Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Omnivores are cool. Don't say we didn't warn you.

Let me advance a potentially unpopular hypothesis, if I may: What if the Final Fantasy Movie, is, for us, no different than the Pokemon movie was for the under 12 set? Or reaching further back, the Rugrats movie, the Power Rangers movie, Transformers, etc. Yeah, we're older, and I'd hope we're smarter, but are we really any less susceptible to hype? What if, despite the cutting edge visuals, the movie ultimately comes down to cheaply exploiting things we're deeply attached to? How would we feel if Sakaguchi does something stupid, like work in a Chocobo for one "wacky" scene completely out of line with the rest of the movie? How much are we willing to forgive to see an FF movie on the big screen?

Thoughts like these keep me awake at night.

I probably need to get out more.

Onward.

Always nice to start off with some unabashed enthusiasm. Yes, the movie looks great, and I've been salivating over it for years. But your own example of Titan A.E. shows that looking great isn't always enough, not when it's tied down with a mediocre plot and boring characters. Nearly any of the recent FFs have had better characters than what we get in most sf films, tho, so there's still a chance of seeing something worthwhile.

On the other hand, I have no problems with CG replacing reality. George C. Scott once said that an actor in a movie is of slightly less importance than the key grip (who's the guy that moves stuff around between shots), and if you think about it, it's true. Actors are rarely better than the lines they've been given by the writers, and the situations they're placed in by directors. A good actor is almost always someone who's just doing what they're supposed to do, rather than botching it up... the only reason we think they're important is because they're the only people we end up seeing, once everything's said and done. That being the case, why not go totally virtual?

Right, but there's a few differences here, the big one being that Ebert's speaking as a film critic, as opposed to TIME or any of the major newsweeklies, who pretty much just parrot what marketing departments tell them to when it comes to technology. (I say this as a devoted Newsweek subscriber, because I cringe whenever they start talking about games.)

Which isn't to say that Ebert's not slightly suspect here: his past reviews have always shown a preference for the latest in the newest and shiniest FX. Not that I can't relate, it's just that after reading his review of The Cell (which other reviewers scared me away from entirely), I do have to wonder about his judgement when it comes to this stuff.

Attacking the problem from the other angle, I'd say that this approach ends up hurting games these days nearly as much as it helps them. It's one thing to have fantasy names if you're living in a fantasy world, but if you're going for realism, it's just distracting. Squall was an ordinary type guy with some not-uncommon problems, so why not call him "Steve", or something, to emphasize the character rather than the weather condition he's named after?

Of course, I could just rename the characters myself, but it's far easier to whine and complain about it... more fun, too.

Standard disclaimer time: the above letter is from an old friend of mine, who's not a hardcore console gamer but knows enough about computers, technology, sf, and other stuff to make his opinion worthwhile from a statistical standpoint: someone who's halfway between this column and the rest of the world, in other words.

And in this case, he hits the nail on the head - the FF movie will have to be more than just a tech demo to get people excited about it, and that's not the impression it's giving off thus far. More than that, Square seems to be caught in a dilemma, because what gamers want out of a movie is likely to be different from what will pull in the masses. Square could make the best movie in the world, but it still might not be a hit with the Titanic crowd.

Of course, the Grinch crowd is probably the wrong market to push this thing on, anyway. I'd suggest something like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, if I wasn't afraid that it won't end up even more marginalized than FF. Still, if Toy Story 2 and The Matrix can be successful, there's hope yet.

Yeah, but think of it this way: what kind of an RPG would it be if there were no daunting obstacles to overcome? (Preemptive strike before someone else gets to it: "A Square game!") If Square does pull this off, they'll be king of the gaming universe, and if not, at least they died trying.

I was a little disappointed I didn't get any response back from the old school crowd themselves about this. (Perhaps I scared them away?) But I've seen enough letters in general from them to speculate on what their answers would have been: that FF was a decent game series that became watered down and lost its roots when it became "mainstream" and started concentrating on more modern plots, that the series has moved from interesting stories about real heroes and destiny to brooding teenagers and confusing psychobabble, and that the FF movie will simply be the final desecration of a loved one's grave.

And while I might disagree with the language, there is a grain of truth in there, much as I hate to admit it. The FF movie's not just an extension of a popular gaming series, it's likely an attempt to lure new gamers in, as well. I doubt we'll see anything like "Final Fantasy: The Movie: The Game", but there will be people inspired to give the series a try after the movie comes out... and gosh, they may just stumble on to FFX, conveniently released in the US a few months after the movie! (I think.) I'm not one of those who thinks RPGs have been hurt in any way by their increased popularity in the PSX era, but it does make you wonder how mainstream the PS2 FFs are gonna get. We shall see...

What else can I say but...

"Excellent."

Closing Comments:

Free topic day tomorrow... which is kind of a misnomer, since the topics aren't any more free than they usually are, it's just that there aren't any on this particular day. Although I guess I could provide one if given enough financial incentive... but that would make tomorrow "expensive topic day", wouldn't it? I dunno, just send me some email. Later.

-Chris Jones, in widescreen and Dolby Digital THX