Nathan Drake Shouldn’t Shoot People… He Should Punch Them

It lessens Drake’s heroism to see him shoot someone, not because it makes him a violent man, but because it makes him look weak.

Recently, a fan of the Uncharted games edited together cut scenes and bits of gameplay to create a feature length movie of each game. Personally, this is something that I’ve always wanted to see since just watching the cut scenes in order didn’t present a coherent story.

Watching the three movies, I was surprised by my reaction to the third one. I think that Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is the best game in the series with the best character arcs, the best writing, and the best plot. Yet, Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception was the most enjoyable movie of the three. Strangely, I found it more enjoyable for the one thing that’s always better in games than in movies: its combat.

In Drake’s Deception, Nathan Drake gets into a lot more fistfights. Not only does this make for more visually interesting fights, but it makes Drake a more sympathetic and relatable character.

Drake is the quintessential everyman of gaming, which means that while he does have several superhuman abilities that justify the game mechanics (regenerating health, climbing abilities) he reacts to the crazy situations around him as we do. It’s not about being realistic as much as it is about being meta. He makes snarky comments about the environment, he interacts with the environment in playful ways, he’s shocked when he survives an action set piece, and he’s easy to relate to because he’s literally the voice of the player at times.

We like him because he seems human -- he seems like us. He acknowledges the absurdity around him, and in doing so, he admits his own vulnerabilities. Even if he ultimately survives every encounter, he initially believes that he can die. He fears for his life, and Naughty Dog has always been good at putting him in just the right amount of danger to keep up this illusion: shooting him on the train in Among Thieves and dropping him in the middle of a desert in Drake’s Deception. This humanizes him. since it's natural to cheer for an underdog, and Drake is always the underdog. We want to see him beaten down, and at his most vulnerable moment. we want to see him overcome that hurt and pain to win the day.

So Drake shouldn’t shoot people because that’s too easy. A couple shots in the chest -- or just one in the head -- and a bad guy is dead. There’s no struggle. It doesn’t feel like Drake is risking his life in every fight. Look at Drake’s direct inspiration, Indiana Jones. Over four movies, Indy shoots a lot of guys, but he also kills people by beating them up, ramming them off cliffs, throwing them from moving vehicles, spearing them, blowing them up, and then there are the deaths that result from his indirect actions like being burned alive, cut up by a propeller, or crushed to death. Many of these fights are long and drawn out, and by the end of them, it feels like Indy is lucky to be alive. The adventure hero is a physical hero; he’s meant to get beaten, hurt, bloody, and battered. It’s the physical violence -- the kind done to him and the kind that he does to others -- that defines him. So it doesn’t make sense for Drake to use a gun. It’s just too easy.

The revamped melee combat in Drake's Deception allows the player (or in this case, I suppose you could call him the director) to spend just as much time punching people as shooting them. Finally, Drake is acting like the physical hero that he’s supposed to be. Every fight feels like a struggle rather than a game of whack-a-mole with guns. These fistfights are the most exciting part of the game-movie to watch (and, in retrospect, play). These are the moments when I feel closest to Drake, the most invested in his struggle. It’s telling that the final boss uses this hand-to-hand combat; Naughty Dog knew this was a proper way to end the game. The final bosses in the previous two games look painfully easy by comparison.

Of course, this brings up the dilemma of watching a game as opposed to playing a game. You could make a strong argument that the final boss in Drake’s Deception was the easiest to play even though it looked the hardest. However, when I think back to playing the game myself, that final fight did feel exciting despite the lack of difficulty. It’s a matter of finding a balance between pacing and difficulty, something that Uncharted has always struggled with, but I think that boss fight gets just right.

It lessens Drake’s heroism to see him shoot someone, not because it makes him a violent man, but because it makes him look weak. He takes the easy way to victory, and the life of an adventure hero should never be easy. The more roadblocks the better. A gun is just boring.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.