i see what your saying...but the only reason im so against a single movie, again, Eragon...i dont need to say much more... but i dont feel that they would have to follow the games...the basic story could make for 3-5 movies that people would see. just the OOT fans alone would make this a decent franchise. i think it all depends on Gannondorf...if there is a good actor who does a fantastic job of portraying him, it would work IMO. then again, theres been many videogame to movie failures...see Mario, and MK:annihilation.
hell, if anything, Eragon is the defining reason for NOT making it a trilogy. they tried to make it the set up for a trilogy, with an open ending to give way and everything, and it didn't do well enough to warrant a sequel (ie it tanked). now you're just stuck with a derivative and awful movie that won't ever get a true ending.
now, imagine if the same thing happens to Zelda. they plan a trilogy. they write the first movie open endedly. contrary to Eragon, it turns out awesome, but since some audiences are just too dumb to notice a good movie, it tanks at the box office. so we get stuck with a movie we DO want to see the ending to, but will never have the chance. me, I'd be f***in pissed.
now, the actor playing Ganondorf is a pretty important part, but if Eragon showed you anything is that just getting good actors isn't enough. it wasted the talents of Jeremy Irons (though he's been pretty terrible everywhere), John Malkovich and Robert Carlysle with an inane script and unexisting direction.
and I don't think it's the OOT fans they should try to grab. if they start Link as a child, I think they'll have a MUCH bigger chance of grabbing the Harry Potter crowds, specially now that they're just ACHING for some new franchise.
EDIT: oops, just now I realised OOT meant Ocarina of Time. I was thinking of old school Star Wars fans of the
Original
Original
Trilogy. yeah, doesn't make much sense, I know.
