METAL GEAR CINEMA FOR THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION: THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FILMS AND VIDEO GAMES.ã
BY
JCLS
BASED IN THE SUBJECT AREA OF
FILM AND TELEVISION STUDIES
QUALIFICATION TO BE EXAMINED FOR
Bachelor of Arts (Honours).
UNIVERSITY OF DERBY
11 April 2003
CONTENTS PAGE
INTRODUCTION:
Aim, purpose and objective for this study. Outline of key sources and examples.
3
CHAPTER 1:
Neo: What is the Matrix?
Spectacular Narratives. The interrelationship between narrative and computer generated special effects.
7
CHAPTER 2:
Neo: Guns. Lots of guns!
The narrative relationships between films and computer games.
16
CHAPTER 3:
Neo: I know Kung Fu.
An analysis of filmic imagery and its relative importance to video game and computer generated imagery.
25
CONCLUSION:
Agent Smith: Goodbye Mr. Anderson.
A critical evaluation of the study, key findings and a discussion of the need and possibility of future research in this area.
34
FILMOGRAPHY:
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
38
40
INTRODUCTION:
The best place to start would be the beginning of course and for that I mean what inspired me to do my dissertation on this particular area of study. Films and computer games have been a part of my life for as long as I can remember, but more precisely over the last few years I noticed a definite convergence of the two media. So what better reason to write about two of my greatest passions in life than in an academic aspect so that I may learn from and hopefully inspire others to do the same.
Primarily I believe that films have had an influence on digital media and vice versa since digital media was first invented. However, this study is aimed at centralising the textual relationships of films and computer games, specifically how one media has influenced the other in an industrial, narrative and artistic/visual sense respectively. Each chapter in this study is an examination and critique of one of the aforementioned relationships.
The first ever use of computer-generated imagery in cinema was the Genesis sequence from Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan (Nicolas Meyer, 1982), it only lasts a few minutes on screen but used up a third of the total production costs. If necessity is the mother of all invention then trying just because one can is the father of all invention, and though some people thought of it as a gimmick others saw the light as it were. These people promoted and pioneered computer generated imagery, and one very notable product of this is Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (Hironobu Sakaguchi, 2001). Notable in the sense that it is the most recent 100% digitally created feature film (at the time of writing this), and is doubly important to this study as an example of a video game based diegesis being produced as a feature film.
One thing I must point out early is that the term computer game is synonymous with the term video game and vice versa, so that one might use the terms interchangeably. Although in a very pedant sense video games are console and arcade based whereas computer games are PC (Personal Computer) based. Steven Poole is a man who knows an awful lot about video games and in his book Trigger Happy: The inner life of video games; he discusses in great detail the history, culture and experience of video games, granted all from a male orientated view point. This is important, as until recently the main demographic for video games consumers was 90% male and under 30 years of age.
Steve Poole’s Trigger Happy is one of a few key texts, on the video game aspect of my argument, that I will make reference to a number of times throughout this study. Other key texts are Game On: The History and Culture of Video Games by Lucien King and an article entitled Hellivsion by Gillian Skirrow in Colin MacCabe’s High Theory / Low Culture. Within these two books and specifically Skirrow’s article there are many pages dedicated to the relationships between film and videogames and as such will prove very useful to this study.
On the other hand the film texts I have researched are few and far between that mention specifically videogames in an industrial, narrative or artistic/visual aesthetic context. This is why my first chapter examines and critiques the narrative / spectacle debate in the context of computer generated images in film.
These images can be seen more and more in video games now in both a stylistic sense and action sense of the image but in turn shall be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3. The relevance of Chapter 1 is so that it sheds light on the arguments in the following chapters but also to ground this dissertation in the realm of film studies and not cyber-culture and video games. The key texts for Chapter 1 are Geoff Kings Spectacular Narratives, Thomas Schatz’ New Hollywood article in Film Theory Goes To The Movies by Jim Collins and Michael Pierson’s article in Screen No.40 Vol. 2 entitled CGI Effects In Hollywood Science-Fiction Cinema.
Chapters 2 and 3 will both make use of the following key texts in a narrative and then visual/artistic image context respectively, Steven Poole’s Trigger Happy: The inner life of video Games, Game On: The History and Culture of Video Games by Lucien King and an article entitled Hellivsion by Gillian Skirrow in Colin MacCabe’s High Theory / Low Culture. However, both chapters have secondary sources specific for their individual argument and as such will be discussed in relevance as and when appropriate.
As yet I have not mentioned the primary examples relative to my argument, film wise my main example is The Matrix (The Wachowski Brothers, 1999), which I will refer to throughout this study, but specific to Chapter 1 will be Jaws (Steven Spielberg, 1975) and Jurassic Park (Steven Spielberg, 1993). Chapter 2 discusses briefly the following films Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (Simon West, 2001), Resident Evil (Paul W. S. Anderson, 2002) and their respective video games, as well as the narrative form of the following computer games Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons Of Liberty (Hideo Kojima, 2002) and The Getaway (Brendan McNamara, 2002) in greater detail.
Chapter 3 will directly compare and contrast The Matrix (The Wachowski Brothers, 1999) and Max Payne (Rockstar Games, 2001) and both cases use of the cinematic effect of bullet time, while also looking at in greater depth Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (Hironobu Sakaguchi & Moto Sakakibara, 2001) and its relation to, in an image/visual aesthetic sense, the new concept of Machinima. Of which I will explain in more detail with in the introduction to Chapter 3.
Additionally, as many examples in this study are video games, and as such to save confusion I will include the important details of these examples in the filmography.
I learned a lot while writing this dissertation, about the subject and its implications but also about myself and I hope those who read this will learn something of equal value.
“ Me transmitte sursum caledoni ”
Chapter 1.
NEO: WHAT IS THE MATRIX?
[1]Spectacle and Narratives: The interrelationship between narrative and computer generated special effects.
The Matrix (The Wachowski Brother, 1999) is one of my favourite films but this is, in all honesty, not the main reason why it is one of my primary examples for this study. The main reason why it is one of my primary examples is that even after repeated viewing well into double figures it still amazes me on two counts. The first is due to the narrative that questions the meaning of life, freedom and God from the standpoint of Jean Baudrillard but also the more pragmatic and traditional themes of love, sanity and human nature. The second count on which I was amazed was indeed a visual one. I had seen the use of what was previously called “flow-mo” but only in television advertising, and even then in very experimental ways. The Bullet Time effects pioneered by John Gaeta and implemented by The Wachowski Brothers were not seen by anyone in that style or context before and as such amazed and revered in equal measure thousands of filmgoers.
These images and sequences, within The Matrix, of Bullet Time are live action shots of the principle subject such as Neo or Trinity (played by Keanu Reeves and Carrie Anne Moss respectively) with a green screen background so that a computer generated image may be super imposed, and the final integrated shots we see on screen is for all intents and purposes flawless. Then a series of still cameras will take a picture at varying angles in sequence so that, once the sequence is finished, the subject during the movement is photographed in a sort of temporal slice so the sequence will give the impression of the camera having moved around the subject during this temporal slice. However in the words of John Gaeta (visual effects supervisor for The Matrix) Bullet Time is “A stylistic way of showing that you’re in a constructed reality”
[2]. The first we see of this is during the opening scenes when the character Trinity is cornered in a room by four armed police officers. All she is armed with is an attitude and tight PVC trousers. Having despatched the policemen she exits the room but is spotted and pursued by three agents and proceeds to leap head first through a small window. At this point the camera tracks through 180 degrees while the axis remains on Trinity in flight and so just before she enters the window our perspective is flipped 180 degrees as well. This seamless integration of computer generated imagery and live action character movements and motivation and its effect on the narrative propagation and comprehension is what this chapter is about.
Bullet Time is not just a clever special effect, it has a diegetic source and motivation within the perception of the characters involved, specifically Neo. During the scenes in which Morpheus is teaching Neo the ways of the diegetic “matrix”, he tries to explain to Neo that his perception of reality within the matrix is just neural impulses and so they matter not in relation to his behaviour and capabilities with the matrix. So by the time we come to see Neo dodge bullet after bullet being fired by Agent Johnson, we realise that he is beginning to believe in what Morpheus is teaching him and so this representation of superhuman feats is more than just cinematic spectacle but also serves as an important narrative milestone.
‘Everything is larger than life; not real but hyperreal, leading us into the imaginary worlds of the cinema but also leaving us to sit back and wonder at its creations. That is the intention, at least’.
[3] Here Geoff King describes in not so many words the purpose of a high concept movie, in a historical sense the high concept movie was borne out of a desperate Hollywood film industry so that they may get a post World War II audience. Creatively the high concept was low on story but big on visual spectacle and economically the high concept movie served as a means of exploiting, in more recent years, a synergy among other media such as computer games and the Internet.
Computer generated imagery (CGI) in movies is the most recent product of the propagation for the high concept movie and I believe CGI special effects are an integral part of a specific type (not genre) of movie known as the blockbuster. King goes on to state that ‘These and other developments have led some to announce the imminent demise of narrative as a central or defining component of Hollywood cinema, or at least its dominant spectacular form’.
[4] This is a pessimistic view but King makes it clear that he does not believe that the spectacle of the images has now superseded the importance of a coherent narrative as the main motivation for an audience to see a film, while stating that others do believe this in a historical sense in relation to the period of classical Hollywood cinema.
I for one agree with King that ‘These films still tell reasonably coherent stories, even if they may sometimes be looser and less well integrated than some classical models’.
[5] However, The Matrix has a narrative that is by no means loose or less well integrated than, for example, Jaws (Steven Spielberg, 1975). The Matrix has the rare and precious quality of being a near perfect symbiosis of narrative and spectacle, Jaws is another example of this quality but with twenty-four years between the two one must ask the question: Why? The answer is cutting edge visuals used by each for their respective cinematic periods. Jaws had an animatronic shark, which in the vein of the high concept movie was the audience attraction. The Matrix has Bullet Time and very violent images of guns and explosions predominantly generated and manipulated by computers during post-production, the finished product has a CG spectacle.
The effect of CGI on the narrative is either a negative or positive one i.e. to detract or promote, but quality of these CG effects are also judged as having an effect. The Matrix received an academy award for Best Visual Effects in 1999, and deservedly so, as The Matrix without these effects would have had a very confusing, if not incomprehensible, narrative. It has to obtain a balance between narrative and spectacle and with CGI, it in theory helps level the scales within The Matrix, as it is narrative heavy. The quality of CGI has an unparalleled effect on the receipt of today’s blockbuster with the average filmgoer.
Titanic (James Cameron, 1997) for example was awarded all the technical academy awards it was nominated for, it is a visually stunning film and I was in awe of the skill involved and the quality of the sequence where the ship breaks in half, however in a narrative sense I would not rate it at all as I believe A Night To Remember (Roy Ward Baker, 1958) is a far superior film. There again we have a periodised problem for the issue of spectacle, one produced during the late classical and the other produced during the postclassical or “New” Hollywood. Both centering on exactly the same historical event while one is told from a fictional point of view the other “classical” film is a B.O.A.T.S. (excuse the pun) story (Based On A True Story). Thomas Schatz argues ‘Both terms connote not only specific historical periods, but also characteristic qualities of the movie industry at the time – particularly its economic and institutional structure, its mode of production and its system of narrative conventions’.
[6] What an audience from a historical cinematic period appreciated visually is a world apart from what an audience appreciates and even expects today. I believe that contemporary audiences are more geared to expecting a CGI spectacle, this view being garnered from the more recent output of the New Hollywood.
King argues that the main point to the spectacle narrative debate:
‘Is not to deny that there have been changes in the precise relations between narrative and spectacle from one period to another, but to question any suggestion that there was a point of departure at which ‘classical’ narrative existed in anything like a ‘pure’ state, uncontaminated by various kinds of evasions and distraction’.
[7]These evasions and distractions are developments such as computer-generated imagery. This reliance on a coherent narrative to appreciate a film is somewhat misguided as the point of cinema was spectacle at its invention, but cinema evolved into a storytelling medium.
Michelle Pierson argues that ‘special effects function simultaneously as an element of the narrative and as a distinct form of technological spectacle’.
[8] This is a very apparent when looking at The Matrix, Jaws and even Jurassic Park (Steven Spielberg, 1993). While Thomas Schatz gives reason to this by stating ‘Jaws in 1975 redefined the nature, scope and profit potential of the blockbuster movie and [laid] the foundation for films and filmmaking practices of the new Hollywood’.
[9] This technological spectacle being the point for filmmaking practices of the new Hollywood. Jurassic Park is an interesting example as it was not the first feature film to include CGI but however was touted as the first film to feature believable and realistic CGI. Previous attempts such as The Abyss and Terminator 2, (James Cameron, 1987 and 1992 respectively) though spectacle in the purest sense, the CGI in these films were of a similar nature and both represent a simulation of something we had previously seen in the film. Pierson make an interesting point about the simulation effect for CGI ‘The aesthetic project governing the production of CGI effects for science-fiction films is frequently represented as being geared toward simulation’.
[10] The diegetic Matrix is a simulated world so in a certain sense the CGI effects we see within the diegetic Matrix are all the more appropriate for The Matrix. Two interesting points Warren Buckland makes are that ‘some films go beyond spectacle by employing special effects to articulate a possible world’
[11] and ‘the films representation of a possible world motivates the special effects and action sequences’.
[12] I agree with Buckland in that the CGI effects in The Matrix help to articulate a possible world within the narrative diegesis, however I am not so sure if the films representation of this possible world motivates these effects one hundred percent. These CGI effects serve as spectacle and also as a means of narrative propagation they are necessary and integral to the plot of The Matrix. This “simulation” of a “possible world” for The Matrix is reason why ‘[Visible] visual effects…simulate events that are impossible in the actual world (but which are possible in an alternative world)’.
[13] This is the very essence of the spectacle created by computer-generated imagery, which in turn motivates to a certain extent the propagation of the narrative.
Michelle Pierson critiques that:
‘If it is arguably time to re-evaluate the relationships between narrative and spectacle in the contemporary science fiction film – time to again think about how science-fiction narratives also set limits on the kinds of special-effects imagery that is being produced for contemporary science-fiction films – it must never the less be remembered that any such return has to be shaped by a tradition of technological experimentation’.
[14]The Matrix is first and foremost a science-fiction film and rightly so pushed back the boundary of computer-generated images for its time. However, this was four years ago and a lot has changed since then and new techniques developed, such as digital grading used throughout the The Lord of the Ring: Fellowship Of The Ring (Peter Jackson, 2001). The relationship between spectacle and narrative is a tightly interwoven one, in the last twenty years film making practices have changed so much that inclusion of computer generated imagery in high concept blockbusters, such as The Matrix, is common place and even taken for granted. The quality of these images differs and as such the appreciation of the spectacle they provide varies. The realism and purpose of CGI is mainly for believable simulation of events and objects that cannot be filmed conventionally and as such are required for their given narratives. Within the diegetic matrix we are presented with a simulated spectacle that contributes to and is very necessary for, as King states, ‘the forward moving development of the plot’.
[15] Schatz put this into a narrative context and describes what I like to imagine as a narrative wavelength: ‘The narrative is precise and effectively paced, with each stage building to a climactic peak, then dissipating, then building again until the explosive finale’.
[16] The last third of The Matrix and even Jaws follow this pattern or narrative wavelength, the troughs and peaks of the spectacle. Where as Jaws had “Bruce” (the animatronic shark) a killer great white shark hunting men too arrogant to realise they are the prey, The Matrix has CGI Bullet-Time: a temporal slice of simulated reality, an effect designed and implemented by computer about a man in a computer program. The depth of the high concept hasn’t changed much if at all in the age of the blockbuster.
Chapter 2.
NEO: GUNS. LOTS OF GUNS!
[17]The narrative relationships between films and computer games, specifically the increasing filmic type narratives in computer games.
There has been lots of speculation in the respective industry press between a convergence of film and video game media, and more often than not this speculation centres on the prospect of truly interactive cinema. Predominantly so these two media have only interacted on three levels, the first is a synergized release of a computer game that is based on the diegesis of a specific film (e.g. Lucas Arts games based on the Star Wars films). The second is a film produced from a game as source material for the main purpose of cashing in on an ever-present audience, Super Mario Bros. (Annabel Jankel & Rocky Morton, 1993), Street Fighter (Steven E. De Souza, 1994) and Mortal Kombat (Paul W.S. Anderson, 1995) as early disastrous examples.
The third level is film that has taken an aspect of computer/video game culture, technology or ideology and used this as the main concept and motivation for the story of the film. For example War Games (John Badham, 1983), Tron (Steven Lisberger, 1984), The Lawnmower Man (Brett Leonard, 1992), eXistenz (David Cronenberg, 1999) and of course The Matrix (The Wachowski Brother, 1999).
However, in 1998 the archetype for a fourth level of interaction and convergence between video games and cinema became apparent (a fifth level will be discussed in Chapter 3). This archetype was Metal Gear Solid (Hideo Kojima, 1998), a video game with distinct filmic qualities in its aesthetics and more importantly it’s narrative. Metal Gear Solid had many things that very few other games did, an auteur like director and writer, a huge budget (comparatively so of course), a professionally composed score with leitmotifs for individual characters and most importantly an impressive and involving narrative. Another example further along this level is Silent Hill (Masashi Tsuboyama, 1999), Steven Poole discusses Silent Hill and its filmic qualities ‘It has an impressive introductory video sequence…[that] is indeed very filmic, with fast cutting and weird camera angles’.
[18] But these are visual aesthetic qualities, and Poole explains why: ‘The mass media naturally reach for the vocabulary of film – apparently the nearest medium in visual terms – in order to describe such games as Silent Hill’.
[19] In my mind games are nowadays definitely more filmic in narrative terms, the story and plot of the examples I will be using are comparative to films in many ways. Though to contextualise this argument I believe it is possible to analyse video games narratively in terms of the rules theorised by Vladimir Propp but a detailed analysis in this sense is not necessary here. And since most other fictional works follow these same narrative rules to a certain extent, it is theoretically possible to make a video game of any fictional work, but as one of my undergraduate lecturers stated, would any one want to play a game based on Schindlers List (Spielberg, 1993). The thematic content is crucial to this level for both media.
The cause effect relationship within games is, however, given a new dynamic that will be discussed below. But narratively speaking The Getaway (Brendan McNamara. 2002) and Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (Hideo Kojima, 2001) are dynamic and fast paced while taking story influences from British gangster and science fiction/action films respectively. Firstly I will discuss the role and purpose of cut scenes and how these propagate the narrative of the game. They are termed cut scenes mainly because they are usually presented before and after certain levels or missions and more often than not detail a certain aspect of the narrative that completing the mission or task will build upon or clarify, a filmic equivalent would be a plot point or a transitional scene between acts. They are predominantly FMV sequences (Full Motion Video); either 100 percent computer generated or integrated live action of characters with digital backgrounds and effects, and cannot be controlled or altered by the player. Though recently a trend is present in contemporary gaming whereby alternate FMV sequences can be accessed taking the games narrative in a different vector. However, they do always serve a narrative purpose, but with my main examples the cut scenes have evolved somewhat from a traditional sense of FMV, the opening sequence of Metal Gear Solid 2 (further abbreviated to MGS 2) and The Getaway are both presented in the in-game graphics engine (to the same graphical standard as the game play itself) and as such creates a more uniform style and look so that they are integrated better into the narrative.
Specifically MGS 2 has an opening sequence cut-scene of approximately 30 minutes, and I may add this is not the shortest cut scene as well, that explains where this story/game fits in to the diegesis of MGS universe, the missions motivation and clues as to the possible outcome. Steven Poole likens this to diachronic and synchronic storytelling and makes a valid argument but in all honesty a lot has changed in the industry since 2000;
‘If these games can be said to have a ‘story’ at all, it is untranslatable – it is a purely kinetic one. The diachronic story of a video game, however complex, is merely excuse for the meat of the video game action; while the synchronic story, as a story, is virtually non-existent’.
[20](Diachronic narrative being the all the past history of the game, and synchronic the current game-play narrative). I disagree strongly with this in the light of the strong narratives of the two examples, The Getaway has a simple premise but this is built upon with completion of the levels and dramatic irony is ever present when we see cut-scenes of an omniscient nature that develop plot points that the main protagonist, Mark Hammond, is unaware of until later in the narrative/game.
The Barbican Centre, London in 2002 held an exhibition to honour the history and culture of video games, entitled Game On, and one particular section was dedicated to the convergence of cinema and video games. Henry Jenkins argues that ‘Most critics discuss games as a narrative art, as interactive cinema or participatory storytelling’.
[21] The “interactive cinema or participatory storytelling” are not an issue here, however “games as narrative art” is. Taken from the book accompanying the exhibition Game On, it is a collection of essays from academic and non-academic sources and one of the main running themes throughout is the relationship of video games to films.
Jenkins argues that ‘The game space is organised so that paths through the world guide or constrain action, making sure we encounter characters or situations critical to the narrative’
[22] this is very similar in terms of the cinematic narrative and how our objective and subjective self is drawn into the forward momentum of the narrative. In theory nothing happens in a game that the makers did not program in nor does anything happen in a film that the filmmakers do not put in; this is the antithesis of interactive cinema and participatory story telling. Pierson argues that ‘Computer games have adapted many of the techniques of narrative filmmaking to suit the action-orientated idiom of computer gaming’.
[23] This is certainly the case within our two examples, and adapted is the right word just as games are untranslatable directly into film and film is certainly untranslatable directly in to a game. So these narrative techniques evolve and adapt as necessary for the optimum method of narrative propagation. Where as a film will have one path but more than one story arc or theme, predominantly a narrative heavy game will have more than one path and also a number of themes and story arcs. However, more often than not, a games narrative path will only branch when a certain amount of game play is completed and all paths lead to the same ending scenario, setting and place in the game space. Only upon completion of a game do we find that our previous actions dictate the ending cinematic sequence or FMV. A film is passive in its narrative movement in relation to the viewer i.e. the viewer has no control of the propagation of the narrative, a game is not; although a player is in control only by proxy but in an active sense.
Gillian Skirrow argues that ‘The materiality of the relationship between text and spectator is nowhere clearer than in video games, where the spectator is also the performer’.
[24] This is true only to a certain extent, whereas a film is prescripted and acted out; a game performance is still governed by certain rules in a narrative, logic and computational sense.
But what about the direct narrative relationship to a film that’s source material is a video game, ignoring the disastrous examples outlined in the introduction, we are left with three financially successful films produced from games. These are Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, Resident Evil and Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, having never played a Final Fantasy game at great length I will concentrate on the Tomb Raider and Resident Evil titles. Narratively speaking both these series of games offered enough rich thematic story and cinematic qualities that the current unoriginal Hollywood could tap it easily enough to garner a script and a watchable high concept movie. In spite of this, as stated previously, these two media of cinema and video game are not directly translatable, and while the most obvious difference is the total lack of play involved, another is a much more compounded, acute and concise narrative in direct comparison. The product must accurately represent its source material efficiently and effectively enough to garner a link between it and the video game and so as to create an extended or congruent diegesis of the game. A major aspect of each game was not present in the film, this was the puzzle solving, a very important aspect to the forward momentum of the game narrative.
Instead with in the films this was changed to more action, heightened suspense and greater characterisation, what remains of the film in terms of the story and the plot is dynamically changed so that the main protagonist can save the day in the ninety minutes of screen time as opposed to an average of 25 hours game play.
Though very original in its narrative as a videogame, MGS 2 is heavily influenced by Science Fiction, anime and geo-political thriller films and literature. The Getaway is; on the other hand, heavily influenced by Gangster films, Kidnap thrillers and police action movies. While tapping inspiration from films like Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982), Hunt For Red October (John McTiernan, 1990) and yes The Matrix, MGS 2 is truly quite original. Conversely movies such as The Long Good Friday (John McKenzie, 1980), Mona Lisa (Nei1 Jordan, 1986), Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrel (Guy Ritchie, 1998), Reservoir Dogs (Quentin Tarantino, 1992) and The French Connection (William Friedkin, 1971) influenced the narrative of The Getaway to such an extent it is part allusion and part allegory for all these films and more but that is not to say the narrative isn’t original, in so much as it is an inventive and new method for telling a story. Distinguished from celluloid to digitisation by that fact we play the game and view the film. Summed up eloquently by Steven Poole when he argues that ‘The purpose of a video game…is never to simulate real life but to offer the gift of play’.
[25] My argument was not to show that one media can be viewed directly as the other in a narrative sense, or to discuss interactive cinema, but to shed light on the narrative bridge between the two media that is now or soon will be unavoidable.
The increasing film like narratives in contemporary video games will very soon catch up in storytelling techniques and methods of contemporary cinema, and as such both the film and the video games industry will either fight for control or evolve and converge. Despite the fact that film narratives are not directly translatable to a video game format and vice versa, strong filmic narratives can be transferred to a video game diegesis, and again vice versa, with some tweaking as outlined in my examples of the Resident Evil and Tomb Raider films it is entirely within the realm of possibility of having a uniquely filmic narrative within a games diegesis (the fourth level of interaction). The Getaway and MGS 2 are a case in point, between them they have approximately 3 hours of cuts scenes (cinematic sequences filling in plot and story point as the game progresses) that were acted and filmed in live action and then digitised or created digitally from scratch to the same visual standard as the game play itself in an attempt (and a very good one at that) to seamlessly blend between the game-play and cut-scenes therefore giving it an entirely cinematic quality. Though rather prophetic this is what Eric Zimmerman has to offer and it also serves as a poignant endnote for this chapter.
‘Games are merging with cinema. Technological advances, particularly in real-time graphics mean that games are becoming more “realistic” and increasingly resemble film. The cinematic turn in games will allow developers a broader palette of expressive tools that will appeal to new kinds of game developers. Games will absorb and replace film’.
[26]Chapter 3.
NEO: I KNOW KUNG FU.
[27]An analysis of filmic imagery and it relative importance to video game and computer generated imager, in relation to mise-en-scene, Machinima and virtual actors.
I believe video games are the tenth art; there are aspects of video games though that can be likened to some if not all of the nine remaining. The images, however, of contemporary video games share close formal qualities like no other with cinema. Since the release of the Silent Hill and Metal Gear Solid (the archetypes for this digital/cinematic hybrid) in 1998 and 1999 respectively, not only myself but also many others have noticed an increasing visual aesthetic / image convergence between films and video games. Unlike in the narrative sense where the increase is one way (discounting the third level of interaction as stated in chapter 2); from films to video games, I will show that the contemporary Hollywood blockbuster and high concept video games share a common visual aesthetic and formal stylistic imagery that is influential both ways.
As with the previous chapter, The Getaway and Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty are important examples in my argument regarding the congruence of the imagery of video games and film, although I wish to outline a specific example for this chapter. Max Payne was released in 2001 to critical acclaim from the games industry but however received an almighty lashing from the industry censors E.L.S.P.A. (Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishing Association) who gave it an eighteen rating and of course The Daily Mail (a.k.a The Daily Fascist) got its right wing hooks in. The violence aside, this game is most well known for its gimmick like imitation of the cinematic special effect used most eloquently in The Matrix; Bullet Time. There is no narrative explanation as to why the main protagonist can burst into a room and virtually kill up to six bad guys in little less than 3 seconds. Part of this remains the skill of the player but the majority is when the game slows down when this feature is activated and the third person perspective reacts in real time to our control. Hence six dead bad guys in what is perceived as three seconds of game play. In Max Payne however there is more to it than that, a well aimed bullet will cause the game to pause and the in game camera will follow the bullet from behind to its target, or spin around the bad guy upon impact just like when Trinity jumps through the window in The Matrix, as described in Chapter 1. Steven Poole gives an enthusiastic examination of this interaction;
‘In its exaggeratedly dynamic Kung Fu scenes, in which actors float through the air and smash others through walls, The Matrix contains the most successful translation to date of certain video game paradigms to the celluloid medium…For their part, films have been very successful in influencing the look of certain types of video games’.
[28] If one ignores the obvious hardware limitations for building 3D game environmenst on computers and consoles, the quality of which is often proportional to the quality of programming such as the character A.I., one can concentrate on the film like qualities they do possess. The first this time I played The Getaway I noticed instantly that there was no screen furniture (such as a health meter, ammo counter or even a virtual compass; a lack of which is very rare, almost unheard of) very quickly I realised the purpose behind this was to promote The Getaway as a definitive film like video game. In Die Hard (John McTiernan, 1988) one does not see a health meter in the corner of the screen, as John McClane progresses his vest get increasingly dirty and bloody, and once injured has trouble walking, in The Getaway as our main protagonist gets injured his suit begins to stain with blood and his movements become sluggish. This aspect of the mise-en-scene is important but not axiomatic, so one has to read it, as it were. Henry Jenkins argues that in ‘Hoping to produce games that can provide a broader range of emotional experiences, they [game developers] draw inspiration from classic melodrama where elements of the mise-en-scene become emotional correlatives for the protagonists woes’.
[29] Though I am by no means stating that video games can yet be analysed as a “text” in the traditional sense, post-modern theory can be applied as an enlightening critical approach to a certain extent. On the opposite end of the scale though is increasing interaction of the second level, Avalon (Oshii Mamoru, 2001) plays on the distinct themes of reality and self in a violent possible future, which of course sounds like many other movies but the distinct difference here is the visual and narrative styles used that promote a feeling of video-games control for the characters, mainly due to the cinematic symbolism as allegory for video game control.
The Fifth level of interaction of video games as hinted at in Chapter 2 is what is known as Machinima. Neither film nor videogame, in essence this movement of production is a unique hybrid of the one and zeroes of digital imaging technology and the artistic and narrative qualities of cinema (please see www.Machinima.com for more in-depth information). Machinima as a contemporary movement is very new and I personally only discovered it existence by chance while researching early texts for this dissertation. Basically Machinima is a conceptual term for computer generated short films that are produced using in game graphics engines of first person perspective shoot-em-up games, such as Quake III: Arena (John Carmack, 1999) or Unreal: Tournament (Cliff Bleszinski, 1999), that are distributed and exhibited via the internet. These Machinima films range from the tech-noir to the surreal, and are gaining quite a following from those who produce and watch them. Though visually they are not better quality than the games engines used to produce them, Machinima’s only limitation is the software with which it is produced. Katie Salen in her discussion of Machinima in Game On believes that;
‘Certainly the language and style of game media have had tremendous influence on recent film direction and camera movement, as a broad selection of cinematic efforts can attest: The style and bullets of The Matrix, the bamboo groves and airborne fight-dancing of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon [Ang Lee, 2000], and the all seeing camera eye of Being John Malkovich [Spike Jonze, 1999]’.
[30]These stylistic aspects, innovative effects and use of camera in the filmic imagery of Salen’s examples represent to me a positive interaction between film and video games. But this by no means represents the end point of this interaction, Michelle Pierson points out a failing in such an effort at the moment in that ‘What the attempts to create homologies between the computer generated images featured in science fiction films and video games still need to reckon with is the very different ways that the imagery functions is these media’.
[31] Though this is in relation to computer-generated imagery in science fiction films, her point is still valid. Though in 1999 we had the archetypes for this homology Pierson speaks of, I argue that with the video games examples used in Chapter 2 this may no longer be the case to such an extent. “The ways that the imagery functions in these media” is self-evidentiary in this convergence of films and video games that is occurring. Additionally Pierson argues that ‘More over, if one of the characteristics of a computer game aesthetic has always been the privileging of rendering speed over resolution the trade off between the two is becoming less and less determining’.
[32] This further promotes my argument that the only inhibiting factor in producing cinematic quality in game graphics is hardware, and since computer power doubles every eighteen months it will not be all that long until it happens.
A friend and fellow film student quite vividly proclaimed that Star Wars Episodes I & II (George Lucas, 1999 & 2002), were nothing more than trumped up video-games, and to a certain extent I agree with him. Within The Phantom Menace the pod race scene serves no real narrative purpose other than the fact it exhibit Anakin’s connection with the force, but a nihilistic viewpoint of its inclusion in the film is that it only served to promote the synergistic release of a video game based on the pod race sport (a prime example of the first level of interaction). The same could be said of the huge battle at the end of Attack of the Clones, Sean Cubitt argues that ‘Games…demand bodily engagement on the part of the end user. In this sense the ‘text’ of digital media is not a fixed entity but the ephemeral production of users’ interaction with the medium’
[33]. This convergence though, of cinema and video games, potentially inhibits this ephemeral digital experience.
This brings me to my final major example, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, though 100% computer generated it does not have the usual artificial looking visual of other entirely computer generated films, for example the disproportionate human bodies in Toy Story 1 and 2 (John Lasseter, 1995 & 1999 respectively), or the cute fluffiness to that of Monster’s Inc (Peter Docter, 2001) and Shrek (Andrew Adamson, 2001). The main difference is that Final Fantasy, though in essence is still animated, is not meant to be viewed as a cartoon or “animated feature”. Characters were often referred to as synthespians and artificial actors, the detail of the opening shot of Dr. Aki’s face and eye is unequalled as yet in 100 % digital productions, point in fact was that nearly 60% of the processing power was used to generate life like hair, hence the lack of long hair on nearly every other character but Aki. The fact of the matter is that Final Fantasy the film was based on Final Fantasy the video game and as such with every instalment of the game franchise the visuals increase in quality; Pierson agrees in that ‘One of the most powerful discourses on computer generated imaging technologies centres on the possibility that this technology might one day produce images that are so realistic it is impossible to distinguish them from objects in the real world’.
[34] And the only thing separating Final Fantasy the film from the video game is the presence of a control mechanism of some sort.
Barbara Creed in her analysis of the viability of the synthespian states that;
‘Eventually such effects will be taken for granted, just as the appeal of special effects lost their novelty in the early decades of cinema. However, the presence of the synthespian in film is not meant to be perceived by the audience as a ‘special effect’ nor to draw attention to itself: the virtual synthetic origins of the star will have to be rendered invisible by the text in order for the character to offer a convincing, believable performance.’
[35] Here the technological imperative is sidelined for the quality of the text that presents a synthespian, more over one might say that to a certain extent the main protagonist of The Getaway is a virtual actor just under our direction or control, and the quality of the in game imagery prevents our identification with the character. Critically speaking the one thing that many people could not get over was the lack of readable facial expressions and accurate body movements of the synthespians of Final Fantasy, and as such this lack was an inhibiting factor for providing a “convincing, believable performance”. Identification with the computer animated characters is limited, but this is not to say even human actors do not look animated at the best of times, Jean Claude Van Damme being a prime example.
At the moment the visual aesthetic / image relationship between contemporary Hollywood and video games is little more than conceptual experimentation. But this “tenth art” has some very interesting aspects, with that of Machinima, synthespians and financial viabilities of synergised releasing of video game media, Poole agrees to an extent that ‘As their powers of graphical realisation have increased, video games have begun superficially to look a bit more like films, while films have become more interested in video games as visual furnishing and conceptual subject matter’
[36]. Just like The Matrix influencing Max Payne in its visual imagery, we get the spatial contests of video game like battle fields and space wars in the Star Wars films that are then returned full circle as a video game extending the proposed “text” but are little more than disc shaped dollar signs for the producers like Gorger Lucas. However, the concept of Machinima is without a doubt a product of the digital revolution and is part of the essence of the digi-cinematic hybrid of narrative and image aesthetics. But the only inhibiting factor in its promotion is the level of technology used in its creation, and even by the standard set by Final Fantasy these images are not yet equally cinematic.
The visual text of a video game is comparable to that of a film, in that both have to be read as sign, index or icon to fully understand them, though in video games they are often explained and intuitive to experience. The Getaway’s lack of screen furniture means that a player has to read the visual clues so as to gauge the vitality of the protagonist, and even during the profanity heavy cut scenes basic facial expressions can be read. All this adds to the dynamic cinematic of feel of The Getaway, creating a landmark textual example in the convergence of cinema and video games.
Michelle Pierson sums this up eloquently;
‘Video games do not place the same emphasis on the aesthetic integrity of special effects. For even though computer games are regularly punctuated by both aural and visual effects, these special effects do not have the same semantic intensity in the relatively restricted visual field of video games as they have in the luminous hybrid space of cinema’.
[37]Conclusion.
AGENT SMITH: GOODBYE. MR. ANDERSON.
[38]A critical evaluation of the study, key findings and a discussion of the need and possibility of future research in this area.
Computers are unavoidable these days and in film their presence in whatever capacity is abundant. Computer generated imagery of the contemporary Hollywood high concept blockbuster, can however serve to promote other aspects of the film making process. Although at times their effect is detrimental to cinema. The spectacle of a film has often outweighed the need for a coherent story or plot and put paid to the traditional notion of psychologically motivated characterisation, and no more so is this the case with the current spectacle of computer generated special effects and action sequences. Historically speaking for every technological advancement in cinema, there have been those who wish to exploit this advancement financially instead of pushing back artistic boundaries and creating new narrative methodologies. For their respective cinematic periods Jaws and The Matrix represent dynamic examples of how art and money have found a new narrative middle ground. And as such these examples are pleasing to the eye and also stimulating for the minds eye; if nothing they make one think. CGI was by no mean the saviour of Hollywood though Titanic for example was a financial success and visual stunning, but was a love story set amongst a great human tragedy and that did not mesh narratively or visually speaking.
The key then is to strike a balance or a symbiosis where by one without the other could not be viable and not make sense.
The main purpose of CGI is simulation, to a degree that is impossible or not feasible by traditional means, but sometimes in the pursuit of verisimilitude of CGI a certain quality is lost. In the case of Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within spectator identification with the characters, despite their quality, was a major problem for critics and filmgoers alike. Indistinguishable simulation is one of the most important discourses of CGI where by one day no one will be able to tell the difference. This discourse is applicable to video games in that the only means of telling real for CG imagery will be the presence of some sort of control mechanism.
Just like in a video game, the convergence of and interaction between video games and cinema occurs in 5 progressive levels, but these are the only ones as yet I have identified at the moment, though theoretically the only limit is the technology for production used within each media. The release in the near future of Star Wars: Galaxies (Lucas Arts, 2002) and Enter The Matrix (The Wachowski Brothers, 2003), the former being an example of an infinite narrative and the latter being an example of a symbiotic narrative video game text, could represent a sixth and seventh level of interaction.
The most fundamental and basic difference between cinema and computer games is the lack of control of one and its total necessity in the other. However, in both cases a player and a spectator is a participant, but can only be distinguished by whether one is passive (as in cinema) or active (as in video games). Interactive storytelling and participatory cinema is the holy grail of the fourth level of interaction. The filmic qualities of video games are not just visual, cinema and video games share a congruence from that of Vladimir Propp and his traditional hero / quest narrative methodologies.
Since nearly all narrative fiction is based on this form of narrative propagation and structure it is possible to indirectly translate from a video game narrative diegesis to film and vice versa. In the transition, though, something has to be sacrificed each way; a film based on a game will have less time and screen space to tell a story that captures the atmosphere and essence of its source material. A video game on the other hand that is based on a film diegesis will lose a lot of the visual intensity and detail of it source material. In the examples I used Lara Croft: Tomb Raider and Resident Evil, though by no means critically successful do represent a step forward from Mortal Kombat and Super Mario Bros. The increasing filmic narratives of contemporary video games such as MGS 2 and The Getaway help to show that this unique digital hybrid of cinema and video games is not just limited to a visual aesthetic. Filmic influences for both these games are numerous and yet they are independent of them narratively speaking. Dramatic irony and restrictive / omniscient narrative can be applied to contemporary video games but only in a limited sense, the forward movement of the plot in a video game is more often than not the purpose behind the inclusion of a cut scene.
Films and video games share a visual aesthetic that is more similar than any of the other eight arts. But also images in video games include meaning and symbolism like what one might find in film, the lack of screen furniture in the Getaway and its minimal presence in MGS 2 again adds to an almost uninterrupted cinematic quality for them both.
The style and quality of the in game graphics never alters, and it’s this uniform synchronicity of visuals, which promotes the feeling of functionality for the images and not just something for the game as a selling point, though this does occur in games such as Max Payne. Synergised Star Wars video games are also at fault for not creating functionality for their images, as with the pod race and battle scenes in The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones, video games offer aesthetic influences on cinema. Machinima as the fifth level of interaction is important in that it represents what cinema and video games means as a cultural convergence. An Internet based phenomenon, it is a digital cinematic hybrid in the purest sense yet, and aesthetically speaking it owes a lot to video games yet they remain part of the digital revolution of cinema.
In all honesty there is so much room for possible research in this area that this dissertation is by no means the last piece of academic work on the subject. For example a whole book detailing spectatorship, identity and unconscious could be written about computer-generated movies like Final Fantasy and Shrek only touched upon by Cubitt and Pierson, the same could be said of Machinima in relation to the digital revolution. Much could be written on the individual levels of interaction of cinema and video games, and with the advent of digital cinematography the demise of lens-based media is in question. If one were to apply post-modern theory to video games such as MGS 2, The Getaway and Max Payne, could it be done in a cinematic sense or would it have to be from a different approach. May be one day this could b a contemporary critical debate of its own. Films and video games are two of only a few things I know a lot about, I always have and forever will watch films and play video games.
Filmography.
1 .A Night To Remember (Roy Ward Baker, 1958).
2 .Abyss, The (James Cameron, 1987).
3 .Avalon (Oshii Mamoru, 2001).
4 .Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze, 1999).
5 .Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982).
6 .Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee, 2000).
7 .Die Hard (John McTiernan, 1988).
8 .Enter The Matrix (The Wachowski Brothers, 2003 VG).
9 .eXistenZ (David Cronenberg, 1999).
10 .Fellowship Of The Ring (Peter Jackson, 2001).
11 .Final Fantasy (Square, 198-2003, VG).
12 .Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (Hironobu Sakaguchi, 2001).
13 .Hunt For Red October (John McTiernan, 1990)
14 .Jaws (Steven Spielberg, 1975).
15 .Jurassic Park (Steven Spielberg, 1993).
16 .Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (Simon West, 2001).
17 .Lawnmower Man, The (Brett Leonard, 1992).
18 .Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrel (Guy Ritchie, 1998),
19 .Max Payne (Rockstar Games, 2001, VG).
20 .Metal Gear Solid (Hideo Kojima, 1998, VG).
21 .Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons Of Liberty (Hideo Kojima, 2002, VG).
22 .Mona Lisa (Nei1 Jordan, 1986)
23 .Monsters, Inc (Peter Docter, 2001).
24 .Mortal Kombat (Paul W. S. Anderson, 1995).
25 .Quake III: Arena (John Carmack, 1999, VG).
26 .Reservoir Dogs (Quentin Tarantino, 1992)
27 .Resident Evil (Paul W. S. Anderson, 2002).
28 .Schindler’s List (Steven Spielberg, 1993).
29 .Shrek (Andrew Adamson, 2001).
30 .Silent Hill (Masashi Tsuboyama, 1999, VG).
31 .Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan (Nicolas Meyer, 1982).
32 .Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace (George Lucas, 1999).
33 .Star Wars Episode 2: Attack of the Clones (George Lucas. 2002).
34 .Star Wars: Galaxies (Lucas Arts, 2002, VG).
35 .Street Fighter: The Movie (Steven E. De Souza, 1994).
36 .Super Mario Bros (Annabel Jankel & Rocky Morton, 1993).
37 .Terminator 2 (James Cameron, 1992).
38 .The French Connection (William Friedkin, 1971)
39 .The Getaway (Brendan McNamara, 2002, VG).
40 .The Long Good Friday (John McKenzie, 1980)
41 .The Matrix (The Wachowski Brothers, 1999).
42 .Titanic (James Cameron, 1997).
43 .Toy Story 1 (John Lasseter, 1995).
44 .Toy Story 2 (John Lasseter, 1999).
45 .Tron (Steven Liberger, 1984).
46 .Unreal: Tournament (Cliff Bleszinski, 1999, VG).
47 .War Games (John Badham, 1983).
VG = Video Game.
Bibliography:
· Buckland, W. Between science fact and science fiction: Spielberg’s digital dinosaurs, possible worlds, and the new aesthetic realism. Screen, Vol. 40, No. 2, Summer, 1999.
· Collins, J., et al (ed). Film theory goes to the movies. London: Routledge, 1993.
· Creed, B. The Cyber star: digital pleasures and the end of the Unconscious. Screen, Vol. 41, No.1, Spring, 2000.
· Cubitt, S. The Distinctiveness of digital criticism. Screen, Vol. 41, No. 1, Spring, 2000.
· Jenkins, H. The Art Of Contested Spaces. In King, L. Game On: The Culture and History of Video games. London: Laurence King, 2002.
· King, G. Introduction: Spectacle, Narrative and Frontier Mythology. In Spectacular Narratives, ed. King, Geoff, London: I B Tauris, 2000.
· Pierson, M. CGI effects in Hollywood science-fiction cinema 1989-95: the wonder years. Screen, Vol.40, No. 2, summer, 1999.
· Poole, S. Trigger Happy: The Inner life of Video Games. London: Fourth Estate, 2000.
· Skirrow, G. Hellivision: an analysis of video games. In MacCabe, C. High Theory / Low Culture: Analysing Popular Television And Film. Manchester University Press, 1986.
· Wachowski, L & A. The Art Of The Matrix. London: Titan, 2000.
Total word count = 8313
[1] Wachowski, L & A. The Art Of The Matrix: Screenplay. London: Titan, 2000, 286pp.
[2] John Gaeta, as quoted in What is Bullet Time? 1999. The Matrix: Revisited. DVD (Region 2: Pal). Warner Home Video.
[3] King, G. Introduction: Spectacle, Narrative and Frontier Mythology. In Spectacular Narratives, ed. King, Geoff , London: I B Tauris, 2000, 1pp.
[4] Ibid. 2pp.
[5] Ibid. 2pp.
[6] Schatz, T. The New Hollywood. In Collins, J., et al (ed). Film theory goes to the movies. London: Routledge, 1993, 9pp.
[7] Op.Cit. King, 3pp.
[8] Pierson, M. CGI effects in Hollywood science fiction cinema 1989-95: the wonder years. Screen, Vol. 40, No. 2, Summer, 1999, 161 pp.
[9] Op.Cit. Schatz, 10 pp.
[10] Ibid. 158 pp.
[11] Buckland, W. Between science fact and science fiction: Spielberg’s digital dinosaurs, possible worlds, and the new aesthetic realism. Screen, Vol. 40, No. 2, Summer, 1999, 178pp.
[12] Ibid. 180pp.
[13] Ibid. 184pp.
[14] Op.Cit. Pierson, 166pp.
[15] Op.Cit. King, 2pp.
[16] Op.Cit. Schatz, 30pp.
[17] Op.Cit. Wachowski, 368pp.
[18] Poole, S. Trigger Happy: The Inner life of Video Games. London: Fourth Estate, 2000, 78-79pp.
[19] Ibid. 84pp.
[20] Ibid. 108pp.
[21] Jenkins, H. The Art Of Contested Spaces. In King, L. Game On: The Culture and History of Video games. London: Laurence King, 2002, 65pp.
[22] Ibid. 69p
[23] Op.Cit. Pierson, 168pp
[24] Skirrow, G. Hellivision: An analysis of video games. In MacCabe, C. High Theory / Low Culture: Analysing Popular Television And Film. Manchester University Press, 1986, 115pp.
[25] Op.Cit. Poole, 77pp.
[26] Op.Cit. Zimmerman, E. In Game On, 125pp.
[27] Op.Cit. Wachowski, 317pp.
[28] Op.Cit. Poole, 87-88pp.
[29] Op.Cit. Jenkins. In Game On, 70pp.
[30] Op.Cit. Salen. Game On, 102pp.
[31] Op.Cit. Pierson, 167pp.
[32] Op.Cit. Pierson, 169pp.
[33] Cubitt, S. The Distinctiveness of digital criticism. Screen, Vol. 41, No. 1, Spring, 2000, 90pp.
[34] Op.Cit. Pierson, 167pp.
[35] Creed, B. The Cyber star: digital pleasures and the end of the Unconscious. Screen, Vol. 41., No.1, Spring, 2000, 83pp.
[36] Op.Cit. Poole, 84pp
[37] Op.Cit. Pierson, 169pp.
[38] Op.Cit, Wachowski, 383pp.
