"A Minecraft Movie" And "Five Nights at Freddy's" Both Have The Same Weird Problem (But I Think I Love It)

The past couple of years have been either a blessing or a curse for chronically online video game nerds as we saw film adaptations of the games "Minecraft" and "Five Nights at Freddy's," which each debuted to mixed reviews from fans, critics, and casual moviegoers alike. Some didn't love the movies but were happy just to get anything at all; some were thoroughly disappointed for various reasons; and some loved the films wholeheartedly. However you personally felt about the movies, one fact remains: they exist. For most people, this is where the similarities between the two movies end. They are both video game adaptations which were made recently. End of story, roll credits. However, like most people, I am not like most people.

I will admit, on the surface there is little in common between the dark themes and jump scare horror of "Five Nights at Freddy's" and the ridiculous, childish, fan service humor of "A Minecraft Movie." In those aspects, in fact, they are clearly very different movies, but I would like to take a look at them both from a perspective of how they utilize the IP they're based on. In "FNAF," the film starts with a short sequence in the titular Freddy's restaurant (the setting of the game) where a night shift security guard is murdered by a living animatronic to kick things off. Then we cut to the "normal" world outside of the IP where we are introduced to the main characters and the normal lives they live. Towards the end of the first act, Mike gets a job as the new night shift security guard at Freddy's, and the movie has fully entered the world of the IP. In "Minecraft," a similar progression occurs. The film starts with a short sequence introducing you to the IP the film is based on before quickly going to the real world for the first act to introduce us to the main characters and their "normal" lives before they are accidentally trapped in the overworld of Minecraft, where they stay for the majority of the rest of the movie. Do you see my point? Sure, Mike and his sister Abby aren't quite "isekaid" into the world of their movie's IP like the four protagonists of "Minecraft," but structurally both movies go about adapting their respective IP in the same way. They deliver a quick "here's what you're here for" scene before introducing the characters apart from the IP and then thrusting them into the world of the IP for the bulk of the movie.

Alright alright alright. So what's the "problem" that I mentioned in the title of the article. Did you just scroll down to this paragraph without reading anything else? Rude. You know I spent time writing all of that, right? Well, I suppose I won't waste any more of your precious time. The problem with the "Minecraft" and "FNAF" movies is that the best part of each movie is the part that has nothing to do with the IP they're based on. The part of each movie where we are introduced to the main characters and their normal lives was so enjoyable to watch that I was actually disappointed when we started the part revolving around the IP that I was there to see in the first place.

In "FNAF," I was truly engaged and invested in the story of Mike, a man who can't seem to catch a break, struggling to deal with at least a decade's worth of guilt and grief while trying to raise, care for, and keep custody of his little sister, Abby. In "Minecraft," I was equally engaged and also amused by the stories of Garrett "The Garbage Man" Garrison, a washed-up, cartoonish video game star in financial troubles trying to relive the glory days; Dawn, a realtor of many talents who also runs a mobile zoo out of her car; and Natalie, a young girl facing the loss of her parents, working at a chip factory in a town obsessed with the brand's mascot, and struggling to do right for her new ward and younger brother, Henry, an adventurous and genius kid inventor. This doesn't even mention the handful of colorful side characters that fill in this world. As well, these sequences in both movies are gorgeously shot, beautifully colored, and expertly edited. Combined with the perfect music choices, I simply loved being a part of the world that each of these movies created, each of which had nothing to do with the IP that they were adapted from.

I should clarify now that I love this "problem" about each movie for obvious reasons, but I consider it a problem nonetheless because in each case, the rest of the movie pales in comparison to the early establishing sequence. "FNAF" is more difficult because I have a harder time imagining where the story would have gone without entering the world of the IP. It certainly would have needed at least a little reworking, but at the same time, I wasn't satisfied with the direction it did take. By shifting focus to be on the IP, I feel like Mike's internal struggles weren't meaningfully resolved. The climax, revolving around living, murderous, cartoonish animatronics, simply couldn't bear the weight of the initial premise set of for the characters in the beginning of the film. Even worse, I felt like the cinematography and creative filmmaking of the early sequence dropped off rather quickly as well as the movie turned into a basic horror flick when the horror elements came into play. In "Minecraft," however, I think it's very easy to see what the movie could have been without involving the world of the titular game, and it truly saddens me that that movie will never exist. There was so much originality and humor and heart in the real-world sequence of "Minecraft" that was cut far too short. Like "FNAF," the quality and originality of the filmmaking dropped off when the film entered the CG animated overworld, and characters' internal problems and struggles were hardly meaningfully resolved (most of the character growth, in fact, seemed to happen off screen).

All of this is not to say that I think "FNAF" or "Minecraft" are bad movies. I had a decent time watching "FNAF," and I was laughing out loud throughout "Minecraft." The problem isn't so much with what these movies are, but rather what they could have been. I think everyone has moments where they see a film and think, "that movie could have been so much better if they had just done this or that," but it's not as often where we see the bones of the better movie under the skin of the lesser one so clearly as I did in these two adaptations. Still, it seems obvious to me that the movies I am envisioning could never have been made. Those early sequences in the beginning of both movies would not have been written or made outside of the context of the IP that the film was adapting, and I imagine that, even if anyone on the filmmaking teams did see the same potential that I do now, a conversation along the lines of, "hey boss, what if instead of adapting that massively popular IP that we bought that is almost guaranteed to make us so much money, we did something completely unrelated instead?" would not have gone over very well. Therefore, the problem with both of these movies is the fact that they made these sequences so good in the first place. Without these "better movies" to wish that I had gotten to see instead, I think I might have more positive feelings looking back at "FNAF" and "Minecraft" than I do now. My enjoyment in the moment wouldn't have been tainted by the disappointment I feel when looking back at them. I do think this is a problem with each of these movies. At the same time, like I said, I do love it. I'm glad those sequences in each of those movies exists, and I'm glad that I got to watch them both in theaters. I can even see myself in the future sometime going back to each of the movies just to watch those early act 1 sequences.

Does this post have to mean something in the end? It feels jarring to end it with that last paragraph as it is. I guess I'd just like to say that it's nice to know that passionate, talented filmmakers are still putting their all into making good movies even when they are being tied down under the necessity of producing another sequel or reboot or spinoff or adaptation because that's the only way a major studio will greenlight a movie anymore. Good indie movies are still being made all the time, but I like to see that the filmmakers working for the big studios haven't had to sell their souls just to make movies and money at the same time. I like to see artists being artists no matter who they work for. And I absolutely love consuming the art of artists who love what they do.