open the damn thing with Simon and Dracula's final battle, and a possible short montage of the castle trek. That will get the audience's attention. Then tell of the aftermath, the curse, and go from there. Simon battles the undead bosses, Carmilla, Death, etc etc etc while traveling the countryside on a varying set of backdrops. Finish it off at the castle ruins with Dracula wraith, and burning the count 'forever'. Looks great in my head.
Honestly this doesn't sound as hard as I thought. Too bad it'll never happen though.
Oh hell yes! Simon's Quest would fit the bill of a movie for sure! And don't forget about the woman whom visits Simon in the cemetery. It would give us a chance to see how Simon learned of his illness and about Dracula's curse over the land of Romania.
-
IMO, LoS put the series on life support in that I barely resembles what it was and that a movie would just kill it. It would be like pulling the plug on a brain-dead person. Ok, that I might have gone too far with that comparison, but you see my point.
Then again, if whoever knows what they are doing and actually knows the overall story of the cannon before LoS, it could save the series. Hell, if they were an actual fan of the series, the could make that movie about the 1999 battle. There are very little details about it that we know, which gives plenty of leeway for a movie so long as what has been said in the games is in the movie.
Here's what we know about the event:
- It happened in 1999
- It was during an eclipse
- The castle was sealed in the eclipse
- Julius Belmont was there
- Alucard was likely there
- There was a prophecy about it
Seeing how there was never a game made about the event, a movie is do-able if what we those points are used in the movie.
Unlikely I know, but it could happen.
-
Yoko's mom/dad was also there, as was Mina's father. And don't forget the "secret organization" Alucard joined (I'd like to think the Illuminati). Also the military was involved to some extent (various dead zombies that "marched towards their death in the Demon Castle War," according to the in-game descriptions)
I've always felt that Lords of Shadow was "the game of the movie." It has all the stuff a live-action CV movie would have; epic orchestrated soundtrack, big-name actors, awesome scenery, etc. Had LoS actually been released in theaters as the CV movie instead of a ps3 game, how would you guys feel about it? Would opinions be the same, or would it be "hey it has a lot of elements from Castlevania, but it also does it's own thing," which is what almost ALL Hollywood adaptations from previous media does anyway?
In that light, LoS can be seen as a blessing in disguise, because if you think about it, gameplay issues aside, it's everything a Castlevania movie on the big screen would be like. For the haters of LoS, I feel the game becomes easier to accept if you think about it like that.
-
You mean Van Helsing wasn't supposed to be the Castlevania movie?
-
I honestly don't think a movie will happen. If it was going to, it would have been years ago. They need to just stop trying to make it happen, the Metal Gear Solid movie sounds more promising anyway.
-
I think it would just bury it.
Castlevania is pretty stuck in it's genre, a one man army taking on the legions of the undead lead by Dracula of all things. In order to properly pull this off with any seriousness you really have to work at it. Honestly the only other direction they could possibly take with this is just full parody mode and hand it off to Pixar for a kid friendly fun filled monster mashup adventure. Not saying that wouldn't also be interesting, but I would prefer some sort of seriousness to it.
T you can do with this. I can see comedy working it's way in easier like this than any other game. You have such a wide variety of expansion and established things to work with.
Kinda like how they did The Incredibles?
-
And don't forget the "secret organization" Alucard joined (I'd like to think the Illuminati).
I doubt very much that Alucard would join the illuminati as they are the originators of the 'new world order' nonsense and thus are in a sense, the bad guys.
-
I doubt very much that Alucard would join the illuminati as they are the originators of the 'new world order' nonsense and thus are in a sense, the bad guys.
Maybe they are the ones who resurrect Dracula.
-
Keeping Anderson away from a CV movie would be one of the few instances where I would condone murder.
I honestly don't think a movie will happen. If it was going to, it would have been years ago. They need to just stop trying to make it happen, the Metal Gear Solid movie sounds more promising anyway.
They already did that movie. "Escape from NY" and "Escape from LA". :P
-
A Castlevania movie seems like one of those things that just doesn't get off the ground. If it does then I don't think it will "kill" the series but it'll leave just another mark on the franchises back. The only way Castlevania can be killed is for Konami to come out and say "We're killing the series, here's more Metal Gear!" and bury all the Castlevania teams in concrete underneath the building with Hudson, team Silent etc.
-
I really hope that the movie is cancelled. I mean REALLY hope that it's cancelled. The odds of it being even close to decent are extremely low. There have been way too many lackluster stories in the games themselves, we don't need any more disappointing story telling in the Castlevania series.
-
A CG movie would be neat. Look at the first LoS2 trailer, it was awesome.
-
A CG movie would be neat. Look at the first LoS2 trailer, it was awesome.
Only Final Fantasy can get away with doing a full length CG movie.
-
Although the thought of a CV movie is pretty great, i really don't feel one should be made. I'm sure most would agree a franchise which has had positive influence on its fans through 2 decades has a very high bar set. So many things have happened throughout the story (canon), that making a movie now would only disappoint many a fan. Everyone of us would expect one thing or another we have favored highly from the series and it would fall short. A prime example i can use of epic movie adaption failure would be Dragonball Evolution. I loved the series through its entirety but when the actual movie came out i was very against seeing it. (still haven't) So many things seemed unfitting. Personally i believe a showtime series or something would work wonders with giving Castlevania a somewhat movie persona. Should it make it past one season with decent reviews then the thought of a movie would be more acceptable. I just feel like all the years it took them to decide who was going to do the movie caused the chances for it to be good to expire.
-
Only Final Fantasy can get away with doing a full length CG movie.
Resident Evil: Degeneration and Tekken: Blood Vengeance say hello.
-
The only way a live action Castlevania movie (or any video game based movie) could successfully capture the look, feel and essence of what that particular game that it is based off of, would be to have actual, non-biased and dedicated fans of the game, do the actual meat of the movie.
In my opinion, this would be the writing and directing.
On a side note, in my honest opinion I feel the best way they could capture a solid first movie story line would be to have it span over at least 2 hundred years.
They may have to change the places of a few characters in order for it make sense to anyone not familiar with the series' timeline (basically 80% of general movie goers).
A good example:
- Trevor (instead of Simon) confronts and defeats Dracula.
- Dracula lays a curse on Trevor, now he has to break the curse by gathering Dracula's scattered parts for a final battle to end the curse.
Perhaps he defeats Dracula but fails to end the curse, which would explain Dracula returning in 100 years and would also lead us to...
- 100 years later Simon Belmont must end the curse of darkness placed on the land by Dracula that his ancestor Trevor, thought he had accomplished.
With the help of a female mystic (Sypha Belnades), an acrobatic pirate (Grant Danasty) and the son of Dracula himself (Alucard), the trio must set out to destroy Dracula once and for all (or at least for the next 100 years or so).
---------------------------------------------------
That would make good, thorough plot depth for a first film.
The sequel, would be where the action, story and intensity really ramps up.
In my opinion, this is where Dracula X: Rondo of Blood and Symphony of the night would step in.
1792 - Richter Belmont is thrown into the chaos brought on by the resurrection of an almost forgotten, dark legend, Count Dracula. Richter's homeland becomes assailed by dark forces and his fiance is abducted.
Richter must rediscover and embrace his heritage, his destiny as well as the Vampire Killer whip, in order to make his way to and through the devil's castle, Castlevania, in order to rescue his beloved and destroy Count Dracula.
(This is a much more personally motivated and driven story.)
Richter Belmont succeeds.
5 years later, Richter disappears.
(We all know why.)
With no Belmont to face and defeat the returning evil, a man's eternal slumber is disturbed, as he is called upon by the forces of light (i'm assuming the soul of his mother Lisa), to once again, confront and neutralize the forces of darkness once more, his own father. (I told you, very, very personal...).
------------------------------------
So that's it, my basic groundwork for the first 2 Castle flicks.
Like i said, I was a little loose with the "whys" and "hows", but at least THIS would be light years ahead of what they have in store for us.
Don't need a crystal ball for that...
-
Grant should just be what he was intended to be, a member of the Danesti clan trying to reclaim Wallachia from the evil sorceror Dracula. And the movie needs to focus on Dracula's alchemy. That's what distinguishes CV's Dracula from all other Draculas.
But most importantly, the whole entire movie needs to be an homage to not only the game series but old horror movies as well. Think "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" but in a serious tone. If you're going to make a movie about a game that's an homage to a genre of movies, the movie should also be an homage to that genre of movies.
-
Grant should just be what he was intended to be, a member of the Danesti clan trying to reclaim Wallachia from the evil sorceror Dracula. And the movie needs to focus on Dracula's alchemy. That's what distinguishes CV's Dracula from all other Draculas.
But most importantly, the whole entire movie needs to be an homage to not only the game series but old horror movies as well. Think "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" but in a serious tone. If you're going to make a movie about a game that's an homage to a genre of movies, the movie should also be an homage to that genre of movies.
I actually think THAT is what a reboot of the games should've went for in the first place. Keep to the classic horror inspiration, but a uber serious and dark take on it. Frankenstein's monster, the mummies, Medusa, Death, werewolves, mermen, clasics like medusa heads, bone pillars, yadda yadda. Hell, even maybe retro "black suit, hair slicked back" Dracula. Something that exists as hallmark to a certain time, yet is timeless as well. Nothing heavily drenched in medievalism. And since it's a reboot, they could start over with the story, and take ideas fromt he original canon buy bypass the plot holes. You COULD make Grant a Danesti, flesh out all the dies between the House of Belmont, House of Danesti and the House of Tepes. Agreed, make Dracula an alchemist and sorcerer and keep his origin "to the point" instead of "Voilà! Dracula is REALLY a Belmont!" or "Voilà! Dracula is a guy named Mathias Cronqvist who was best friends of the head of the Belmont clan!!". Just keep him Vlad Tepes, show him as a human transforming himself into the "Dark Lord" through sorcery, demonic worship and alchemy. Show him as BOTH a brillaint tactician who can command hoards of monsters to reap a trail of death over the Wallachian countryside as well as a vicious warrior who can take out band of warriors/vampire hunters with little hesitation. No "either one of the other", but BOTH! I'm tired of the stark contrast ideals of choice in modern EVERYTHING. Either one or the other. NO! BOTH!!!!! You can have BOTTTTH! You just have to TRY! It's like everybody's too caught up in their own little illusions of "this can't work any way but either one way or the other!". When people dellude themselves into thinking like that for so long, there IS no other way than path 1 and path 2. There is no middle ground, or at least they've become(made themselves) blind to it. It's a situation where the phrase "Open your eyes." fits in perfectly. You CAN have your peanut butter and your chocolate TOGETHER!!! ;D
-
They need an outside source. IGA... had some ideas. I mean, Dracula being a bit remorseful and just missing his wife was cliche, but at least he gave Drac a personality. He kinda made you feel sorry for the guy. Really, Drac wasn't all that bad. A bit misguided, very intelligent, very knowledgeable... AND NOBODY WOULD LET HIM FUCKING SLEEP! Just let the guy get a good century's rest and he might not be so cantankerous the next time people see him.
But letting Europeans work on the story... Maybe if it was a pagan greek. But anyone that thinks Satan should be in Castlevania needs to be pulled from the crew immediately. I have no problem with a villain in Castlevania being from the Belmonts. I liked making Richter into a villain temporarily. And in one of my planned (still in planning) fan games, I was going to make a Castlevania enemy a Belmont in origin.
I would love to see Dracula fight with a sword and sorcery. Then summon a demon while he recuperates, then when the demon is defeated he gives his body over to the demon and it attacks stronger than ever.
But Big D was only really ever evil because he was a warmonger with an army of demons. I mean, the guy never actually hurt anyone. There were rumors of it, but all he did was send skeletons and demons out to terrorize villages. Maybe spread a curse about the countryside. Wasn't the only time he was ever seen leaving the castle in Haunted Castle? And that was just to snag a girl.
-
What? the old Dracula having a personality?
"Bah i'm revived so I will cleanse the world from humans blah blah, master tactician that never comes out of his throne room and waits for the hero to be fully powered to fight blah I'm so sorry Alucard lisa I love you forgive me blah 5 minutes later I'm seducing a young witch and then procceed to kill her blah blah blah"
No, the old Dracula was a bad pastiche of every evil cliche. At least the new Dracula doesn't want to kill humanity, he wants to kill THE BROTHERHOOD and oh he's got good reasons for that.
But Big D was only really ever evil because he was a warmonger with an army of demons. I mean, the guy never actually hurt anyone. There were rumors of it, but all he did was send skeletons and demons out to terrorize villages. Maybe spread a curse about the countryside. Wasn't the only time he was ever seen leaving the castle in Haunted Castle? And that was just to snag a girl.
IGA liked to call Dracula "The prince of Darkness" and the "most powerful demon lord" (Even when he didn't even left his room in 1000 years or so). He liked to picture him has the baddest of the baddest and was supposedly humanity's worst nightmare. as a game villain there couldn't be a worse bad man than Old Dracula. He was so futile.
But letting Europeans work on the story... Maybe if it was a pagan greek. But anyone that thinks Satan should be in Castlevania needs to be pulled from the crew immediately. I have no problem with a villain in Castlevania being from the Belmonts. I liked making Richter into a villain temporarily. And in one of my planned (still in planning) fan games, I was going to make a Castlevania enemy a Belmont in origin.
Well Akumajou Dracula means "Dracula Castle of the Devil" and it was implied in the beginning that Dracula got his powers from Satan, we also had a lot of christian imagery in Castlevania. Satan is not an outsider to the universe, even if the implementation wasn't as good, you can't say that he doesn't have "a place" in the series.
-
Akuma doesn't mean THE Devil. An akuma is any kind of malevolent demon. And Dracula summoned Sumerian demons. Satan was Jewish and questionable as to even being a demon. So no, he doesn't belong. Dracula wasn't a devil worshiper, he was an alchemical sorceror and demon conjurer.
Actually the master tactician that never leaves his throne room is good strategy. If you're not a soldier, don't go forth into battle. He's never really been the hardest boss in the series, just tediously slow to die because of his multiple forms or summons.
-
Well Akumajou Dracula means "Dracula Castle of the Devil" and it was implied in the beginning that Dracula got his powers from Satan, we also had a lot of christian imagery in Castlevania.
Actoolee, to be more accuracy, I believe the CVAdventure manual stated that Dracula made a pact with an "evil deity," and Lament confirms that evil deity was Death. There was also some stuff about "Satanic Rituals," but the canon never states that the actual fallen angel Lucifer/Satan had any involvement. And TheouAegis is right; Dracula summoning Sumerian demons & gods to do his bidding is more likely than him becoming pals with Satan.
However what I DO like about the LoS-verse is how this version of Dracula essentially usurped Satan for Hell's throne, which is why he and his acolytes wants revenge on him 1000 years later. Dracula is an enemy of both God AND Satan, and I think that makes for a good story.
-
Actually the master tactician that never leaves his throne room is good strategy. If you're not a soldier, don't go forth into battle. He's never really been the hardest boss in the series, just tediously slow to die because of his multiple forms or summons.
Because "Getting the ***** out and thinking another strategy" was not good enough for him. He should had learned that the Belmonts were not cute puppies by his 3rd encounter, a frontal attack is simply not an option, and of course, he was too "battle weak" to be considered a threat. It's even worse that we are told that he's the most evil thing on earth but we never see him doing any harm (except in Rondo of Blood but that's not IGA's story) outside his Castle. He's not that bad, really. And that undermines his importance and "awe". The old Dracula was just not a compelling villain, not in the way he was written. In the way he didn't represent A THREAT.
Not that Gabriel is MUCH better but at least we can understand him, and right now he's done nasty things justified by his own twisted moral code. And the fact that he believes himself to be God sent could lead to interesting things. And for all we know he wasn't killed in MoF so he's a little more of a figure.
-
Because "Getting the ***** out and thinking another strategy" was not good enough for him. He should had learned that the Belmonts were not cute puppies by his 3rd encounter, a frontal attack is simply not an option, and of course, he was too "battle weak" to be considered a threat. It's even worse that we are told that he's the most evil thing on earth but we never see him doing any harm (except in Rondo of Blood but that's not IGA's story) outside his Castle. He's not that bad, really. And that undermines his importance and "awe". The old Dracula was just not a compelling villain, not in the way he was written. In the way he didn't represent A THREAT.
Not that Gabriel is MUCH better but at least we can understand him, and right now he's done nasty things justified by his own twisted moral code. And the fact that he believes himself to be God sent could lead to interesting things. And for all we know he wasn't killed in MoF so he's a little more of a figure.
I still dont' care for Gabriel that much, though, especially as Dracula.
And the gripe about old CV Drac not measuring up is only so really because, quite frankly, he couldn't. None of the original games invested in the story over gameplay. If anything, you can't tell a deep story in a 2D side-scroller or metroidvania if you want to keep up the pacing of exploration(MoF is a prime example, the pacing feels off). Not that it CAN'T happen, though you have to balance both sides to get it right. For longer story sequences, you have to balance that with gameplay. The game would have to be considerably long because of that. RPGs can do that because they are given an ample amount of time to develope both their stories and gameplay through exploration. Actions games rarely reach that mark. That being said, I'd love, for once, a ballsy action game that TRIES to do something like that(as in an action adventure that actually spans 60+ hours of gamplay and story, with multiple locations and events), though in this ADHD generation, the quick fix rules over the slow burn. Peoplel want games they can finish fast and easy.
As for Dracula, I still stand on my belief that one dipping from both puddles would be the best representation. One who is both a genius tactician AND a ruthless warrior. So far, Gabriel has only shown me he's a brute, and old Drac is mainly the last boss. I want to see a CV story where Dracula actually confronts the Belmont and leaves him on the verge of death. Then when the Belmont returns home, he finds his family all slaughtered and staked to the walls in crucifix style(didn't a comic or the movie treatment do something like that?). Dracula basically leaving the Belmont alone and broken, and he, the last of his family, has to work his way up again, train and take his revenge on the "Dark Lord". THAT is the fuckin' CV reboot I want to see. It could be a retelling of the origin with Trevor being the young Belmont man seeking vengeance on Dracula and his hoard of monsters. Dracula could be leading groups of monsters and completely demonlishing villages. Survivors get rounded up and taken to the castle for impalement. That's really what I want to see in this series.
-
You can either have Coke or Pepsi, DragonSlayr81-chan, NOT both >:(
-
You can either have Coke or Pepsi, DragonSlayr81-chan, NOT both >:(
Hey, but Coksi tastes freakin GOOOOOOD!!!
Besides, I was thinking up an idea. Maybe a new Dracula origin where Trevor's father, Grant's father were allies with Dracula(then, Lord Vlad Tepes), who led them in his personal elite squad against the Turks. But throughout battle, Dracula's bloodlust grew and he was to lead them into Turkey to commit atrocious acts on innocent people. Belmont and Danesti(among the few others, you could fill in the blank to who they are with various important families in the CV universe) abandoned him and he was captured by the Turks, tortured and imprisioned. There, kept with other undesirables and locked away in the darkest pits under the Ottoman rule, Vlad met an old man who was locked up for heretic practices, but strange enough, cannot die(the Turks have tried to kill him on many occasions for being a blasphemer in the wake of Islam, but the man continues to live). The man teaches Vlad the dark artes and secret rules of Alchemy.
Vlad eventually breaks out of the prison and uses his new found powers(not yet a vampire) on his captors. He then seeks to reclaim his homeland and rules as a cruel leader and seeks to ethnic cleanse the lands from those who might taint it's heritage. Lots of people, radicals, pilgrims and criminals are impaled. Vlad, now calling himself Dracula, seeks even more power, and eventually crosses over into there realm of being a cursed being, like the man passed his dark wisdom down to him. He now seeks revenge on those who abanodoned him, but from the years he was imprisoned, many of them(Belmonts, Danesti, among others) left the area of Wallachia to settle elsewhere, in secrecy, leading simple lives. Dracula finds one of his former knights still living in the area, masquerading as a simiple farmer who's raised his lovely daughter, Elisabetha, alone. Dracula has both them brought to his castle, Elisabetha is raped in front of her father, then he is killed in front of her. She's kept inprisoned in his tower, his pet and prized bird. She eventually gives birth to Alucard and kills herself shortly after. The time prior and after, he actively searches the countryside for the others, finding some and leaving many in misery.
-
DragonSlayr81 makes a good point about Dracula so I agree with him. Dracula's character was fine until IGA made LoI and messed it up. Then we have LoS which makes Dracula interesting on another level but doesn't live up to what he really should have been. The Real life Vlad Tepes was both a master tactician and a ruthless warrior. He's the ONLY one to rightfully be called Dracula because that's who he is.
-
The main issue I have with LoI is it confuses the connection between Vlad Tepes and Dracula. Dracula can be a title, but they already established he is "Vlad Tepes Dracula" beforehand. But if I disregard the narrative shortcomings of LoI, I like the idea. He had to have a human life before being a vampire, which is something the games before that didn't elaborate on. Back in the day, the player had to assume he was the Wallachian guy who liked impaling. SotN started portraying him as kind of dark messiah or a judge of mankind, not just someone who does things for the evulz. I like that more than him just being a complete sadist asshole just because. Personificating evil in the world to a single entity? Not my cup of tea *cough and subtly points at Satan wearing a black cloud crotch cover*.
Fox Mulder says it best: "The devil is just a man with a plan. True evil is the collaboration of man". Classic Drac is just doing what mankind wants. Humans are the true "villain" of the story. Drac is a sophisticated man who got betrayed by God, so he became a vampire. Then humans took away what he cared about the most, so he became the genie of their vile needs. And I mean genie in the Wishmaster-kind of way, not the Disney way.
My fanon explonation why his tactics are varying and he seems to remember little of his genius strategist ways? Repeated deaths make you kind of silly. But even if the Real Big D is an ineffective murderer of Belmonts, he always had style and class.
-
Indeed, A-Yty-chan, IGA stated that the man once known as Mathius Cronqvist eventually changed his name & identity to live in quietly in foreign lands, where he would delve deeper into the dark arts & "perform taboo rituals & summon ancient demons in his castle fortress," according to the CVAdventure manual. The SotN manual also stated that he was estimated to be 800 years old, therefore there was no way anybody could speculate that he was OUR historical Vlad from the 15th century. Since early on this "alternate history" of Earth never intended for Vlad to have fought the Turks in Wallachia, have a sibling, etc. That's what I think is great about the series; it borrows several historical events/figures, but puts its own spin on things (The Crusades, the solar eclipses, etc.) A "what-if" version of planet Earth.
And quite honestly, I'm still clamoring for a game that takes place a century after LoI that shows a young Vlad collecting demon/vampire souls. A reverse-AoS if you will, but the big bad could be Galamoth. So many possibilities..
-
And quite honestly, I'm still clamoring for a game that takes place a century after LoI that shows a young Vlad collecting demon/vampire souls. A reverse-AoS if you will, but the big bad could be Galamoth. So many possibilities..
Ah yes, I would want to play that game.
But, would future developers use IGA's timeline?
-
And quite honestly, I'm still clamoring for a game that takes place a century after LoI that shows a young Vlad collecting demon/vampire souls. A reverse-AoS if you will, but the big bad could be Galamoth. So many possibilities..
Or maybe anyone who previously owned what would be Castlevania. If Walter's castle weren't indeed the demon castle, then I want to see how Dracula found the castle and made it his, and how it became a creature of chaos (or if it were indeed a creature of chaos from the beginning).
Also, seeing as Death is pretty much Dracula's familiar, perhaps this could be worked into the gameplay in a manner not unlike Chaos Legion.
-
I don't believe Dracula ever found Castlevania in the 'stumbled upon' sense. It is a product of his sorcery therefore he created it out of his own will. It's a reflection of his evil desires and ambitions that always changes every time it is reborn, but ultimately is still the same in it's purpose.
-
I see, if he did raise the castle through his own will, then I suppose crisis' proposal would work better, as an act of that caliber would require immense power, even moreso to bind the power of Chaos as the castle's power source.
-
Killing the essence of what it really is I mean. Assuming LoS hasn't already killed off the original series forever...
LoS hasn't killed off the original continuum forever. The same rabid irrational hatred and paranoia that "fans" have toward the LOS entry is no different than when the Kojima Army claimed Rising Revengeance would be the deathnail of the Metal Gear franchise. LOS was not Konami killing off Igarashi's universe, it was Konami taking Castlevania in a different direction albeit briefly whether the entry would be successful or not. It seems apparent that Konami is insistent on continuing the traditional Castlevania series (and with that the canon) on handheld consoles anyway.
But I degress, changes to our beloved franchise would be inevitable in a film for budgetary and storytelling reasons. And probably so Anderson's wife could Mary-Sue if he winds up running the show. You can't build elaborate castle sets or even convincing CGI ones on the cheap, and the lone protagonist defeating monsters set-up would have to be changed for a general audience. There would have to be a love interest, because every American action movie MUST have a romance, and a comedy sidekick. No matter how much they're obviously tacked-on. Dracula and his minions would have to be adjusted to fit into a post-Twilight world.
I agree with everything you have said.
If the movie(s) were successful this might make a general audience more aware of the brand name Castlevania, but would it really help game sales, and what would its creative effect be on future games? Of course since it seems Konami is probably not interested in reviving the original canon after MercurySteam lets go of the reins, the entire question may be moot.
On this end I disagree with everything you have said for the following reasons. It doesn't matter how bad or how successful the Castlevania movie will be, it will hardly affect the series. I argue this because of Resident Evil. Because most Americans are retarded the Resident Evil movies have been balls out blockbusters. The same idiots that saw the first one came out to see six or seven or whatever fucking number Anderson is on at this point. Each year there is a new RE movie which is somehow even more abysmal than whatever movie preceded it and people keep drinking the punch. Bear in mind that the idiots going to see these movies are composed mostly of typical movie goers and not the RE fanbase. Movie goers only go to see movies. They aren't about to drop $40 for a movie and an additional $60 for the game on which these movies are based on. With that said whether the Castlevania movie kicks ass or sucks it interest in the game series will be what it is.
Focusing my post directly on the aforementioned movie I want us all to be clear on why it's going to suck as all video game movies do. The issue we've seen in previous video game movies is that directors gear these movies toward "a commercial audience" see "the ignorant masses" and in order to give the illusion that they're staying faithful to the property they pick certain elements on callbacks of those properties. For example, look at Silent Hill 2 or whatever the second movie was called. It was based almost entirely on the third game but it took elements from this game or that game or that in the series, taping them together in a terrible mishmash while the narrative strayed from the original source material and a buttload of CG was inserted to fill in the multitude of holes.
Carlyle is working on the Deus Ex movie and guess what. It's going to be shit. Even though Carlyle has played the games, he knows that in order to grab that "commercial audience" he's going to have to dumb the film way down and just pick certain aspects of the game to throw into the film.
Castlevania is going to be a terrible film because Anderson is going to pick somethings from say two and three, maybe SOTN, some LOI, and maybe some LOS and he's going to tape all that shit together because Anderson, not being a gamer, won't know what takes precedence in the Castlevania-verse nor will he care. So expect Alucard and Leon to run into each other, anticipate Mathias and Gabriel existing in the same universe and be prepared to wipe your ass with the money some of you are going to spend on this piece of shit.
To make this simple as I know I can rant and rant and rant, video game movies suck because directors cut and paste "elements" from games and throw them into the movie. But those elements are never tied together to make them feel like anything but Easter eggs. Anderson is the abortion that Hollywood was glad it botched. This is true. But it wouldn't matter who directs Castlevania because it would be terrible anyway.
Is Castlevania and excellent property? Fuck yeah. Would it make a good movie? On a good day it depends on which game. But typically fuck no.