In a previous column I discussed the relationship between the games industry and Hollywood as it applies to licensed games. More often than not videogames made from movies are not very good although there are some rare exceptions. This time I'm going to look at the relationship from the other side of the mirror: movies based on videogame properties. It' a sensitive subject to many gamers who feel that Hollywood has treated our beloved game franchises with contempt, opting to cash in on name and image recognition without paying the core game content the proper amount of respect. Somewhat validating that opinion is the fact that a movie based on a videogame has yet to break through as a huge commercial and critical success. That will change.

The highest grossing videogame adaptation remains "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" from 2001 which opened at number one at the box office with approximately $48 million and went on to gross over $274 million worldwide. "Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" was successful enough to warrant a sequel in 2003, "Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life," but the second film did not perform nearly as well as the first. Critics panned both films and every film based on a videogame since with good reason. Filmmakers have not been able to crack the nut of a videogame narrative, both capturing what makes the game license appealing in the first place and delivering a movie that gamers and non-gamers alike can enjoy. However they are still trying and I applaud them for that despite their motivations. Hollywood doesn't keep making videogame adaptations in the hopes of crafting a superior movie; they're doing it because a movie based on an established property (book, comic or videogame) has a built-in audience. Whether videogame movies suck or not they usually make money and it's important to remember that making money is more important to businessmen and women than making great movies. My hope is that by continually chasing the videogame pot of gold, they'll make a great movie by mistake.

What brought this topic to mind was last week Director Bret Ratner ("Rush Hour," "Red Dragon," and "X-Men: The Last Stand") mentioned that he was prepping work for a film based on God of War. Gamers were incensed at this news. Like many of my ilk, I count God of War and God of War II as two of the best gaming experiences the medium has ever delivered so you could say that I have an active interest in a God of War film. But my reaction to Ratner as a possible director was not righteous indignation or anger, it was muted optimism. No, Bret Ratner is not who I would pick to direct it, but we have to accept the fact that videogame movies carry a stigma (some might even call it a stink) that will keep high-dollar talent at bay. The visionary directors out there who gamers put on their short lists for this movie won't come anywhere near a videogame adaptation until someone solves the equation and proves that a videogame can result in a great film. Until then we have to work with what we can get.

The Big Daddies and the Little Sisters are integral pieces of the BioShock experience.

What's going to be the game/movie combination to break the mold? My chips are down on "BioShock," which is currently scheduled to be released in 2010. "BioShock" will be directed by Gore Verbinski ("The Ring" and all the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies) and written by John Logan ("Gladiator," "The Aviator," and "The Last Samurai"). Whether you like any of their previous work you have to admit that these are people who can get money out of studios and an adaptation of BioShock is going to need money. The elaborate sets that will be needed to construct the underwater dystopia of Rapture, special effects to capture the plasmid abilities and costume design to bring the Big Daddies to life are going to be pricey. With Gore Verbinski attached the studio will be less reluctant to part with their cash.

Several factors make BioShock an ideal game for Hollywood attention. The first of which is that gamers adore it (although that could also be seen as an obstacle). Gamers will go see a big-budget BioShock movie whether it's well-received by critics or not. But how do you get everyone else into the theater for a videogame movie when they have such a long track record of being poor? You give them something they've never seen. BioShock has a unique setting, an incredible story and the promise of some amazing action set pieces. The groundwork is laid for a successful movie adaptation as long as the filmmakers can preserve what makes the game so great. The story is incredibly important to preserving the mystery of a BioShock film and the production design must retain the game's mid-1900s-future-low-tech ambiance. This is not a game built around a single character or gimmick that can be easily co-opted for a movie. All the pieces of BioShock need to make the transition to the film.

The next film to try our patience will be out in a few weeks: "Max Payne" starring Mark Wahlberg. I loved the Max Payne games and I think the movie looks pretty good. Despite the intimidating list of bad films made from games, I remain optimistic when I hear about a game getting picked up by a studio. "God of War", "BioShock", "Halo", "World of Warcraft", bring all of them on. I'm either a slow learner or a glutton for punishment when it comes to videogame movies. I'm like a mouse in an experiment that refuses to stop reaching for the cheese connected to the electric current. I keep thinking, "Maybe this time I won't get shocked."

Previous Columns:

• Is Gaming Immune to Attack?
• Aren't We Done With WWII?
• What Causes MMO Tribalism?
• Too Many New Games
• The Retro-Gaming Surge
• DRM and Piracy: The Vicious Circle
• Who Is to Blame for the State of Game Scores?
• Expectations and Predictions for E3 2008
• The Legacy of Diablo
• Parrying Premature Attacks on Indy 4
• Why Movie Tie-In Games Suck
• A Perfect Score: Is Any Game Worthy?
• Massively Multiplayer: Fantasy vs. Sci-Fi

Join our discussion on this topic