‘The last of’ awful adaptations

Adaptations shouldn’t stray too far from the source

Ronnie Saenz / Contributor / The USD Vista

The popular post-apocalyptic zombie video game “The Last of Us” has recently received its own television adaptation that premiered on HBO Max on Jan. 15, and made waves among viewers for being “surprisingly good.” This isn’t a surprise because the zombie genre is overdone, rather it’s surprising because video game adaptations into film or television are usually synonymous with dumpster fires  and  Adam  Sandler movies. But, with “The Last of Us,” video game enthusiasts have found their perfect adaptation.


From “The Super Mario Bros.” (1993) to “Sonic the Hedgehog 2” (2022), video game adaptations to the big screen and television have become commonplace.  Just as common is that these adaptations are often critical failures, and that comes down to the faithfulness to the source material. “Uncharted,” “Doom,” “Resident Evil” (2022), “Monster Hunter” and “Tomb Raider” all have below a 50% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes with the consistent comment, “It was nothing like the video game.”


Take the TV adaptation of “Halo” for example. “Halo” the video game defined the modern first person shooter genre and is  beloved  by many  for its fast paced action. The  story of the  game  series  is  simple,  fun, memorable  and  action  packed. On  the other  hand, “Halo”  the   TV  adaptation     almost  completely ignores  the  action  adventure that  the Halo franchise is  known  for.  “We  didn’t look at  the  game,” says  season  one  showrunner  Steven Kane in an  interview with Vanity Fair. “We  didn’t  talk  about the  game. We talked  about  the  characters and  the world.  So I never  felt limited  by it being a game.”


As a result of ignoring the game, the “Halo” show focuses more on drama than the action packed scenes fans have come to expect. Even after spending $10 million per episode, “Halo” only has a critic score of 70% on rotten tomato and an audience score of 52%.

 
What’s unusual about “The Last of Us” is that it is (so far) extraordinarily similar to its video game counterpart, often having scenes that are identical frame by frame, which is unheard of for video game adaptations. Even the casting is great, as many are relieved the main protagonist in “The Last of Us” Joel is still hot and the zombies are not.

 
As  mentioned,  most video game  adaptations infamously overhaul significant amounts of the   original   piece,   whether  out  of   fear   it   may   not   connect  with  general audiences or simple   ignorance  of  the  source material,  but the commercial and  critical  success  of  “The Last of Us” is  proof  that  less  creative liberties  is  better  than  more.


Following the source material as closely as possible is  a good  idea because it keeps the very things that people loved about that story intact for the adaptation. This is very much an “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” scenario.


Even though these pieces are based on beloved series, audiences often cite their disappointment   that   adaptations  aren’t  more  faithful  to  that  series. By straying  from the games, these  films  are  alienating  the original  fans  instead  of   general audiences,  in   effect  creating  a generic  piece  of   media   instead  of  one  based  on  an  adored  franchise, with pre-existing  character  arcs  and canon.  The  cost  of   these  creative   liberties  is  reflected  in the  film’s  poor critical  reception, proving the excess of creative liberties taken on these projects are actually weighing them down.

 
While all the mentioned films and TV shows are critical failures, they aren’t commercial failures, raking in tens to hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office. It’s proven that when a popular video game series is attached to a film project, it doesn’t matter how good or bad the adaptation is; it will make money simply for the brand recognition. This is why studios pump out so many lazy films  based  on  popular  video games.  If it  will  make  money anyway, why try to create compelling and good-faith films? I  could  cite  artistry as a  reason  for  the  deviation,  but from  a money  perspective,  these film  adaptations  are  important for  another  reason:  exposure.


Video games are an inaccessible and expensive medium, with newly released games  costing $60 per customer, and the caveat of having  to  learn  how to play them. Film and TV don’t have this problem, as they are relatively inexpensive and no one needs to learn  how to  watch them.

 
If  your  only  exposure  to a  video  game  and  the  stories it  tells   is  through   poorly   done film  and  TV  adaptations,   then you  will   have  a   bad  impression of  that  game.  If  you make a good  impression  of  a  game,  then more   people  will  buy that game and more sequels  will be made.

 
According to IGN, “The Last of  Us  Part  1” game sales have  skyrocketed 238%  in the UK since the  recent release of the show, because  newer fans are buying  into its  success. A faithful     adaptation  is more likely to bring  long-term  success than the  lazy  adaptation  capitalizing from  the  popularity  of  a  game.

The accurate casting from the game (left) to the show (right) is best represented by Joel, played by Pedro Pascal. Photo courtesy of Naughty Dog/HBO

Video game adaptations have come a long way from Yoshi being played by a literal dinosaur to  Joel   being played by Pedro Pascal.  After “The Last of Us,” the future is bright for video game adaptations with upcoming   projects such as “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” (2023) and a “God of War” show. As long  as future  adaptations   stick to the sources, these game series and  so many more can  bathe in the  long-term success  paved by their predecessors.  It’s also important  that  we  as  audiences demand more out of studios to give these projects to people who love and care for the games.

 
Video  games  are  an  excellent medium for  storytelling,  and  it’s great  that  we  are  finally  seeing those  stories  faithfully  acted out on  screen,  but  if  things  don’t change,  we’ll continue  to  see  bad adaptations  and  audiences  won’t  open themselves  up  to original video  games.  I  do  truly  believe that  the  future  of  video  game adaptations  is  bright,  but  inaccurate adaptations could change this.