$40bn in the bank but doesn't want to fund own movie

[miker]

They believe in HALO so much that they want $10m for the script and creative control over the cut, all on the studio's expense. Fucking idiots, what did they think would happen? They did get the studios to read their spec script though by having it delivered by people wearing costumes.

Read all about it (NY Times)

(No I haven't scoured the web for alternate angles, I really can't be arsed. That's what a discussion is for!)

[Matty2phatty]

I'd read about this too, and it really frustrates me that the studios can't just say "that's ridiculous" and make an offer of $500 000 or so.

But, Microsoft know they're on a really hot property with Halo, and i guess they really are in a position to make whatever demands they like, and the studios will fight for the rights.

Jon Favreau said in an interview that once you get two studios interested, they're ALL interested, and the prices offered just get higher and higher. Nobody wants to lose on a chance to make a film that has this much potential to make copious amounts of money.

Everybody knows video game adaptions suck, but they go to see them anyway because it's based on a game they play.

I so totally hate that Microsoft can get away with this, but it's business. I guess ultimately it IS about turning a profit, and a topselling game like Halo is practically guarenteed to bring the money.

I'm actually starting to think Microsoft will get a taste for moviemaking after this outing and decide to branch out on their own, with Microsoft Studios or something. It really wouldn't surprise me.

[miker]

If I were Microsoft I'd make HALO on my own dog food and show the world what my technology could do.

All you need is cash. And it's not like Microsoft is short of a few bob.

But history shows that Microsoft is shrewd enough never to spend their own money when they can avoid it.

On the videogame adaptation theme, I actually think the "Resident Evil" films are okay. If I was 15 I'd probably love them.

[Chance1234]

This is a local industry, for local people wil lhave none of your strange ways round here :-)

[jb_617]

You're all idiots.


----------------------

[img]wink.gif[/img]

[curtinparloe]

Microsoft had taken the unusual step of paying Alex Garland, the writer of the horror film "28 Days Later" and a Creative Artists client, about $1 million to write a script faithful to the Halo universe.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It wasn't just $10m the Gates we love to hate wanted either: merchandising, 15% of gross, $75m+ budget, creative control.

Let me rephrase that: "Please give us $75m to make our own movie. We're really rich!"

[jb_617]

Well, as Bill Gates himself once said:

"I didn't get rich by writing a lot of cheques."

It's Microsoft's toy, Microsoft's pram, and quite possibly, Microsoft's maternity ward. The issue here isn't studio, it's writer. Alex Garland? ALEX GARLAND? He can't write to save his freaking life. The Beach? Shit. The Tesseract? Drivel. 28 Days Later? Felt like 28 years in a coma!

Still, the subnormal freaks who lap that fucktards vomit up like kittens round a bowl of cream won't notice. I mean, a film of a video game? Three simple words: Built. In. Audience. Every loser in the world who sits around playing crappy video games will go and see this shit. God forbid they should do anything useful with their lives. Go read a book, just not an Alex Garland one.


---------------------

I smell a "Summer Blockbuster".

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 15, 2005 07:37 AM: Message edited by: jb. ]</font>

[twister!]

Originally posted by jb.:
...the subnormal freaks who lap up that fucktards vomit like kittens round a bowl of cream won't notice. I mean, a film of a video game? Three simple words: Built. In. Audience. Every loser in the world who sits around playing crappy video games will go and see this shit. God forbid they should do anything useful with their lives. Go read a book, just not an Alex Garland one.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">[img]biggrin.gif[/img]

The frustrating thing is that is probably true. I read an interview with someone a week or two ago (sorry don't remembre who, maybe Schrader) he was saying that when he was making films in the 70s, film was considered high art. What went wrong...? Most things (and NOT just films) are just so 'dumb' now. You really have to look hard to find the quality these days. People seem happy to pay and see shite like this.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 15, 2005 06:40 AM: Message edited by: Justin M. ]</font>

[jb_617]

Amen, Justin.


----------------------

Although you did come dangerously close to the "Is Film Art?" thing. And none of us want so see that again.

[twister!]

Originally posted by jb.:
...you did come dangerously close to the "Is Film Art?" thing. And none of us want so see that again.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The horror of that very thought did cross my mind when I wrote it - and I thought god I hope you-know-who doesn't see this... shhh [img]graemlins/shhh.gif[/img]