Chris Roberts

Last I've seen Chris is happily engaged as a producer on a number of films. He's his own man now. I think the most recent movie that he was involved in was "Man of War" with Nicholas Cage. He's got several more down the pipeline. Chris does have a production company called Point Of No Return (I think that's what its called, it's been a while since I've looked up on it), however it's website has remained without update for years now leaving me to think the company is defunct. I would assume that as long as Chris has movies lined up for which he can serve as producer he will remain in that arena. If he finds work drying up or if he gets bored enough doing the same thing then he may return to the PC arena.
 
Thanks a lot for the info, he is an amazingly talented person and I would love to see him do both, if that is possible, the movie thing AND maybe some more WC
stories for PC, ...ah well, we can hope. thanks again. much appreciated.
 
TopGun said:
I quess it's easy to mistake the two
Click to expand...

http://www.aloha.com/~lifeguards/portugue.html


portjell.gif


updates070705_LoW_hq.jpg
 
Ya know what I think would be great?They could put the Wing Commander Movie on T.V., but they could include the traitor sub-plot(which they left out of the movie, but included in the book). That would kick butt because the book was so much better than the movie.
 
maniac89 said:
Ya know what I think would be great?They could put the Wing Commander Movie on T.V., but they could include the traitor sub-plot(which they left out of the movie, but included in the book). That would kick butt because the book was so much better than the movie.
Click to expand...

Yeah they could...if they actually had the budget to shoot the traitor sub-plot scenes.
 
Maj.Striker said:
Yeah they could...if they actually had the budget to shoot the traitor sub-plot scenes.
Click to expand...

Where have you been?
 
Yeah they could...if they actually had the budget to shoot the traitor sub-plot scenes.
Click to expand...

The traitor scenes were shot... the issue was that they confused test audiences, not that they couldn't be made.
 
My 2 cents worth:

I think a lot of the confusion/resentment to the film comes from the VERY different visual style to the "filmed" WC games. WC3 and 4 both had a very distinctive style to them that wasn't particularly reflected in the film. WCP just had kinda plasticky sets, especially the decon tube after you check the mission stats, it wobbles about all over the place. :D

Personally I really like the film. The opening credits always make me go all tingly and I enjoy every minute of it, bad acting and good. Why? Because I am very aware that it's a fun sci-fi film and take it as such. For me it's engaging a totally different part of my brain to what gets used when I play the games. WC3 is my all time favorite (The whys and all that are here )

There is no way at all that any film can really capture more than the spirit of a computer game. Just look at the awful FPS section of the Doom film to see how boring it would be if it really was just a film of the game!

As to Chris Roberts, I'm sure the final film wasn't how he envisioned it either. The only way you ever get total control over a film is to do it yourself start to finish, like George Lucas did with the later SW films. And even then he has said he's not entirely happy with the series. The finished product is far more likely to be dictated by the studio than the original creative force.
 
TopGun said:
Who did they choose as test audiences?
Click to expand...

Test audiences tend to be people "picked off the street" and made to sign a waver before being shown a late workprint of a movie. In recent years, test audiences have made a major shift in movies. Troy dropped it's original score and the original Exoricst prequel was shelved (recently put to DVD) and completely redone by hack director Renny Harlin
 
In defense of the cuts, the reasons audiences gave made lots of sense.

When the traitor is unmasked at the end of the movie (he wears a space suit that hides his face in the Kilrathi sequences) it's supposed to be shocking that it's Admiral Wilson.

... except that no one cared or remembered who Admiral Wilson was. He appears for several seconds in the Pegasus sequence which gives no one any indication that he's the traitor... and the movie's attempt to remind people is to show a still photo of him 45 minutes later in Captain Sansky's quarters. That doesn't work -- in order for the audience to appreciate the traitor it has to be someone they... well, remember to start. (And, ideally, the reaction should be 'oh, of course!'... not 'hey, they outright lied to us about him!' -- which is what the movie does, having him send the drone warning Tolwyn).
 
If that was the case, LOAF, I have to agree. For such a plot twist to work there must be adequate set up that, unfortunately, was lacking.

Interestingly enought, the same kind of plot device works great on WC2, WC3 and WC4.

It's telling that they can make great traitor sublots on computer games but fail on a movie.
 
I personally don't think it works very well in WC2 or WC4 -- but for the opposite reason.. it's *too* obvious. In both cases the character who's a jerk to you for the whole game turns out to be the traitor.

Wing Commander III was great, though, because it's both the most likely character *and* the one you're least willing to believe... because the game is set up for your character to defend him at every point.

(Now, Wings of Glory, there's a traitor -- who suspects the pretty French girl?)
 
I agree that Hobbes' re-defection was a shock as he did seem to have turned his back on his people, and in his eyes he had done
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top