Halo Film Still On Track

Eurogamer reports that, despite the decision by Fox and Universal to back out of the movie's production, the film version of Halo will move forward. From the article: "Now Microsoft has released an official statement via the Bungie website which reads: 'We are disappointed that Universal and Fox wanted to significantly renegotiate the financial points of the deal. But the Halo franchise is hugely popular and our goal remains the same - to find a partner that shares our passion and will creatively collaborate with us to best represent the story and spirit of the Halo franchise ... Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and the rest of the creative team are dedicated to ensuring the Halo movie becomes a reality,' the statement continues.

Video game movies

[beavt8r]

I really hope they can recreate the feel of the game in the movie. We all know video game movies don't usually do well, but they have potential. I liked in Doom when they had the first-person perspective, i thought it was a great touch. I think I would watch the Halo movie (if it indeed does come out) just because of the many nights I've spent getting my butt kicked. With the huge popularity of the Halo series, I do hope it is a good movie.

But, with the up and down of "Yes it will be made" and "No, we're not going to make it" it makes me wonder if it actually will make it to the theatre.

Re:Peter?

[BewireNomali]

definitely. in fact this would be open/shut if peter jackson was directing. it's frankly puzzling why they chose the blomkamp guy when he AFAIK has not even directed a distributed feature yet. Not even one. It's tough to sell studios on that much cash and tell them that a guy who technically has never directed a movie before is in charge of what they'll see on-screen. in fact, that is a fool's errand on paper. especially given the mixed success of video game adaptations.

Much goes on that isn't being disclosed.

There is a bit of hope ..

[Brigade]

Something important to bear in mind: Halo was the game that defined the Xbox launch and led a lot to it's success. Halo 2 was THE game of the last console generation (fastest selling media in the US, $125 million in 24 hours) .. I have a lot of non-gamer friends that specifically bought X-Boxes and Halo 2 (as well as live subscriptions) just to play online together across the country. Now, if you actually have played the game, or seen the 'making of' DVD, you might change your perspective. They developed the game a lot like an actual Hollywood production, with professional spot-on voice acting, a great plotline, and scored by a symphony orchestra (along with some modern rockers) .. True, the normal rule of thumb is "Video Game -> Movies do poorly and suck." But take into account the original games used to make the adaptation: Super Mario Bros, Double Dragon, Bloodrayne, Doom, etc. Garbage in = Garbage out. Both Jackson and Bungie are anal-retentive diehards about thier work, there is a very strong chance that this game will break the bank at the box office. Not to mention that this will further market the Xbox 360 and Halo 3 simultaneously; I just hope M$ doesn't rush it to meet a 2007 launch to coincide with the game (which I doubt Bungie will allow them to do .. they only rushed Halo out the door .. they sat on Halo 2 and 3 despite what Microsoft wanted, in order to do the job right, and it paid off in spades).

Re:Peter?

[BewireNomali]

I will explain. Peter Jackson directed several feature films ( I think the exact number is 4; he'd produced twice as many features roughly in the same time span) by the time he was commisioned to do LOTR. He proved himself capable of handling multimillion dollar budgets and incorporating his technical expertise into telling cogent narrative. He also proved himself an excellent manager of resources and was ready to exploit the tax advantages of shooting in New Zealand. So to say that Jackson made it big only through special effects is not accurate. I suspect this is why you posted as AC.

Your assessment is based on emotion (he's created the most unbelievable 3d work I've ever seen... I can imagine... etc.) and hype; there are a lot of people who are far more qualified to direct a film of this magnitude who have displayed Blomkamp's skillset and more.

I suspect the following: Blomkamp is a layer to shield Peter Jackson from personal damage to his brand should the film not do well or not be well received. Thus there needs to be significant disparity between relative skillsets. A failure is chalked up to: he's young and inexperienced, but shows promise. A success is win/win for everyone. This is risk mitigation. Jackson will essentially be directing this film. Blomkamp serves a dual role; he will essentially be pimped out on Hollywood projects afterwards; Jackson will be attached to all as exec producer (as will Weta be, of course: he needs to work hard to chip away at ILM's Hollywood monopoly) and collect his cut in addition to working on his own projects, essentially doubling his earning potential with nominal additional work.

finance

[nerdwithagun]

Why does Microsoft need financial backing from Fox/Universal? Sure they're going to need them for advertising and all the other filmy things they do, but MS must have $150M laying around in petty cash of their own somewhere. Why use Fox/Universal's and let them take the returns on it, or does it come in some sort of package deal from them that isn't negotiable?