Pretend it’s a video game: How films emulate… | Little White Lies

Pre­tend it’s a video game: How films emu­late gam­ing mechanics

25 Apr 2025

Words by Daniel Schindel

Colourful illustration depicting a group of five people with neon-coloured hair and clothing, set against a dark background with smoke or clouds.
Colourful illustration depicting a group of five people with neon-coloured hair and clothing, set against a dark background with smoke or clouds.
As a (very loose) adap­ta­tion of Until Dawn hits cin­e­mas, it’s worth inves­ti­gat­ing the suc­cess­ful – and unsuc­cess­ful – attempts to explore what it feels like to play a video game on the big screen.

David F. Sandberg’s new hor­ror film Until Dawn is based on the 2015 video game of the same name, which has caused some con­fu­sion or even con­ster­na­tion among fans of the source mate­r­i­al, since the film seems to have lit­tle over­lap with it. In the game, play­ers con­trol eight dif­fer­ent teens at a snowy moun­tain ski lodge who are men­aced first by a masked killer and then by a pack of wendi­gos. The movie fol­lows a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent group of young peo­ple who find them­selves trapped in a time loop where­in each iter­a­tion sees them up against a dif­fer­ent hor­ror sce­nario – a mur­der­ous clown, a loom­ing giant, face-rot­ting par­a­sites, etcetera. Besides a few details, like a miss­ing sib­ling as a plot device or the use of actor Peter Stor­mare, Until Dawn the movie bears lit­tle resem­blance to Until Dawn the game. Sand­berg has said that the movie expands upon the uni­verse” of the source mate­r­i­al in lieu of reusing its plot, explain­ing the game is pret­ty much a 10-hour movie, so I think it wouldn’t have been as inter­est­ing for me if we were doing just the game, because then it’s going to be like a cut-down, non-inter­ac­tive ver­sion of the game, which just wouldn’t be the same thing.”

The filmmaker’s com­ments speak to a per­pet­u­al issue in adapt­ing video games for film. A large part of the appeal of gam­ing is par­tic­i­pat­ing in the action your­self; strip away the inter­ac­tive aspect, and going through the same sto­ry beats can feel tedious. This dilem­ma has become more per­ti­nent as games have been increas­ing­ly used as the basis for block­busters in recent years. Before that trend was solid­i­fied by box office suc­cess­es like A Minecraft Movie, Son­ic the Hedge­hog, Five Nights at Freddy’s, and The Super Mario Bros. Movie, turn­ing games into films was long a fraught enter­prise. It’s a his­to­ry lit­tered with flops rang­ing from 1993’s Super Mario Bros. to Assassin’s Creed to most of Uwe Boll’s oeu­vreall films which, to vary­ing degrees, were greet­ed with crit­i­cal and fan respons­es along the lines of Why even both­er?” How­ev­er, there are scat­tered films that have mean­ing­ful­ly cap­tured some part of the gam­ing expe­ri­ence. They aren’t always the titles one would expect, and sur­vey­ing them helps clar­i­fy what makes cin­e­ma and gam­ing dis­tinct as art forms.

The 2022 film Unchart­ed is a great case study for the fail­ures of just trans­pos­ing the plot of a game to a film. It repli­cates a major action sequence from Drake’s Decep­tion’, the third game in the series it’s based on, in which pro­tag­o­nist Nathan Drake clings for dear life to crates strung behind a plane thou­sands of feet up in the air. This is thrilling to play but a chore to watch. A live-action Tom Hol­land poor­ly com­pos­it­ed into a whol­ly com­put­er-gen­er­at­ed vista means the scene lacks any sense of weight or grav­i­ty. Things ani­ma­tion can con­vey eas­i­ly become uncon­vinc­ing in anoth­er medi­um. Stick­ing with the theme of adven­tur­ing archae­ol­o­gists, the var­i­ous attempts at Tomb Raider films also illus­trate this obsta­cle. If you remove play­er input, it’s dif­fi­cult for the con­cept to not come across as lit­tle more than a distaff Indi­ana Jones rip-off.

Some game adap­ta­tions decid­ed to rec­ti­fy this expe­ri­en­tial gap by try­ing to repli­cate some key aspect of the source. The Max Payne’ action games are notable for their slow-motion bul­let time” mechan­ic, which turns what could be chaot­ic shoot-outs into more mea­sured prob­lem-solv­ing sit­u­a­tions. The 2008 film also occa­sion­al­ly uses the effect, but when you’re mere­ly see­ing Max Payne shoot guys in slo-mo rather than tak­ing advan­tage of it your­self, you won­der why you aren’t watch­ing a Matrix movie instead. Doom’ is a land­mark game for the ways it pio­neered the con­ven­tions of the first-per­son shoot­er; the 2005 movie adopts a first-per­son per­spec­tive for one action scene, an extreme­ly This is what you kids like, right?” move that miss­es the whole point of why games use that POV. In a Doom’ game, you are the Doomguy, and the cam­era rep­re­sents your gaze. The view­er is not Karl Urban, and briefly see­ing things through his eyes is dis­ori­ent­ing rather than pro­duc­ing any sense of iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. Roger Ebert (char­ac­ter­is­ti­cal­ly dis­miss­ing gam­ing as a medi­um in pass­ing) described it as like some kid came over and is using your com­put­er and won’t let you play.”

Two people, a man and a woman, pointing firearms in a dim, wooden interior.

How­ev­er, there have been films that have uti­lized the first-per­son POV in a way that res­onates with how it works in games – notably not game adap­ta­tions. In the night­mar­ish open­ing to John Hyams’ Uni­ver­sal Sol­dier: Day of Reck­on­ing, we see the protagonist’s fam­i­ly mur­dered before his eyes through his eyes, which kicks off a sto­ry that’s dis­tinct­ly gamey in the way it pro­gress­es from one com­bat encounter to the next. But then, in a twist, it turns out that first scene was a false mem­o­ry used by sin­is­ter forces to moti­vate the lead to go on his ram­page of revenge. It’s a dark decon­struc­tion of the sim­plis­tic vengeance-mind­ed tropes that dri­ve action sto­ries in both games and film.

A sim­i­lar twist is sprung in Hard­core Hen­ry, a film shot entire­ly in first per­son that owes a ton of its visu­al lan­guage to games. This is espe­cial­ly notice­able in its use of ges­tures. The tit­u­lar Hen­ry holds objects like guns or a det­o­na­tor so that they’re leg­i­ble for the cam­era, rather than in ways a human would nat­u­ral­ly posi­tion them­self. One char­ac­ter, Jim­my, has been cloned mul­ti­ple times, and his clones tend to act like game NPCs, espe­cial­ly dur­ing action scenes, when they speak in quick sound­bites (“barks” in devel­op­er lin­go) rather than like peo­ple hold­ing con­ver­sa­tions, some­times to direct Hen­ry to where he should go and what he should do. Since the Jim­my clones are remote­ly con­trolled by the orig­i­nal Jim­my, there’s a humor­ous meta­text here; the Jim­mies are an army of iden­ti­cal non-per­sons con­trolled by an exte­ri­or intel­li­gence to help the pro­tag­o­nist, much like how NPCs in a game have their scripts and exist in the ser­vice of the player’s nar­ra­tive. And like the lead of Day of Reck­on­ing, Hen­ry is moti­vat­ed by false mem­o­ries (this time of a wife in per­il rather than a dead one) implant­ed by nefar­i­ous pow­ers to get him to do what they want. Set­ting aside the fre­quent headaches the first-per­son action may induce and any gim­mick­i­ness in its con­cep­tion, the con­ceit gen­uine­ly works to put the audi­ence in the posi­tion of a per­son who’s essen­tial­ly a blank slate.

The many deaths of Jim­my in Hard­core Hen­ry recall a sub­plot in Res­i­dent Evil: Extinc­tion. Series lead Alice has also been cloned, and the evil Umbrel­la Cor­po­ra­tion has been sub­ject­ing one copy of her after anoth­er to vio­lent exper­i­ments, enough times that there’s a ditch full of dead Alices. The set­up posits a mor­bid spin on the famil­iar game sce­nario of one char­ac­ter who goes through mul­ti­ple deaths in their effort to make it through a lev­el – what if instead of being reborn each time, every playthrough was an indi­vid­ual per­son who’s been killed off? At the end of the film, Alice frees her clones and forms them into an army to get pay­back on Umbrel­la – an assault seen in the open­ing of the next Res­i­dent Evil film, After­life. The play­er char­ac­ter and all her extra lives have teamed up, bro­ken out of this dark ver­sion of rein­car­na­tion, and are pissed off at the game devel­op­ers for forc­ing this exis­tence on them. The fifth install­ment in the series, Ret­ri­bu­tion, takes the meta­text even fur­ther, with the heroes try­ing to sur­vive a series of VR sim­u­la­tions that dis­tinct­ly feel like dif­fer­ent gam­ing worlds – a recur­ring visu­al motif has an Umbrel­la vil­lain mon­i­tor­ing them through secu­ri­ty cam­era footage arranged in grids that look an awful lot like a lev­el select screen.

Paul W.S. Ander­son direct­ed and/​or wrote all three of those Res­i­dent Evil movies, and his lat­er game adap­ta­tion Mon­ster Hunter also feels in direct con­ver­sa­tion not just with the sto­ry­line of its source mate­r­i­al but also the expe­ri­ence of play­ing it. A good por­tion of the film is sim­ply Mil­la Jovovich’s char­ac­ter wan­der­ing an alien land­scape, learn­ing about it and its hos­tile fau­na, in a way that’s strong­ly redo­lent of what it’s like to explore an open world in a sand­box game.

An even bet­ter approx­i­ma­tion of the explo­ration game vibe came with the recent cult hit Hun­dreds of Beavers. Though the film is not based on a game, direc­tor Mike Ches­lik has acknowl­edged how, along with silent cin­e­ma and clas­sic car­toons, gam­ing was a direct influ­ence on it. The plot is struc­tured around a col­lec­tathon-style quest for beaver pelts, and the audi­ence is con­stant­ly shown a map marked with the lead’s cur­rent loca­tion and all the points of inter­est he’s found. More per­ti­nent­ly, his repeat­ed series of fuck­ups, each of which teach­es him in a slap­stick way how the wilder­ness works (this cave is full of wolves, this rope trap will fling him to this spe­cif­ic part of the for­est, etc.), exem­pli­fies a player’s pro­gres­sion through a learn­ing curve. Ches­lik has even likened the movie to being a Let’s Play for a game that doesn’t exist.

A few oth­er titles also con­vey the vibe of the knowl­edge-gath­er­ing parts of gam­ing. One of the less-dis­cussed influ­ences on the TV series Lost was the clas­sic point-and-click puz­zle game Myst’. As showrun­ner Damon Lin­de­lof put it in an inter­view with Time: What made [‘Myst’] so com­pelling was also what made it so chal­leng­ing. No one told you what the rules were. You just had to walk around and explore these envi­ron­ments and grad­u­al­ly a sto­ry was told. And Lost is the same way.” The pod­cast The Lost Broad­castshas explored this con­nec­tion fur­ther. Co-host Esther Rosen­field likens Lost to a game where there is no direct­ed quest.” (Which was a fre­quent source of frus­tra­tion for view­ers hun­gry for more answers to the show’s many mysteries.)

A man with curly hair and a woman with long blonde hair stand together in a night-time street scene, looking directly at the camera.

But few works cap­ture what it’s like to stum­ble through a game where you don’t under­stand the rules or what’s going on bet­ter than the 2019 dis­as­ter­piece Seren­i­ty. This is appro­pri­ate, since the plot’s cli­mac­tic reveal is that Matthew McConaughey’s whole world is a home­brewed vir­tu­al envi­ron­ment, and that all along he’s being con­trolled by a teenage boy. Said boy based McConaugh­ey on his deceased father, and he craft­ed this game to steel his nerve to kill his abu­sive step­fa­ther. Once again, a game-like film fea­tures some­one who awak­ens to and grap­ples with their lack of agency – you can call the sub­genre sym­pa­thy for the play­er char­ac­ter”. Seren­i­tys bizarre char­ac­ter beats, the­mat­ic inco­her­ence, and con­stant weird-out moments (a pre-Suc­ces­sion Jere­my Strong walks into and then out of the sea with the unflap­pable sto­icism of a Ter­mi­na­tor) make it feel uncan­ni­ly like a bug­gy indie game that’s a labor of love from one ques­tion­ably tal­ent­ed programmer.

On the oppo­site end of the spec­trum is the ultra-pol­ished, high-bud­get sci-fi action flick Edge of Tomor­row, in which Tom Cruise’s pub­lic affairs offi­cer Major William Cage becomes stuck in a time loop on the day of a major bat­tle against an alien army. Through dying repeat­ed­ly and gain­ing a lit­tle bit more expe­ri­ence with each go-around, he pro­gress­es from a hap­less, cow­ard­ly adjunct to a hyper­com­pe­tent war­rior. Expe­ri­en­tial loops are inte­gral to the game expe­ri­ence, so in a way, every film about a time loop con­tains some essence of gam­ing. But Edge of Tomor­row stands out for how Cage specif­i­cal­ly uses the loop to hone his skills, how the nar­ra­tive func­tion of his sit­u­a­tion is not to impart self-knowl­edge like in Ground­hog Day, but to pro­vide him with an end­less train­ing sim­u­la­tor. It’s not just that he gets bet­ter at using his pow­ered exoskele­ton, either; the way Cage learns pre­cise­ly how every­one around him will act, and con­se­quent­ly how their behav­ior changes if he inter­venes in dif­fer­ent ways, demon­strates per­fect­ly how a play­er inter­nal­izes ene­mies’ pro­grammed attack pat­terns and NPC script­ing trees.

The time loop idea brings us back around (appro­pri­ate­ly) to the film of Until Dawn. It’s inter­est­ing that the writ­ers thought that incor­po­rat­ing the con­cept would help the movie hew clos­er to the game despite the new plot. Until Dawn’ is one of the few games with­out a death-and-do-over mechan­ic – you instead are meant to roll with every sto­ry devel­op­ment, even unan­tic­i­pat­ed char­ac­ter deaths. Still, Sand­berg cites the abil­i­ty to replay the game as the inspi­ra­tion for the time loop con­ceit. Much of what the writ­ers have said about the film in inter­views about how they’re pay­ing prop­er trib­ute to the game through East­er eggs and oth­er homages seems to dance around one prob­lem: Until Dawn’has a pur­pose­ful­ly basic sto­ry, even bring­ing in hor­ror scribe Lar­ry Fes­senden to assist with the script. The fun of the game comes from how you can shake things up and change what hap­pens with­in this frame­work. With­out that, straight­for­ward­ly recre­at­ing the plot would like­ly feel point­less. A time loop, though, is some­thing that feels game-like” enough to jus­ti­fy the tie to this par­tic­u­lar intel­lec­tu­al prop­er­ty. But as is clear from decades of tri­al and error, there are so many oth­er ways to crys­tal­lize the spir­it of gam­ing in cinema.

You might like