There was nothing wrong with the first Mortal Kombat film's storyline. Since when it is a flaw for a film to be PG 13? Paul Anderson did the game justice for the most part, he took few liberities from the orginal video game storyline and turn out very well. It followed the game story better than most video game to film adaptions.

Alot of people assume that just because this new film will be "dark" and filled with blood it will make it better than the first film. It takes far more than blood, guts, and tons of swearing to make any good movie.

The Escapist doesn't seem like he payed any attention to the Mortal Kombat storyline at all. Lets not even take into consideration about the 2nd film , because that one was a bad joke.

And if that's just a taste of what could potentially be more fights in the full length film between more characters...it's worth paying to see all on it's own.

"Says he wants to make a movie that balances the real world with the mysticism and the special powers. Compares it to the way Harry Potter exists in two worlds. As in there are two universes that coexist with each other."

Thank you. Called it. I guess that would mean two seperate versions of MK CAN in fact co-exist with the drastically different one still containing magic and good chunks of the famous MK mythology. I don't think any film maker EVER would have enough balls to remake a franchise while throwing EVERYTHING out. That's basically asking the fanbase/creators to kill your ass.



Again, I'll state this. What is the clip? A person's take on Mortal Kombat. What is its purpose? It's a test-reel to prove MK can be rebooted and fit in with film in todays world. Who was it made for? Rich old big-wigs who I'm sure honestly don't give a fuck whether Baraka is black, white, Tarkatan, a demom from Hell, or God himself. They just want to see if it looks good to their eyes before they fund the director with wads of cash that they could instead be rolling around in on the floor.

What we, as fans, really have to look at is did the director make this because this is his WHOLE vision or did he just throw bits of his vision together to try and make something he thought those same big-wigs would more-than-likely go for than sitting them down and trying to explain MK to people who don't know and don't really give a shit about MK in 8 minutes or less.



I see where you're coming from. But MK is a franchise. There is always going to be a director somewhere who will have some great idea about how to put MK on the screen and make it work. If it gets made, give it a try. If you hate it and even if it doesn't work AT ALL for the majority of fans, I guaran-damn-tee you that in another 5-10 years if MK is still making games, some hot young director will be in WB's offices or where-ever MK is then and will be pitching an idea that'll more-than-likely get made.



Again, who's to say that those wouldn't be the only two characters changed that drastically? Have you ever noticed exactly how limited Earth-bound villains are in the MK franchise, especially from the beginning? It could very well have been done as an approach to even out the playing field, story-line wise. It makes it somewhat more alienating to the "heroes" if they have to fight against people from another place as well as people from where they are from as well. Puts more stake into what they're fighting for. I go through that problem all the time, I'm taking film and writing classes here in college and I'm hoping to be a screen-writer as I do nothing in my free time except hang with my wife, watch film, write and play games. Kind of a boring life, but that's what I enjoy. And I know sometimes, especially when coming at a project that already exists elsewhere, to make it interest and different, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.



Did anybody really NOT see that coming? I'll choke myself to death the day a good video game adaptation is made on film. Because again it comes down to the rich big-wigs who have the majority of the say. Look how X-Men 3 turned out. Thanks Brett "The-Rat." Or do I dare say it? Bat-nipples.



Just gotta give it some faith, man. It could very well turn out to be better than the first MK movie. Or not. But either way, it'll still be interesting.
At the end of the day, I'm glad this long discussion, semi-argument happened. Why? Because people voiced concerns. Concerns those involved with the project have probably already read. People don't have to shove their opinions down other peoples throats or call people inbreds or idiots or act like their opinion is law, but this right here is how shit gets done. Always has been and always will.

Anywho, bring on Rebirth. Even if it may be awesome, or shit.

And we can call bullshit right there. Sure, the primary concept was there, but they re-wired everything differently.


That is a massively huge claim, but he makes no attempt to justify it. I'd like to see him try to explain how Subzero's conversion, Smoke's tragedy, or Ermac's redemption were silly.


First of all, how would he even know that? And second of all, why is that relevant?

Listen everyone, if you hate the MK storyline so much... why do you insist on attaching the name Mortal Kombat to this project? Change the character names, call the movie "Saw 7: The Tournament," and everyone wins.

Another reason why it's so hard to portray the game's story in the films, is because in the games we are a lot more accepting of weird confusing rules and story elements that just wouldn't make sense in a movie series. For example, in MK the characters are supposed to battle to the death in these tournaments correct? Well in the games they somehow are all alive even though Liu always wins the tournament. Even when someone dies in the games...they never stay dead. How do you explain that in a movie? Better yet...why would anyone even care when someone dies in the movie, if they are just gonna be brought back? It carries no consequences thus why would people invest emotion into fights or deaths? Sure, we are all used to it and understand it, but to your casual fan watching this in theatres, how the hell are they supposed to believe that a tournament to the death ends with nobody dead, and if they do die, they'll just be brought back for the sequel because they are needed to further the storyline of the games.

It's common among franchises like this to alter the story to make it make more sense to your basic movie goer audience. There's only so much explaining you can do before the audience may just give up because it makes no sense. So if you want a movie that actually makes logical sense and follows a decent storyline, you're gonna just have to deal with the fact that the movie is gonna be different than the game.

And to this PG-13 talk...the first MK was still good without having to be R, but it was only so good. It still felt really toned down. Believe it or not to those who seem to want to think MK became popular because of it's awesome story...that's just not the case. Does it have an interesting story and charcters when you get into it? Of course. But you'd be a fool to not believe the already well known obvious knowledge that even the most casual fan knows...and that's that MK grew so big and is known for by any gaming fan, because it was so gorey and violent at a time where it just didn't exist. Hell, MK was the reason we have the ESRB rating we have today.

So to complain and act like MK shouldn't be so violent and gorey in the movies is just ludicrous.

Well, there's two ways go about it.

First off, not all the central characters would have to be in the tournament. Reptile is Shang's guardian, and Baraka was a general (or something), so they could just be in the background. Jade would be a spy; Subzero would die by Scorpions hand, and so on. The remaining slots could be held by filler characters (one of the smarter decisions made by Anderson in the first film). No need to over due it, but two or three would do the trick. It's also important that the tournaments have a 2-team structure, so Liu would never have to fight Kung Lao.

The second approach is to permanently kill the lesser-important characters, like Stryker, Rain, or even Stryker.

Anderson didn't make up the "fill the tournament with filler characters who can be killed off" idea, that's actually canon from the games.

The official comic shows a huge crowd of like fifty to a hundred guys gathered in the Courtyard when Shang gives his "let the tournament begin" speech.

And then the opening of MK2 specifically contains the phrase "Only seven warriors survived" to explain why none of the main characters from the game caught a Fatality in the plot. (technically inaccurate since Sub-Zero DID die, though that was supposed to be a mystery at the time)
Also, Liu Kang's finishing move in MK1 is supposed to be non-lethal. That's why the Butterfly Kick-Uppercut looks so lame and there's no decapitating or exploding, his Fatality literally does not kill! He's supposed to be a pacifist monk. Liu's ENTIRE motivation in the first game is "turning the shaolin's tournament into a deathmatch is sacrilege, I want to take control of it back from Shang and make it peaceful again". Makes sense that if the guy who won the tournament is the one who refuses to kill, that's why all his opponents survived, doesn't it?

Because it is not SAW. Why do you all intend to attach SAW to this has no piece of torture is found within?

Though you have a point. And to clarify, I do not hate the story. Why would I? I just had enough of it. Armageddon closed it for me, albeit with lackluster efforts, but it is closed. It had it's run. I want to see something fresh, and as I said it two years before, I wouldn't discard an MK what had nothing to do with the original and 0 new characters. MK can be in my opinion detached from it's content.

This is what people and MK experts cannot seem to grasp, that certain aspects of fiction, especially postmodernism aren't FOCUSED ON THE PLOT. Read Ulysses for example. The message of the novel is anything but the plot.

But this is a game. Story is secondary. And yes, all the biographies are background material explaining WHY this character does such things, and to whom. It isn't fiction in the novels sense of work. MK goes about and tells us who?, what? and how? and why? Nothing else mostly. Certain additions are to give character to characters (for example, we know that Johnny Cage is a stage name- this has zero impact)

Outoworld is a wasteland because it shows why Shao kahn needs to be stopped. Netherrealm is hell, because we should know the denizens are nherently evil in various qualities. Such things serve as stylistic indicators. Nothing more really. Edenia is Eden because Edenians are almost inherently positive. Save Tanya. And even that is contrastual.

Well, I think it's successful in the sense of it's purpose. It's getting people talking about Mortal Kombat again. I mean, 2 million views on youtube in 3 days? That's quite impressive.

I'm kind of amazed by this entire argument.

Tony The Tiger, about 14 pages ago basically asked why everyone was screaming and crying about MK vs DC and yet this video, which is so different from MK, is being embraced by people.

To me, it's the same exact argument. Literally. Something new was introduced and the people that liked MK vs DC back then were telling people to "get used to it," "learn to love it," "this is a good change for the series" etc.

Meanwhile people were crying about how it wasn't MK, or how they wanted a true sequel and how it was a waste of a game and not what we thought the next game would be etc.

Well, here we have something new introduced, and the people that like it are telling others to get with the progam, don't fear change etc while the people that hate it say it's not MK, you're not a real MK fan if you like this (or at least a good MK fan), how dare they make Reptile into blah blah blah.

It's sort of a cycle of fanboyism, if you will. Those that like what's introduced will call those that hate it recalcitrant and resistant to much needed change. Those that hate what they see will refer to the source material as evidence, they'll see the differences between that material and the new material and they'll use that to justify their opinion that what's new is invalid or less than what's come previously.

My feeling is that it's perfectly fine to like or dislike this. It doesn't make you any less of a card carrying MK fan either way. So what if people want to see new interpretations of old characters? So what if people don't want to see this one particular interpretation?

To me, that can be the hard part to reconcile. I really like the style of the video, especially given how much it cost to make. But apparently to some people that means I must like this, that, the other thing and now all of a sudden I have terrible taste and my opinion is less valid because of it.

Then again, I don't like reinterpretations of Reptile and Baraka. Does that somehow make me some stoggy fanboy that's stuck in the MK1 era? Maybe I just don't like seeing a movie completely change the source material, because while I don't mind them taking a good amount of liberties, what's the point in having characters if they're not at all who they were before?

My whole point here is that I think it's okay to like some aspects, hate others, like all or hate all of what this video has to offer. Some people need to stop acting like their opinion is more valid or that somehow liking this or hating this means you're also this, that or the other thing.

I personally want to see MK grow up. I like this vision of MK, even if it's a bit too gruesome. I think it has potential. I just hope that like Harry Potter (which the author referenced in terms of magic), the director mines the source material for the best aspects and stays close to those aspects, instead of simply editing the truth to the degree that he did. After a while, it just kind of stops being the truth.

Either way, I expect this exact same argument to unfold when the E3 news comes out. People that like the next MK will see it as a welcome change and that those that hate it are resistant idiots that just want to see MK2 remade over and over again while those that hate it will see it as some sort of abomination that's not truly MK or not nearly as good as the past and that those that like it are just morons that will accept any change as good change and are thus lesser MK fans.

Hopefully that won't be the case!! I don't mind arguing, but I'm hoping more than anything else that we'll see a lot to like in the next MK game!

On a side note, if you read the interview, it really sounds like he's a fan of the series and has been for a long time. Not to draw comparisons, but I know that the guy that brought Street Fighter back from the dead was a huge fan. I know it's games versus movies, but if this guy loves MK that much, I'd be more curious to see an expanded interpretation of this world though his eyes.

I'm not saying that gives him a free pass to do whatever he wants and turn Shinnok in to a surly but loveable cab driver, but it tells me that he at least cares about the source material and that he might take better care of it than most other directors.

Emphasis on the "might."

I think I might have an answer for that.

Ever since MKA the fanbase wanted Mortal Kombat to grow up, both in feeling and grit. The brutality was comical, it had no shock value, the background material and story was lackluster. They wanted change, resh air, the game series has been very formulaic....and has been on the verge of collapse financially.

Then came MK vs. DC. Somehow people associate comic book superheroes with teen fantasy, even when our current teenagers are getting off on torture porn most vehemently brought up here (saw). I think why the people decryed MK vs DC was because Superman does not exactly scream grit.

Superman can be adult material: Red Son, critically speaking a pinnacle of good writing and political dabbling within the boyscout aspect. Superman does not really work with what MK is about according to the fanbase.

The level of violence we tolerate is frighteningly going upwards. Of all the people here I rarely found anyone who actually understands why the teenage MK fans want and like the new MK approach: to them, what we grew up with is soft candy partially.

And the older generation is accustomed to seeing the nostalgic, err.. "90's" style antiheroism with all of it's glamour, and actually saw quality grit and thirlling in stuff like Se7en. They knew that back then this was not what MK needed. It sufficed back then.

Does it now? Sure, MK vs Dc saved the developers, but also it was a dead end on how to MK. That the MK heroes were compatible with the DC ones, those who have been given their NON-ADULT versions (not The Dark Knight, not Superman Red Son, Deathstroke did not show it off... Joker was not the Joker from JOKER) or more precisely, the mainstream versions. And exaclty those versions are which usually bring in repsect for the comic book writers. Not the pulp that is serialized.

That MK was compatible with mainstream pop culture superheroes shows to me that the younger MK fans who are more adult-material oriented and not raging teenagers with stiffies for disembowelment being beautiful do want an MK that sewers specific ties with the original.

After reading some of the interview with the director I think this guy is on the right track.

He did this in a very short period with limited funds and without the help of WB or Boon.

He set a dark tone and does not seem shy about pushing the envelope.

With help from the MK team and WB financial backing this guy could create an epic MK movie.

I appreciate his current direction, but if he is chosen for the next movie I am confident Boon and company will make sure it is rooted in the spirit of the game.

That's all I ask.
When he said that he was going to include mysticism, I became slightly more optimistic. However, I'm still concerned with his depiction of Jax and Sonya as inner-city cops; it seems like he's ditching the international-world shaking aspect of the series (and, ideally, I'd like to see something that's as true to the series as possible). However, I understand that certain changes must be made.
What concerned me about the preview was that it seemed to ignore the spirit of the game itself. It seemed to downplay the kung-fu aspect of the game and replace it with horror.
Everyone is talking about how "dark and gritty" is the new thing. I couldn't agree more. However, the reason that "The Dark Knight" was successful was less the grit, and more the fact that it was rooted in the spirit of the original Batman comics, and not in spandex and bat-nipples ::stares angrily at Joel Schumacher::.
Despite everyone (myself included) liking "dark and gritty" things, Mortal Kombat was never dark and gritty. And, even if it were, it was certainly never horror. "Iron Man" was extremely successful, without being dark and gritty, because it stayed true to it's original source material.
The first Mortal Kombat movie was one of the best video-game movies of all time, because it was true to the video game...sure, it made many changes, but it was true to the atmosphere and intent of the original.
If Tanchareon want's to ground Mortal Kombat in darkness, I can support it, providing he respects the source material, and doesn't try to make unnecessary changes for the purpose of "grit" and "horror."
In short, I'd rather "Mortal Kombat: Rebirth" to be about Mortal Kombat. I'd rather it not be "CSI: Saw" but with all the characters' names changed to be those of the Mortal Kombat characters. Sure, I'd love to see "CSI: Saw", but I wouldn't want it titled "Mortal Kombat."
I'm sure that it will be a wonderful movie, no matter what...I just hope it's an MK movie!

I actually really like the "trailer" and think that it could turn out to be a great film. The first Mortal Kombat movie was pretty close to the actual game's story, yes, and that made the fans of the games happy. But that's not necessarily the only audience you want to capture when making a film. Just like the Resident Evil movies that a lot of people say are crap because they are fans of that game and the movies don't follow the series' plot. I happen to like those films and am a huge RE fan because I can see them for what they are worth.

With Mortal Kombat, I see it no differently. I think that they need a better story to capture both the gamers and the general public, which is what they seem to be trying to do here. Heck, they aren't straying too far from the original story. They got Scorpion's real name right and he's even an undead person. They gave Reptile a nice, new backstory, as well as Baraka. I think it will be alright.

I think this sums up the flaws of the game perfectly :D

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1925555

Looks like the Midway team loves me so much that they modelled the new Baraka after my avatar. Gone, but not forgotten. The Legend of BMK.

I dont think this will have the characters we care about and the time to build them, just mindless blood and gore for the sake of a new darker watchmen style MK.

Were in the graphic novel era people comon this is just bullshit

Haha. genuinely funny. But how is that relevant to this thread exactly?

I'm using it to show the conflicting complexity in people's arguments.. that the game isn't true to its own story at times, so we should not get so caught up in the artists interpretation

It took me two days to read this whole thing.. So Wow it's amazing to see that Mortal Kombat still has a fanbase, and definetly now alive one!

About the pitch idea; I'm all for it! Of course I was myself a bit worried about the Baraka, Reptile and Jax "KILL 'EM ALL!" supercop.. First I was thinking that this is not MK, but I would still wanna see this flick! After that interview I was confident that this guy can really make a movie that can bare to carry the name of MK. (I don't care if Baraka is a doctor, sure I would prefer a tarkatan, and I liked the Reptile idea.)

Few points on why I'm for it;

The MK story is really much done.. It's just going and going and going, and there's so much flaws.. - Let's just give the guy a chance to re-invent a piece of the story, let's use the beloved characters, ditch the crappy ones. It would be just a movie, how in the hell you as an director could make a movie that's good and you're pleased yourself, if nothing new is allowed.. Would you even want to do anything because so many die hard fans are ready to behead you? It does not take anything away from us, could you just understand that and be fucking entertained and stop being a purist! I personally like this dark shit. I would like it to have the WTF effect! When frosty freezes someone to a solid piece of ice it does not work if there's a dude who says "Okay, let's get it on , BITCH!". Just ditch the idiotic shit like Jax in Annihilation against Motaro.. "Yeah, I'm gonna kill you Pony!" Don't lose the MK in it but make it more edgier! The "magic" part is going to be in there, but NOT in the IN YOUR FACE - style, and I'm very happy for it.

I'm thinking the same thing for the new games too.. Get rid of all the shitty characters aka reduce the options, sometimes less is more.. Then the developers could really concentrate in the gameplay, and making it brilliant. Let's start from the scratch, using these classic guys, giving them new background stories, or just making those stories better. Developing a whole new story, hell i'm up for it.. I think that would make MK interesting again atleast in the eyes of casual players! And fans would still go for it!

In a nutshell, this shit needs to be renewed. It's been around for almost 20 years! We need to go forward and stop being snobby about the details that were told in MK II and so on.. MK is going to be dead soon if no one has the balls to take it to a new level! I'm happy to see even someone trying! It's not easy to satisfy the most fanatic group that I know, give him a chance!

And don't even bother with the "you're not a real fan" and other shit like that.. I've grown with MK and I have truly love for it, i'm just as diehard as you.

Very well said.. cheers on the insight and opinion :)

Huh. Did not know that.


The Saw thing is kind of a running joke at this point. It's only in line with Saw in terms of the level of violence; this project is probably closer to something like "The Usual Suspects" in terms of story structure.

It's interesting that you mention post-modern fiction, because that really does explain the difference between our two camps. Whether or not this proposal is blasphemy or not will depend on whether Mortal Kombat is based in it's story or in it's presentation. If fictional substance is in presentation, then things like characters and places are contingent; just tools for the delivery. I haven't read Ulysses, but I have read about 200 pages of "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" along with some Philip Roth, so I'm only half sure I'm following you here.

I guess ultimately, I don't really agree with the thesis of post-modern literature. In the abstract sense, all stories ever made and will be made already exist. We're sort of "discovering" them, so if you make changes to a story, you haven't revised it, you've merely created (I use "created' figuratively) an alternate version.

I also don't know if it's fair to say story is secondary in video games, because even though it's true, it's misleading. A game's story can be extracted and evaluated in of itself. When you say a good game has a bad story, you're reviewing to separate things. I can't say how hard Tobias/Vogel work in the writing room, but with a concept like Mortal Kombat, the story kind of writes itself.

You cannot blaspheme against that is not inherently holy.

Fictional substance is where you find it. YOUR interpretation is what ultimately counts in postmodernism. There are no guidelines and there are no preset values but what you make of it. And yes, it is not the story, it is not the plot, it is not the character, it is not the resolution that constitutes Mortal Kombat. It is the personal interpretation of all those things together throughout MY. OWN. LENSE.

If you try to prescribe me that this (exactly MK1-MK3) is Mortal Kombat and everything else is secondary and must be subservient to it, I laugh in your face. It cannot work, simply because I do not see it that way. This is why I try not to dismiss those who like "what Mk should be about purist-style" for they are as entitled to what they like, as am I. Netherrealm Studios has failed me too often, so the result of this is my lack of interest in the newest product. I prognose stagnation and 0 change in MK perception outside perhaps gameplay. That is what I see. Prespective.

If people chastise you because you even dare think anything else other than what they consider to be the norm that is a clear indicator of some sort of intelligence one way or another. That is what I have learned throughout my life.

Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is an excellent choice superior to my suggestion.

I don't mind somebody changing up the storyline of MK within his own vision of a potential movie, but Baraka a doctor? For real?

Reptile being born the way he was and stores heads in fridges?

At least tweak the story in a way where you're not completely making it seem so silly and incredibly distant from the characters and storyline we're familiar with. Again, I don't mind the MK universe being portrayed in a different way on screen, but not to the point where it's silly and ridiculous.

Although, I think Michael Jai White would make a terrific Jax and Jeri Ryan a terrific Sonya.

Oh, and can Johnny Cage catch a break in these films? First it was the glasses, then Kahn jacks him up, now Baraka terrorizes him? Jeez. lol