Well it looks like more than rumour now, and I know it’s attracted a lot of discussion and debate, so let’s hope the news that Halo is a go brings more.
Empire have the story that there’s a writer on the case, and none other than that of The Beach and 28 Days Later!
The Beach author Alex Garland is the man for the job and his very involvement has raised expectations tenfold. Not only is he responsible for the aforementioned hugely bestselling book (which spawned the hugely disappointing movie – but that wasn’t his fault) but he also penned the screenplay for Danny Boyle’s genre-redefining zombiefest 28 Days Later
Now that is good news, perhaps we could expect a way decent script to come out of this, and maybe, just maybe they could stick to it and give us a good movie.
I WILL ALWAYS LOVE 28DAYS LATER!
Good to know some of my rants are well put…thank you Richard,
Justin
Justin I think you’ve made some excellent points there and things that we’ve talked about again and again regarding individual movies. Have you read the post about censorship and rewriting?
I think it’s really hard to tell with some movies if they are going to work or not. You get the cult movies that grow out of nowhere and didn’t really do well in the cinema, and you get the huge, big budget and cast movies that fall flat on their face, but to an extent there is a fair indication up front if a movie has a fair shot or not.
One of the biggest things we see is track record. When looking at a new movie, why is no one looking at the track record of the people involved or the genre? That would tell them a lot.
Example 1. Videogame adaptations. Look at the Net and see the passion about these movies and the desire from the public to get them right. Then look at the takings of the films to date and the people involved. Track record analysis: Uwe Boll is a negative factor. Keep the original teams involved heavily. Do not alter the basics of the movie unless it genuinely helps the storyline. Get people who genuinely understand the game and the appeal.
Example 2: Comic book adaptations. Same as above, a hugely passionate audience dying to see these movies done right. Track record analysis: Get a team who understand and care about the comic book (Raimi on Spiderman) and adapt it faithfully and you get a fantastic movie. Get the original teams involved heavily. Get people who understand the original comic and it’s appeal. Do not vary from the basics of the comic unless genuinely aiding the movie and the characters. (Seems to be a little pattern here)
Example 3: Remakes. Again, these are liable to have a hugely passionate audience, and usually about the original version, not yours. Track record analysis: Get the original team heavily involved. Get people who understand the original movie and the appeal (Shimizu for Grudge\Ju-on or Verbinski for Nakata’s Ringu). Do not vary from the basics of the original story.
See, I’m not going to go on here, but we can see the pattern emerging.
1. Get the original team heavily involved.
2. Get people who understand the original movie and the appeal.
3. Do not vary from the basics of the original story.
…and additionally…
4. Listen to the audience.
5. Give more power to the creatives and less to the Studio Execs, allow them to use the money to honour a script\remake\sequel\videogame\comic book.
Right now what we are looking at is the huge control that the Studio Execs have over the movie making and greenlighting process. Check out the post “Is this the reason for remaking Evil Dead?”, the conversation Tapert has with the execs says it all – they do not understand the sequence of the Evil Dead movies, but they want a movie made called ‘Army of Darkness II’ because it’s a cool title!
That, without swearing, is bleeping ridiculous! A title does not a movie make. Just think of the movies with ridiculous titles that have been wonderful, and vice versa, movies with excellent titles that have been pitiful.
What the execs are missing is that the creatives are the ones who make or break the movie. Screenwriters, Directors, Actors, the execs are the ones getting them the funding and distribution and they need to listen to their creatives and give them more free reign, let them take chances. That’s one reason why foreign cinema is so good and Hollywood just ends up remaking their movies all the time.
That’s what I think it’s down to. However, it is also down to the MGP, as you call them (or even us!) Justin. We can make or break a movie, yet what are we to know? We’ll go see movies whether we know they’ve given more creative control or not, because we like to hear if it has a good title or good actors in it.
Although I think the number of knowledgeable people in the MGP is increasing, it’s still way off what you would need to start seriously influencing Hollywood. How long did it take for them to pick up on Ringu, and was that based on MGP or just the fact that someone liked it so much in power that they thought they should give it a go? There’s now a company that trawls the Asian film market looking for good movies, buying the rights and trying to sell them over in Hollywood. That’s not the MGP, that’s dollars.
…and there we hit the nail on the head. Dollars. That’s what it comes down to. The execs want to encourage the MGP in, and they know big names, big stunts and a cool title will do it.
We need to get wise. So do the creatives, they need to start fighting back and not let the execs rule the movie making. Raimi and his team are “playing the game” and letting the remake be done so that they are allowed to make the sequel.
Frankly, I’d rather they didn’t play that way at all. Once they have the money the execs won’t let go that easily. I’d fight for my terms and my way.
Okay…enough said! So yes, very right indeed Justin, and well put!
Good News: The screenwriter of 28 Days Later! :-)
Bad News: Directed by Uwe Boll! :-(
Exactly Richard, I wholly agree with you here. It has the prospective of being so awesome if just clung to and ran with! Your post has sparked some very interesting thoughts on my behalf.
Why does Hollywood do that??? It‚Äôs more or less possible now to devise a math equation that could show a production company that if you don’t just stick with the original guys it’s going to lose quality, especially with all the proof out there.
Is it all because of money, egos, and the fact that most of the m.g.p. (movie going public) will eat up just about anything handed to us.
Is that it; are we all as a whole just basically buying into everything flung our way? I mean some of the stuff coming out nowadays would have never cut it thirty years ago. Even with over priced budgets and out of this world special effects. I mean is it even possible for us to create a movie that encompasses all the aspects of a great film – a classic film. Like Thin Red Line, Apocalypse Now, and the matrix all rolled up into one style of film.
Now I‚Äôm not saying we all want to watch war films, or even films that are imbedded with Neo’s clubbing hundreds of Smith’s over the head. But couldn’t and wouldn’t we all benefit from more films, whatever the genre, that just embodied this simple philosophy? More substance‚ĶI guess I’m desperate for more magic like Good Will Hunting. That was just beautiful. Even the Matrix itself at least had good cinematic quality, stuck with the same style through the entirety of the trilogy, and used special effects to enhance itself.
Is it more our fault that this happens, I mean does the m.g.p. play the more important role of inspiring what actually makes it onto the silver screen? Is it all about the business and not creating the art? I mean if I,m creating something it’s my baby, so if some executive walks in and basically uproots my ‚Äúchild‚Äù and hands it over to the new ‚Äúparents‚Äù I’m ready to duel! You know?
Is that stretching it to compare the Industry to “Child Services” and new “Parents” at times?
I think we as the m.g.p. really need to start looking at ourselves and what we buy and except rather than pointing the finger at the “creators” and people at the helm. Not that we all do!
Your thoughts Richard?
I strongly think that the movie should be written by the original writers of Halo 1&2, that is what made the game a great hit and giving the movie a different background crew will ruin it….unless they have a trick up their sleeve, lets hope for that