I know i'm coming into this late in the game, but Nintendo did what was right, and what they were legally obligated to do. The fans who made this movie violated the Fair Use Act, by distributing this movie in a way that makes money. It doesnt matter if its in a completely different medium. If it was not approved by Nintendo, and the creators of the film did not pay for the rights to use Nintendo's IP for a marketable product, then they were in the wrong. Obviously the ones who made the film knew they were wrong when they "conceded" to stop distributing the film.
I agree that having the owners of an IP greenlight something does not make it automatically good. Look at 90% of video game movies. However if the owners of the IP actually have a strong hand in the process of creation, they can greatly improve the quality of it. Look at Ang Lee's Hulk movie, versus Marvel Studios' The Incredible Hulk. The latter is a much better movie because Marvel was heavily involved in its creation.
Star Wars is another example, the extended universe books are approved by LucasFilm, and many of the early ones by Lucas himself, and are good, while the unlicensed fan fics, some may be good, most are horrible.
While Nintendo does seem like the bad guy here, they were doing what was obligated by law. The filmmakers are lucky that Nintendo let them off easy.
And to anyone saying that a movie is not a competitor to a video game is ignorant. Any use of an IP is a competitor to the original use. The Harry Potter movies are a competitor to the books, as are all movies based on books. There are a lot of people who believe that "I can wait till the movie comes out." This will extend into the video game market very quickly, and has already to some extent. Bad video game movies, like the Uwe Boll films, make many people never want to play the game. I have never wanted to play Alone in the Dark or Bloodrayne after having sat through those, and the only reason I personally still play Resident Evil is because the story was there before Anderson's movies came out, and i remember when the game first came out.
Sorry for the extra long post, here's the TL/DR:
Nintendo did what was right by law, and the filmmakers were lucky.
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by George.
Zelda Movie
I know i'm coming into this late in the game, but Nintendo did what was right, and what they were legally obligated to do. The fans who made this movie violated the Fair Use Act, by distributing this movie in a way that makes money. It doesnt matter if its in a completely different medium. If it was not approved by Nintendo, and the creators of the film did not pay for the rights to use Nintendo's IP for a marketable product, then they were in the wrong. Obviously the ones who made the film knew they were wrong when they "conceded" to stop distributing the film. I agree that having the owners of an IP greenlight something does not make it automatically good. Look at 90% of video game movies. However if the owners of the IP actually have a strong hand in the process of creation, they can greatly improve the quality of it. Look at Ang Lee's Hulk movie, versus Marvel Studios' The Incredible Hulk. The latter is a much better movie because Marvel was heavily involved in its creation. Star Wars is another example, the extended universe books are approved by LucasFilm, and many of the early ones by Lucas himself, and are good, while the unlicensed fan fics, some may be good, most are horrible. While Nintendo does seem like the bad guy here, they were doing what was obligated by law. The filmmakers are lucky that Nintendo let them off easy. And to anyone saying that a movie is not a competitor to a video game is ignorant. Any use of an IP is a competitor to the original use. The Harry Potter movies are a competitor to the books, as are all movies based on books. There are a lot of people who believe that "I can wait till the movie comes out." This will extend into the video game market very quickly, and has already to some extent. Bad video game movies, like the Uwe Boll films, make many people never want to play the game. I have never wanted to play Alone in the Dark or Bloodrayne after having sat through those, and the only reason I personally still play Resident Evil is because the story was there before Anderson's movies came out, and i remember when the game first came out. Sorry for the extra long post, here's the TL/DR: Nintendo did what was right by law, and the filmmakers were lucky.