I keep hearing this notion that movie tie-in games used to be great but now they've got a bad reputation.
No. They've always sucked. And they were even worse back in the 8-bit days. There were a few exceptions, but if you pick up an NES cart with a movie title on the label, odds are it's a complete disaster. The tech wasn't there to pull off the cinematic feel of modern stuff, and most of them were cheap cash-ins that stuck the film's theme over a generic, mediocre genre staple. Today, you can pick up the Telltale or Lego version of your favorite IP and be guaranteed a game that's at least competent. Back then, we had LJN. Ugh.
I'd have to give the medal to Goldeneye, personally. I remember literally being on the edge of my seat for that one, heart pounding, leaning left and right in a futile effort to peek around the corners. And I obviously played too much of it, because I picked it up at a party not long ago, after many years absent, and was still slaughtering friends with the Klobb and strafing around the maps while staring at the walls to dissuade the evil screen-watchers. And Oddjob was never really a problem. That's the beauty of split-screen multiplayer: when your buddy pauses on him at the select screen, you can just lean over and slap the shit out of him. I'd need a bit of practice to do the Facility in under 2:05 these days, but I still remember where every soldier is.
The general rule is that the best film to game adaptations are the ones not released concurrently with the source: Goldeneye, Riddick, The Godfather, Ghostbusters, Blade Runner, The Warriors, Tron 2.0. Many of them don't try to precisely mimic the plot of the film, either. It's the good tie-ins that are really rare, like X-Men Origins or Scott Pilgrim.
What I find particularly interesting are the fan-made adaptations of cult films. There are games based on Tremors, The Room, and Manos: The Hands of Fate...