Editor's note: I tend to agree with Jonathan's main argument -- that direct adaptations from games to films and vice-versa generally fail. I'd also argue that Uwe Boll crapfests are just far too common, and that we've seen few talented directors, writers, and actors create a game-based movie. On the other side, how many household-name game developers can you name who've worked on move tie-ins? That's what I thought. -Rob

Gamers want to see their digital idols at the multiplex. We flock to them whenever another movie studio releases an adaptation for the big screen.

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider brought in the most money domestically, but not even the superstar cast could prevent the press from trashing the film: Rotten Tomatoes's top critics gave the summer action flick a mere 20 percent.

That said, it was faithful enough to the game. Angelina Jolie was sexy and strong, ridiculous stunts and sets permeated the feature production, and the plot played out like an over-sexed, Indiana Jones sequel. But those don't mean that Tomb Raider works as a movie. I liked it better the first time I saw it….when it was called Raiders of the Lost Ark.

Silent Hill is another example. I have friends that would tell you something like “it’s cool” or “it’s pretty good.” It’s likely that most of these positive reviewers substitute their fanboy craving for Pyramid Head for honest critical analysis.

As a technical adaptation of the game, Silent Hill delivers. Plenty of fog and rusty chain link fences compose the environment, the musical score is dead on, and the characters spend a lot of time wandering between grotesque set pieces. 

Nobody leaves Pyramid Head on the cutting room floor.

But for Joe Schmoe who hasn’t played Silent Hill on a PlayStation, the movie is an incomprehensible mess. Hell, I loved the game and still found the big screen version to be nonsensical. The creative team was so intent on cramming in as many visual and character references as possible that they forgot to include a decent story. (They should have used the plot to Silent Hill 2 as the basis for the movie.)  Critics agreed that the film was not fit for mass consumption, but enough gamers went to see it to make it worth the studio’s time.

So, if filmmakers fail at copying their interactive inspirations, do developers perform any better?

Unfortunately, no. Game critics seem to think along the same lines as their cinema counterparts. A blockbuster movie does not a decent game make. But as long as these promotional cash cows continue to sucker a quick buck from fans of the source material, they are unlikely to disappear from the market.

Iron Man, the movie: Repulsors firing away; Iron Man, the game: Just repulsive.

Games and movies are not interchangeable with one another in a literal sense, but that doesn’t mean the two mediums can’t mine each other for inspiration. Direct adaptation is almost a guaranteed failure, but that doesn't mean the two art forms can't pay homage to one another.