New Live action Halo Short

[Darth Wong]

Tell me about it. Did you ever watch Blackhawk Down? In that movie, they have this long fight in some crappy burned-out building that looks like an empty warehouse. Who fights over a big ruined empty warehouse? Is there some sort of amazing bunker hiddden there?

Oops, that one actually happened in real-life.

As we all know, that's because they got shot down, it certainly wasn't their battlefield of choice.

Way to miss the point, fuckhead. You emphatically declared that the locale was "contrived" and stupid, even though you don't know the context. The fact that you need to mention the BHD context in order to explain the battle location is the exact point I was making, genius.

It's not as if I'm a Halo fanboy; I don't play console games much and I've criticized the Halo backstory myself; frankly, I think it's retarded. But ranting at length about the stupidity of the location of a battle based on a brief clip in which you know absolutely nothing about the context is simply retarded.

[Shroom Man 777]

I agree with Covenant, that Halo video was stupid. Just as dumb as [url=http://youtube.com/watch?v=YHmToBxxH5o&watch_response]this video[/i], in fact.

In the video I linked to, the Nazis battle the Soviets in a giant junkyard - some shity landfill nobody cares about called Berlin. Seriously, what stupidity.

The only difference between both videos is that in the Halo video, the Nazis are defending their junkyard against the Bear Cavalry instead of the Soviet Army proper.


Seriously, that video was pretty good. Not as good as a bunch of guys in pajamas shooting Romuloids with dildoguns set to "nominal", but pretty good. If only they fought in a grocery store (like in that documentary Hot Fuzz) instead of some stupid junkyard.

And I'd rather get hit by a tiny foot-long spike than some positively gigantic 9mm bullet.

[Shroom Man 777]

Someone help me. I fucked up that link. Goddamn junkyard wars.

Here's the properly dressed link.

[Covenant]

I never called it contrived because it was messy, that's approaching a strawman. Let me explain why I felt it was contrived.

I called it contrived because instead of filming a sequence that looks like it takes place within any of the environments we've seen in Halo, it takes place in a dirty, flat, boring junkyard with a bunch of bizzarely spaced concrete walls topped with razorwire. As far as military bases go, it is the least properly designed ever, so either it is a bad set, or just a cheap one.

I can't see a reason for shooting there other than budget, which is a contrivance all it's own. I liked the other things, the little mockumentary about the pistols and such, those are clever. I liked the teaser trailer in 3d. But filming in some cruddy junkyard that you barely did anything to dress up, and then shoehorning it into the story (even though it seems to stick out like a sore thumb) seems to be a contrivance no different than all the other contrived cost-cutting measures that movies and films take.

So I was saying, as I said elsewhere, that this was not doing a very good service to the Halo franchise. They certainly can do better than that.

If they wanted to make it look Halo-versey, they wouldn't need to do much to add some bitz to the walls so that it seemed more like the futuristic bases you encounter in the game. As it was, it looks like a paintball arena with a tiny bit of set dressing and some halfassed CGI mattes in the back. How is that not contrived?

When you engineer a situation so that it must take place in something you find desirable for some other reason, how isn't that contrived? It seems as contrived as every Stargate planet taking place in Canadian forests.

It's not like the walls need to make gleam as if they were gold, or some shit. Spartans feel quite at home near concrete:



But I think it was blatantly obvious that this was shot in a cut-rate location, given some serious shakeycam, and then pushed out the door. Wasn't this supposed to be some kind of technical demo for a hypothetical Halo movie?

It's not as if I'm a Halo fanboy; I don't play console games much and I've criticized the Halo backstory myself; frankly, I think it's retarded. But ranting at length about the stupidity of the location of a battle based on a brief clip in which you know absolutely nothing about the context is simply retarded.

Honestly, 'at length'? This is what I said, before I was forced to defend it:

Terrible little contrived junkyard scene,

That's five words. How is that ranting at length? I responded to criticisms, which all seemed to characterize me as either not realizing it was connect to the Haloverse plotline (which again does not mean that this wasn't contrived) or that I hated it because it was dirty.

Anyway, if there is a fantastic reason that this needed to be shot in one of the most drab and unexciting locations ever known to man (and yes, ruined Berlin, a train yard, or a dirty urban battle would score infinitely higher on my Grit meter for awesomeness) then alright, it's not contrived. But it still looks like warmed-over ass.

[Covenant]

And to provide a response to a criticism I've already gotten, I'll explain more clearly:

Even outside of context, I'm calling that location contrived (location! Not the clip!) because it is neither a properly designed military base of any stretch, or something you could just happen upon. It's possible they were 'forced back' there, but why is there razorwire all over? Clearly, some entity strung that up there, so it's not just a construction site, it's some variety of fortified location. A really ugly, lame looking fortified location. Which is why I called it contrived. That's the only reason. It just seems like they wanted to avoid needing to film something bigger or more elaborate, so they turned a junkyard into a 'communications base' with a little concrete bunker in it and had the combat take place there.

[weemadando]

You sir, are a fucking idiot.

ITS A PROOF OF CONCEPT MOVIE. A FX TEST.

It was shot wherever they could on an insanely low budget to show that their armour, weapon and vehicle designs were funtional.

Showing the "deep culture and heritage of the Halo universe" wasn't really a top priority.

Fucking hell Covenant, go back to your mother's basement with your bickering.

[Covenant]

You sir, are a fucking idiot.

First of all, this is the kind of criticism I have no problem with. I stated my opinion of what I thought, and if you don't agree, it's fine to call me a fucking idiot. That's pretty standard operating procedure around here--I was only really responding to the objective claims people were making, such as saying I was totally out of line to call it contrived. I really don't want to sound spammy, but if I don't reply to these posts, I end up looking like I just want to disappear.

I'd happily take this to pages, since it's getting a bit ridiculous, and it's really overwhelming the thread. But I'll respond to this.

ITS A PROOF OF CONCEPT MOVIE. A FX TEST. It was shot wherever they could on an insanely low budget to show that their armour, weapon and vehicle designs were funtional.

As an FX test, it's fine. It shows their props work. I may not like their FX, but it does demonstrate that the Warthog works and that their guns and armor allow for a complete range of motion. As an FX test goes, it's extremely successful. Is that the assumption everyone was operating under? One person told me it was Promotional Material, and others seemed to indicate it was going to tie itself into the game.

However, I'd dispute that saying it was low budget really means anything in this case, as I think that assumes that we aren't counting the cost of the props they already made. I'm not sure how much it costs to move all those concrete things into place, but it cost something. The animation staff had to make the wookies do their thing too, and all those guys had to be modelled, textured and rigged beforehand, so that was also on-hand. As were all the props. So if this had been a completely seperate entity from start to finish, it would have been fairly expensive to make. So calling it low budget is true, but it's using a variety of extremely high-budget add-ins.

Anyway, if it really is just FX test footage that they decided to leak in order to pique some interest, then I'd call it a successful FX test--and since FX tests don't need a plotline, I wouldn't bother calling it contrived either. But if there's a larger storyline with a 'context' and this is just a snippit of some larger production, then I still think it's below Sci-Fi movie of the weak standards as far as the location goes. Why is that such a heinous insult?

[weemadando]

Hmmm... Having now seen that "leaked footage" in a pseudo-official context (the ad on discovery) I'm not sure what to make of it. Its still damn impressive, and certainly seems to be very basic proof of concept work still, but I'm not sure about what it really was meant to be.

[Covenant]

Hmmm... Having now seen that "leaked footage" in a pseudo-official context (the ad on discovery) I'm not sure what to make of it. Its still damn impressive, and certainly seems to be very basic proof of concept work still, but I'm not sure about what it really was meant to be.

Well, the best I could make of it was from the I think Offical?? site:

Can you explain what that Halo short movie was about? Was it real time?

It was live action. What you saw was a short film that's not related to any movie. Neill Blomkamp is the director, with Peter Jackson as executive producer, and he wanted to work on the Halo movie. The Halo movie is not in production. The studios that were involved, for whatever reason decided to back out of it, but we're still very interested in talking to people in Hollywood about it.

In the meantime, we're going to use these film shorts to help promote the Halo universe and get the world super excited and crazy for Halo 3. Neill did an amazing job on that short film. I'm a huge fan of the Halo universe, and watching that short film sent goosebumps all over. That's Halo coming to life in a way that I think I lot of people can really get into it, even if they're not videogame players. We think Halo can be one of those epic stories like Star Wars. We still have work to do, there's no question about that, but we believe that Halo has the potential.

So... it seems to me like people probably pulled out of the movie when they saw in what style the director was making it. There was a bit of a kerfuffle about him, afterall. He's a known quantity from a few other films you can find on YouTube. Right now the movie is not in production, but they have some variety of script and all the props, and some variety of WETA partnership still. What they probably need is funding and a distrubutor, since they already have Peter as a producer. From the same place:

Are Microsoft, and Peter Jackson as producer, still wedded to Neil Blomkamp as director? That was one of the problems that the financiers had.

That was one of the rumors. It's a lot more complicated than that. But Neil Blomkamp is still working really closely with Peter Jackson. Honestly, I'd be really curious to see what Neil Blomkamp -- if you've seen any of his shorts -- what he could do with the physicality of the Master Chief. Seeing the Master Chief in video games is one thing; he's running around with guns and rocket launchers. I'd like to see him taking out some trucks bare-handed, clambering across rooftops, leaping from building to building, in a way that you can only really do in a movie. You can take such artistic liberties with the gameplay elements, that I think Neil Blomkamp would be able to do something fantastic but I literally don't know if he would be the director who made the movie eventually. I have no idea.

Blomkamp has a very unique style that I think is something that could scare a Hollywood exec one he sees some screenings of the video they're shooting. However, he can do a good job, even if it is rather distinctive. The rest is just assumption, who knows what goes on behind those doors? There's always a lot more politics and drama than they let on. So... it's a very confusing thing. I was criticizing it as if it were the movie, but I think that may have been premature, especially since your theory about it being an FX demonstration (possibly to attract funding and create a buzz about the team) does make a lot of sense. Microsoft is doing a massive ad blitz, so they may have just thrown this in too.

Which doesn't seem like a horrible idea, afterall, it seems everyone else really grooves it and gets a good vibe.

Anyway, I apologize for being a wet blanket. I saw H5RSTG (I can never remember his name right!) say a bunch of similar things, so I thought I'd toss in my two cents, but I really should have just kept it to myself, if even just to avoid derailing. Thinking you're able to back up an opinion is not always a good enough reason to interject it, and I really hate fighting about little stuff.

[Shroom Man 777]

Though I wonder why Hollywood execs are so being dickish towards the Halo movie.

[ray245]

From the rumors going around...the execs are afraid of the rising cost, and wanted to have more influence in the making of the movie.

Basically coming out with their own version of storyline...like Doom and resident evil, only to piss microsoft and bungie off...

Microsoft and bungie wanted the original storyline and etc, the studios don't agree to make a bigger budget 'game film' and decided to pull out.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Protip: Where the war is fought doesn't really matter.

It's about killing the enemy.

[SylasGaunt]

I called it contrived because instead of filming a sequence that looks like it takes place within any of the environments we've seen in Halo, it takes place in a dirty, flat, boring junkyard with a bunch of bizzarely spaced concrete walls topped with razorwire. As far as military bases go, it is the least properly designed ever, so either it is a bad set, or just a cheap one.

It's not a set, it's a landfill as I recall or at least that's what it is in real life. I'm not sure what it was supposed to be in the film though we do know it was close to a bombed out and ruined area, and that the two initial ODSTs were were seeing were sent to recover that designator which was buried in some manner of wreckage so they could pick the chief out of the other crap falling off the Forerunner ship from the end of Halo 2 when he jumped out of it.

They fought there because that's where the designator landed or where the vehicle it was carried in got trashed.. or who knows maybe it's just where the brutes dumped it as useless junk when they took over the area.

If they wanted to make it look Halo-versey, they wouldn't need to do much to add some bitz to the walls so that it seemed more like the futuristic bases you encounter in the game.

Why the hell do you keep assuming it's some kind of base? Hell for all we know it is supposed to be a damn junkyard where something crashed.

Hell if anything I'd say it looks like some sort of cargo loading area considering the place is full of big shipping containers.

[Commander 598]

From the rumors going around...the execs are afraid of the rising cost, and wanted to have more influence in the making of the movie.

Basically coming out with their own version of storyline...like Doom and resident evil, only to piss microsoft and bungie off...

Microsoft and bungie wanted the original storyline and etc, the studios don't agree to make a bigger budget 'game film' and decided to pull out.

Microsoft Film Studios looks mighty nice for a name don't you think...?

[ray245]

From the rumors going around...the execs are afraid of the rising cost, and wanted to have more influence in the making of the movie.

Basically coming out with their own version of storyline...like Doom and resident evil, only to piss microsoft and bungie off...

Microsoft and bungie wanted the original storyline and etc, the studios don't agree to make a bigger budget 'game film' and decided to pull out.

Microsoft Film Studios looks mighty nice for a name don't you think...?

Hopefully, given that microsoft is already so rich, they can be more creative than most of hollywood's studios...since money making does not matter THAT much to micrsoft.

Come to think of it, given that microsoft's gaming competition, sony is already in film making business, I wouldn't be too surprised by it...

[Lord Revan]

why was it filmed in what looked like a junk yard or something similar

real life reason:Weta had limited bubget to make it so they made the best of stuff they had hence the limited amount you see of elements that are CGI (brutes, covie ships) and the limited "set".

In universe explanation: this probably some small skirmish related to the larger operation(s) in Halo 3 and for what little we do see it's not a attack against a covie or UNSC base, but a holding operation until they can transmit Master Chief's landing trajectory to the SAR team(s).

[Darth Wong]

Considering how horribly Hollywood butchered the concept of Doom when bringing it to the Big Screen, I can completely see why Bungie and Microsoft would want to retain some control over the script.

[DPDarkPrimus]

There's an interview with Neil Blomkamp about the Halo shorts he made and about the dead Halo movie.

Full interview

[Molyneux]

There's an interview with Neil Blomkamp about the Halo shorts he made and about the dead Halo movie.

Full interview

Well...damn. That's the first I've heard of someone actually saying, straight-out, that the film is downright dead.

Come on, Microsoft, just make your own damn film studio already! You have a guaranteed audience, we just want the movie.

[Ace Pace]

There's an interview with Neil Blomkamp about the Halo shorts he made and about the dead Halo movie.

Full interview

Well...damn. That's the first I've heard of someone actually saying, straight-out, that the film is downright dead.

Come on, Microsoft, just make your own damn film studio already! You have a guaranteed audience, we just want the movie.

I hope you wern't being serious.

[ray245]

There's an interview with Neil Blomkamp about the Halo shorts he made and about the dead Halo movie.

Full interview

Well...damn. That's the first I've heard of someone actually saying, straight-out, that the film is downright dead.

Come on, Microsoft, just make your own damn film studio already! You have a guaranteed audience, we just want the movie.

I hope you wern't being serious.

Too late...Bungie isn't under microsoft anymore, which means there won't be a well bigger company defending halo from being torn apart by the studios.

[Darth Wong]

Too late...Bungie isn't under microsoft anymore, which means there won't be a well bigger company defending halo from being torn apart by the studios.

Wrong. Halo is still Microsoft licensed intellectual property.

[Covenant]

Too late...Bungie isn't under microsoft anymore, which means there won't be a well bigger company defending halo from being torn apart by the studios.

Wrong. Halo is still Microsoft licensed intellectual property.

Not only that, but they're talking about continuing 'multimedia' products iwth Halo and Peter Jackson. So it sure sounds like they're going to keep trying to do something with their original idea, and I don't blame them. I hope they change directors though. I agree with his vision for the film being an ultra-gritty and realistic depiction of a war in space, but I haven't really liked his stuff to date. There's lots of people making good, gritty WWII movies who have already proven that they can handle a film without getting sidetracked in budgetary problems. Here's hoping they get something good out of it.

[Molyneux]

There's an interview with Neil Blomkamp about the Halo shorts he made and about the dead Halo movie.

Full interview

Well...damn. That's the first I've heard of someone actually saying, straight-out, that the film is downright dead.

Come on, Microsoft, just make your own damn film studio already! You have a guaranteed audience, we just want the movie.

I hope you wern't being serious.

Why do you hope that?

[Stark]

Maybe he doesn't want to cry over another trailer?