Blomkamp Says Halo Film Is "Dead"
Director spreads dirt on adaptation's grave in interview.
If you've been holding your breath waiting for the dormant Halo movie to re-enter development, you may as well exhale now -- the project's former director, Neill Blomkamp, says it ain't gonna happen.
The Halo film died last year when Fox and Universal shut down the co-financed production, but with Halo 3 hitting shelves this fall -- and eventually meeting, if not exceeding, sales expectations -- a number of fans and insiders remained hopeful for a resurrection. Adding to the speculation was the series of Blomkamp-directed promotional Halo 3 shorts that hit the Web earlier this year which, according to some, were supposed to serve as a sort of lure for the studios.
Not true, says Blomkamp, who discussed the Halo shorts -- and the film's demise -- in a recent interview with Creativity. Regarding the shorts, he says:
This is the first I've really spoken about those pieces. There's such a massive misconception about what those are. In essence, those pieces have zero to do with the film. Like less than zero.
According to Blomkamp, his vision for the Halo film relied on "degraded, screwed-up looking footage," an aesthetic he planned on pushing "as far as [I could] until the studios kind of threw a noose around me...I wanted it to feel like the most brutal, real version of science fiction in a war environment that you've seen in awhile."
Blomkamp then goes on to refer to Halo as "entirely dead," chalking its dissolution up to Universal and Fox's inability to get along. Of course, in Hollywood, few (if any) projects are ever entirely dead, something the director acknowledges by saying he'll "be curious to see what happens."
For more on Neill Blomkamp's Halo vision -- and a few hints as to what he'll be working on next -- click on the link below!
Source: Creativity
The Halo film died last year when Fox and Universal shut down the co-financed production, but with Halo 3 hitting shelves this fall -- and eventually meeting, if not exceeding, sales expectations -- a number of fans and insiders remained hopeful for a resurrection. Adding to the speculation was the series of Blomkamp-directed promotional Halo 3 shorts that hit the Web earlier this year which, according to some, were supposed to serve as a sort of lure for the studios.
Not true, says Blomkamp, who discussed the Halo shorts -- and the film's demise -- in a recent interview with Creativity. Regarding the shorts, he says:
This is the first I've really spoken about those pieces. There's such a massive misconception about what those are. In essence, those pieces have zero to do with the film. Like less than zero.
According to Blomkamp, his vision for the Halo film relied on "degraded, screwed-up looking footage," an aesthetic he planned on pushing "as far as [I could] until the studios kind of threw a noose around me...I wanted it to feel like the most brutal, real version of science fiction in a war environment that you've seen in awhile."
Blomkamp then goes on to refer to Halo as "entirely dead," chalking its dissolution up to Universal and Fox's inability to get along. Of course, in Hollywood, few (if any) projects are ever entirely dead, something the director acknowledges by saying he'll "be curious to see what happens."
For more on Neill Blomkamp's Halo vision -- and a few hints as to what he'll be working on next -- click on the link below!
Source: Creativity
Related Items
| Celeb: | Neill Blomkamp |
|
Heath H. writes: on Oct 08 2007 07:08 AM Nooooo! Well, damn. (Reply to this) |
|
The Risk Taken writes: on Oct 08 2007 07:28 AM I don't "Believe" it... (Reply to this) |
|
giertson writes: on Oct 08 2007 07:50 AM Well hopefully they can get a new director if they do end up going for it. I much prefer Bungie's vision for Halo than Blomkamp's gritty, shaky cam vision; it just isn't what I want to see in a Halo movie. However, what he should do is direct a companion short that is all chaotic and shaky and so on, but centered on a group of grunts who are being attacked by Master Chief ("He's Everywhere!!"). That would make me happy. (Reply to this) |
|
the-russian writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:02 AM "degraded, screwed-up looking footage" - Why would this require loads of cash? They should just get Jackson and WETA on board, and make it a low budget, self-financed project. It would make boat loads of cash, and probably turn out pretty well. I like the idea of the gritty, shaky cam stuff. I think the shorts and the Halo 3 tv ads turned out really well, and would work great as a feature length film. (Reply to this) |
|
eastern2western writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:04 AM nothing is entirely dead When the transformer cartoon failed, every studio though the toyline died with the failure the failure of the cartoon. Now, Bay's live action version came out and revitalized transformers by making a load of cash. The college kids who spent hours on the halo games will eventually grow up and some of them might become rich enough to finance movies. By that time comes, one of them would probably write a check for a halo movie. (Reply to this) |
|
Gimy writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:06 AM not that i wanna see this, i thought 2 was kinda crappy but...this will eventually see the light of day. sorry, they have made remakes...prequels...prequels TO remakes...and you're gonna tell me they're not going to make a movie from a video game thats THAT successful? best guess is...they make a cgi kinda getup and its straight to dvd...eventually. (Reply to this) |
|
Ender7406 writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:25 AM See you in ten years, Halo the Motion Picture... (Reply to this) |
|
Holly Jolly writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:39 AM If only Microsoft had enough money themselves to make the movie. Darn you studios for trampling over poor little Microsoft. -sarcasm- (Reply to this) |
|
AcE! writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:42 AM Great News, lets keep it this way. (Reply to this) |
|
DiscoDan writes: on Oct 08 2007 08:56 AM thank God! (Reply to this) |
|
Warheart1188 writes: on Oct 08 2007 09:19 AM Good. I was really hoping for the project to fail. Halo is a too precious franchise to see ruined in a film adaptation. Those short films were kinda cool, but they were really corny. If the Halo movie would've looked anything like that, I would've puked. No Halo movie; I'm happy. (Reply to this) |
|
PrecentorEpsilonXVI writes: on Oct 08 2007 09:30 AM Hmmm... I suppose some of you would say that this is good. I forsee it being bad in the long run. If the film is made now, the large fan base and fresh, fond memories of the game would drive the producers and director to a level of quality needed to appease fans. 10 years from now, however, when Hollywood is fishing around for more stuff to make a quick buck on, they'll come across this franchise and think "Hey, people liked this game a lot - lets try a movie!" The fan base will have dwindled due to the ADD nature of gamers looking for the "next best thing" and the licensing fee will be much smaller due to the lack of a interest in advertising the game at that point, both of which will leave little input or drive to make a quilty movie. Hence, we will get a Halo film that will most definitely be sub-par (think, DOOM) rather than a movie that might, if someone screws it up, be sub-par. I'd rather see Halo now than later, personally. (Reply to this) |
|
Muddler writes: on Oct 08 2007 11:11 AM We don't need every sitcom, comic book, and video game made into a movie. If Microsoft can ship $160,000,000 in game disks on opening, why would it bother financing a movie for probably between 5 and 10 times the game development costs only to receive lower margins? Why would MS risk making a bad movie or making less than anticipated at the box office? Why not just stick with what it knows how to do well - make a video game? There is simply no good reason for MS to stick its neck out to make what, in all probability, will be a bad movie (no video game has ever translated into a good movie). (Reply to this) |
|
Xavier Telouran writes: on Oct 08 2007 11:13 AM "degraded, screwed-up looking footage" = Super Mario Bros. the Movie? Seriously, just get the Jim Henson Creature Shop on the phone and make it a series on the Sci Fi Channel. Problem solved, moving on to the next bad idea: A Very Halo Christmas Special. (Reply to this) |
|
sharpless writes: on Oct 08 2007 11:38 AM Frank O'Connor of Bungie (the makers of Halo) commented on this recently and said that this was only Neil's take on the issue. As far as the studios are concerned, the movie is dead, but Bungie and MS can still make it, since Halo is their property. So yes it's dead, but not permanently. Not necessarily, anyway. (Reply to this) |
|
apostate writes: on Oct 08 2007 12:11 PM 'According to Blomkamp, his vision for the Halo film relied on "degraded, screwed-up looking footage," ' Can we please stop with the shakey cams and crazy filters. Can we bring back a little subtley to film. I liked "Saving Private Ryan" too, but I don't need to see it for the three hundredth time. I would also like to be able to watch a film in the theater and not get nausious. (Reply to this) |
|
rgallitan writes: on Oct 08 2007 12:30 PM Ick. Well, I hope he stays off the project. Halo is not "gritty." What I always appreciated about the games was the clean, bright-colored, cinematic style - operatic, even, when combined with that pretentious but lovely music. Halo is an epic, not a documentary. Compared with the myriad other games with alien/supernatural foes, it's impressive how LITTLE blood Halo contains - and most of it is purple. Allies and enemies alike are peppy and humorous. Locations are big and bold and go much more for style than realism. It just amazes me that people can play the same game I did and come away thinking it was Aliens or Saving Private Ryan in Space. Halo's aesthetic has more in common with Star Wars or The Fifth Element. Neil Blomkamp doesn't really have a vision for Halo. Not specifically. Judging by his shorts, he just really likes gritty, documentary-style sci-fi in general, and wants to do that on the big screen. And that's cool. Maybe they should hand him the Escape From New York remake, or an adaptation of Quake. But Halo is something else. (Reply to this) |
|
zbbrox writes: on Oct 08 2007 12:52 PM rgallitan's got it right. Like I said in another thread, Halo's style should be like Lord of the Rings with guns and grunts instead of swords and elves. This should not be a gritty, hard-R kinda flick. (Reply to this) |
|
eastern2western writes: on Oct 08 2007 01:06 PM It is true that ms could finance the whole entire movie, but it is not worth it for them to step their feet into hollywood because they get much better return in producing games. For example, Halo 3 probably costed them 30 million to make and ms has already tripled its investment in the first weekend. If they make a movie out of it, the lowest estimate is some where around 100 million and that is without the ad cost and there is no sure bet that the game-fans would flock to see the movie. It is very smart of them to outsource the work to a hollywood studio instead because ms could probably make more money just from the licenses. Hey, that is how george lucas made his fortune. (Reply to this) |
|
Vikingus writes: on Oct 08 2007 01:36 PM good (Reply to this) |
| You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register. |







