Chris Roberts

Bearcat

Captain
Does Chris Roberts ever come around here? I think if I created a continuity that had a whole community of fans keeping it alive long after it died I'd at least stop in and say "hi" or something.

Either that or he knows I'd punch him in the face for making that horrible Wing Commander movie.
 
Bearcat said:
Either that or he knows I'd punch him in the face for making that horrible Wing Commander movie.

Well, if he did today, posts like this are a great way to make sure he doesn't bother to again.

We have an inforburst interview with him, https://www.wcnews.com/infoburst.shtml and many former Origin employees do frequently read the site.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I kind of got distracted there. I'm not sure what I think about the guy. He gave birth to something I love so much and then drug it through the mud so bad.
 
If you're not going to justify your opinion with any examples or explanations about what you didn't like, don't post. This clearly falls under CZ Rule 2.
 
the movie wasn't all that bad. In fact I actually like it
Could it have been better/closer to the games? sure, but it was a decent "re-imaging"
 
I was disapointed when the scene with Quinn, Wade, Rembrandt and Proffesor Arturo disapearing into something resembling a jump-hole got cut from the movie.

But on a more serious note, asking if somebody shows up here, complaining that he hasn't released a WC game since 1996 (while hoping that your cries of injustice will be enough to get him to do something about it) and then threatening to punch him in the face isn't going to make him more inclined to care about the chatboards.
 
I also thought that the movie was kind of poor if you think of narrative standarts.But what do I want? It's an action movie and and Star Trek VI (which I really love) wasn't Citizen Kane either... Yet, I also felt sorry about the (optical) distance to the games...
And why did they do this Blair-young thing? I like it how the Star Trek guys work with time (not great cinema either, yet much better). They have some certain continuity within TV shows and movies. The movies base on the show, the shows base on the shows, the movies base on the movies and shows base on the movies as well... They keep the timeline (except Enterprice, which I can't talk about without being banned ~~~ ).
I simply don't get why so many creative people think that they have to change the timeline when they change the medium... ?
 
Martini Doctor said:
And why did they do this Blair-young thing?
What do you mean 'Blair young thing? in '54 Blair was (or should've been) 24 years old. And I reckon Freddie looks to be in his early 20's.
The characters of WC do age keep in mind. The signifigance of Flash thinking he's better than Blair is because....Blair got older. The big deal about recalling Blair to active service in WC4 was....Blair got older. The fuss about Blair getting into the cockpit in WCP was....Blair got older. The big deal about Blair destroying Kilrathi HQ in Venice was because....Blair was the kid.
In the movie Blair isn't only the kid, but still the rookie out to do something big to prove himself. As to why people thought he needed mystical space-powers to do so is still beyond me.
 
his mystal space powers involve being able to do math really quickly in his head

That sure sounds mystical to me

I've got some friends who can do math really quickly in their heads also. Maybe they're MAGICAL.

Or maybe they're just people.
 
Aplha 1-1 said:
What do you mean 'Blair young thing? in '54 Blair was (or should've been) 24 years old. And I reckon Freddie looks

What I meant is: Why had they to go back to the beginnings and couldn't simply go on after the last WC game?
 
Because that wouldn't appeal to most people -- it'd be fine for Wing Commander geeks like us, but even the vast majority of casual players know Wing Commander as the game where you fight the Kilrathi.

Your Star Trek did the same thing -- it continued making original series movies set long before the current show for many years because *those* were what people at the time knew Star Trek as... it's the same reason they don't make a Deep Space Nine or a Voyager movie today, those settings only have niche appeal. To make a movie profitable you have to sell a lot more tickets than you do copies of a video game.
 
Makes sence. I guess it just didn't came to my mind that people who haven't played the game would want to see the movie... :) I'm so far that I accept WC as base element of western culture... I guess it's not that far... :(
 
Well, it's necessary for a succesful movie.

Consider: one million video games sold is a great success... but one million movie tickets sold is a horrible failure. In order to sell a movie based on a video game you need to make it appeal to the broadest possible audience, not just the people who liked the game.
 
RE: Where in the world in Chris Roberts

2 questions...
Does anyone know what happened to Chris Roberts Digital Anvil studious personnel?
What are the orginal Origin people up to these days and who are they currently working for?
Last as I can remember there was going to be a third part to his StarLancer,Freelancer series.
I hope that the wingcommander mods for freespace2 works with winxp or I'm gonna be really bummed. :rolleyes: :D
 
Chris Roberts has been a movie producer for about five years now. Digital Anvil was closed last month. https://www.wcnews.com/news/update/6736 Some people might have been offerred jobs in Washington, but I imagine most are probably looking for new jobs right now. Many Origin personnel did go on to work for companies such as Digital Anvil, Ion Storm, Verant, Sony Online Entertainment and other companies that had offices located in Austin. The Freelancer sequel was probably put on hold indefinitely.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree that the movie was bad, but I don't think one can pin it all on Chris Roberts. In my mind the biggest problems with the movie were:

1). Freddie Prinze, Jr couldn't act his way out of a paper bag. They cast him because he was a "hip young popular actor", but he can't act, and he wasn't nearly popular enough to justify his acting. It's a shame, because I liked the performances of some of the other characters (Paladin, Angel, and Lilliard's Maniac especially).

2). Bad editing of the script. Some gaping plot holes and inconsistencies. It's been a while since I saw it, so I don't remember many of them, but if people want to discuss I'm sure I could dredge them up.

3). Too many cliches. Again, a problem with the script.

4). The whole mythical powers thing did bug me. It wasn't just being able to do math well, because, as someone pointed out, a number of people can do math well. Movie Blair was the only one who could do this fancy, manual jump thing, not because he was mathematically gifted, but because he was part Pilgrim (by the way, I thought the whole invention of the Pilgrim thing was horrible--where did that come from? It's not in any of the games, although I confess that I haven't read any of the novels...).

The movie's concept and visuals were very impressive, and the directing was well done, but the other problems did it in.
 
Farbourne said:
I agree that the movie was bad, but I don't think one can pin it all on Chris Roberts. In my mind the biggest problems with the movie were:

1). Freddie Prinze, Jr ...

2). Bad editing of the script...

3). Too many cliches...

4). The whole mythical powers thing...

The movie's concept and visuals were very impressive, and the directing was well done, but the other problems did it in.

I'd be the first to agree that I think there are issues above and beyond Chris Roberts directorial skill that affected the outcome of the film. However, even as far a s freddie is concerned, I don't think acting was one of them.

Budget, and editing done because of the budget, are IMO some of the biggest factors. I truely feel that, while it may not have been perfect either, The movie as filmed could have been an entirely different ending. In the theatrical version the whole end fall flat because the cut half of the films climax out (the knife battle with the pilgrim traitor on the commcon) and as such some other scenes become trimmed oddly too. In the final cut there's still an odd scene of sansky looking at a picture of himself and a friend. And then during the battle he's holding a pilgrim cross and also toys with his ring at one point (although I can't remember exactly where the ring part was)

Then theres the Merlin thing. It was actually filmed (though they presumably didnt include it so they wouldnt have to do the cgi to save money) As such, there are all kinds of scenes in the film that are edited around seeing Freddie with a doll (the cgi stand-in). So what would those scenes have been like with merlin back in them? Although I hated the concept as it played out in the script, I think the scenes would have been more natural feeling. ultimately, my point is that potentially the movie could have played very, very differently that what we got. Whether or not it would be better is a different question. As LOAF often says: It's amazing that the movie works at all.

One of the most fair profesional reviews I read of the film described it as having high production values that just don't add up to much, and that the film was ultimately forgettable (far from others "worst movie ever" crap). And if it werent for my love of wing commander in general, I wouldnt be much interested either. Yet when one takes a closer look there are a lot if interesting things done in the film. PLus all the little references that arent readily apparent to the rest of the wc unverse. Plus: Good sound Plus: Good effects (with the exception of one particular scene of exterior of "real"fighters over cgi background) Even the set design and kilrathi design are interesting (It's just too bad that they didnt look as good as in person according to Chris and LOAF). To be fair they don't come accross any less fake on screen than Elizabeth Berkley.
 
Back
Top