Half-Life Fan Film

[Mattykins]

I still feel Halo is a billion dollar film that is just waiting to be made. The backstory to Halo is incredible. That is my mission, to get it into turnaround...not that I am in any position to get Halo into turnaround...but still.

It is a billion dollar film. Just no one has the guts to make it. I've seen this one. It looks like it was made on the cheap. But it shows excellent thought. These guys have some talent.

Yeah, kind of my sentiments. I mean, here we have big studios that are hell bent on formula and totally disregard the people they are trying to sell to, or maybe it's too much red tape to get it done in a timely manner. If it takes ten years to develop a decent HL movie, it's too late. The Halo Movie, tooooo late.

I'm tending to think do these people have any agents involved in the real world looking for anything of current popularity/interest? Anyone at all? Besides some old rich living-in-a-bubble fart that only has the attitude of "this is hows it's been done before and that has always worked" mentality. It's frustrating.

 

[Jason Sanders]

Well thats good news sense Im working on a starwars fan film.

 

[dougspice]

I still feel Halo is a billion dollar film that is just waiting to be made. The backstory to Halo is incredible. That is my mission, to get it into turnaround...not that I am in any position to get Halo into turnaround...but still.

Turnaround is generally considered a BAD thing. Or are you saying you want to make sure the current Blomkamp/Jackson movie stays in turnaround so you can get your own out there?

I'm pretty impressed by this Half-Life series in all respects except one: the acting. It's below par at best. Given that performance is one big thing you can usually get for free, I have to wonder what that's about.

 

[Mattykins]

How is turnaround considered a BAD thing?

A lot of projects have been completed that have been pushed into turnaround. All it means is that the current studio decided that they wouldn't or couldn't proceed with production and it releases the film rights back to the original owner so it can be set up elsewhere.

I fail to see how that is a bad thing. Unless no one sets the film up again. Then it would have the same fate that it would have had with it's prior owner.

 

[Nektonic]

I actually think doing fan films is one of the better ways to build a brand for yourself. Especially now with properties like Star Wars actually having a festival put on by Lucasfilm. The guy who did Grayson ended up getting funding for a feature project, as did the guy who did Batman: Dead End, largely based on the popularity of their fan films.

Heck, this Half Life fan film has gotten 2.3 million hits via this single posting already! I think fan films on the internet are going to be the new short film festivals. It will be a way for filmmakers to show off their HD workings and show what they can do on a micro budget with a blockbuster-level property.

Can't wait to see how far this goes!

Hollywood is training todays audiences that remakes and adaptations are good, and original works are bad... or at least original works are a risk because the audience doesn't know exactly what to expect.

I say this with some trepidation, but the way Hollywood is going in terms of nearly every movie being based off of previous material, it seems that fan films may eventually become the only way to get some notice. The big wigs at the studios don't seem to care for an awesome original spec script anymore unless a big director and a superstar actor or actress are already attached. Even for established screenwriters and directors this is not something that can be easily done. For newbie writers and filmmakers this is nearly impossible whether you have a great script or indie film under your belt.

The way TV specs are done, where a writer writes a spec episode of Grey's Anatomy or CSI or whatever popular series they like to showcase their writing talent, well... it just seems like this is the way Hollywood could go in terms of feature films as it would apply to aspiring writers and directors trying to make a name for themselves. It seems that the skills of re-imagining and adapting other works vs. being able to create something completely original will become the desired trait for working writers and directors in the near future.

Heck, this Half-Life short was not perfect in terms of some elements and only cost 500 bucks, yet the amount of views it has gotten would probably dwarf the number of Youtube views for most $50,000+ budgeted and awesomely written, acted, and directed indie shorts or features that no one has any clue about the subject matter. Same for a Halo or Star Wars fan film. The catch is that if you don't do a good job the fans of that property will eat you alive and the potential legal troubles could possibly drain your bank account.

It sucks to admit it but I feel this is a great big sign that film is beginning to go on its way out as the dominant art form of the 21st Century. Right now the decline is at the very tip of the beginning stage. Two or three decades from now and the arts & entertainment landscape could and most likely will be completely different. Of course, we could also have a film renaissance or something akin to the late 60's and early 70's where big changes occurred and reinvigorated the medium. Hopefully that will be the case.

 

[dougspice]

How is turnaround considered a BAD thing?

A lot of projects have been completed that have been pushed into turnaround. All it means is that the current studio decided that they wouldn't or couldn't proceed with production and it releases the film rights back to the original owner so it can be set up elsewhere.

I fail to see how that is a bad thing. Unless no one sets the film up again. Then it would have the same fate that it would have had with it's prior owner.

By definition, it is a setback to progress. Sure "a lot of projects have been completed that have been pushed into turnaround". But it's also a good sign that your project might be dying.

Or to put it another way: how is it a GOOD thing?

 

[Nektonic]

By definition, it is a setback to progress. Sure "a lot of projects have been completed that have been pushed into turnaround". But it's also a good sign that your project might be dying.

Or to put it another way: how is it a GOOD thing?

I guess it is better than being downright canceled. What would that be called anyway? Red lighted?

Since you guys are referring to the never produced Halo film, I can't for the life of me figure out how the studios can't see the MMMMMMAAAASSSSSIIIIIVVVVVVVEEEEEE profit potential of even just a competently made Halo film, let alone a really good one. And shame on them for only thinking in terms of a big budget film. Halo could also make a great TV series as well. Put it on the Sci Fi channel to feed the Stargate and Battlestar Galactica audience that would gobble it up like an ant eater at Bill Cosby's house for a five course Jello dinner party. Actually, Half-Life would make a cool TV series as well.

 

[dougspice]

The way TV specs are done, where a writer writes a spec episode of Grey's Anatomy or CSI or whatever popular series they like to showcase their writing talent, well... it just seems like this is the way Hollywood could go in terms of feature films as it would apply to aspiring writers and directors trying to make a name for themselves. It seems that the skills of re-imagining and adapting other works vs. being able to create something completely original will become the desired trait for working writers and directors in the near future.

This is probably true. Just look at what Marvel is doing with their new writer's group! http://www.variety.com/VR1118001734.html

As much as it pains me to say, I think movies will be looked upon as the 20th century's definitive art form... not the 21st's. Not to say that movies won't continue to be made, but I think we've crossed the point where a movie is likely to be a defining cultural milestone in the way that Jaws or Star Wars or The Seven Samurai was.

 

[Mattykins]

Sure, turnaround might mean the project has reached it's end. But it's good if a different studio can actually set it up. Peter Jackson has been sitting on Halo since it first got pulled. (Microsoft was looking for a huge margin, and people started pulling money when costs got out of control - I think it was up to 196 million when people said enough).

If it was in turnaround, someone else could pick it up and push it into development. In which case, turnaround is good. Just because there is a chance it might not get made if it's in turnaround doesn't inherently make turnaround a bad thing.

I mean, 99% of films made on this board never see a dime. So according to your view of turnaround having a risk - couldn't the same logic be applied to making a film anyways? There is a risk it might not get finished or make any money, so why make it?

I believe in turnaround, especially when a company picks it up and wants to do something with it.

Halo has massive potential. Like I said, it is a billion dollar film. Easy. Only thing that needs to happen is a different company who is interested in making it needs to pick it up.

I've been dreaming of a Halo package for years. A TV series, a film franchise. There is so much incredible story there. But the issue is getting the rights for the thing. And the money....

As for writing. The thing is right now with the economy, no one wants to take risks. They can see franchises doing well and priorly established characters doing well - why not make a film on it and see an (almost guaranteed) ROI?

Give it a few years. The alphabet networks are really struggling right now to get decent programing. They are trying, just not hard enough. Film will be the same way especially as the older execs are phased out and newer, younger people take the reigns.

 

[Nektonic]

As much as it pains me to say, I think movies will be looked upon as the 20th century's definitive art form... not the 21st's. Not to say that movies won't continue to be made, but I think we've crossed the point where a movie is likely to be a defining cultural milestone in the way that Jaws or Star Wars or The Seven Samurai was.

Yep, you got exactly what I was trying to say. It is sad but that is the way it is looking. The good news is that there will probably be more opportunities for a larger percentage of filmmakers to carve out a living making films instead of all the money being tied up in Hollywood and in a dozen or so big summer tent poles and several Oscar films each year. Look at books. They're not as big a deal to us today, but a hundred years ago owning some books was probably a big deal for the majority of the population. Now you can choose from a mind boggling number of them at Borders or Amazon. Actually, with more filmmakers going with direct-to-video distribution the trend seems to already be occurring with DVD's now. So I think films will go on. I personally think the next big huge divide will be between the standard 2D films and mainstream 3D films produced by the studios.

As for films as big cultural milestone like the examples you mentioned, I think it could still happen but it seems less likely the more time goes on. What was the last big movie that accomplished this? I'd say maybe The Dark Knight but it seems a bit early to really tell yet. Maybe The Matrix (first one), Lord of the Rings trilogy, Sixth Sense, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Goodfellas, Titanic, etc... ? I don't know, those are some that come to mind with the most recent being more than five years old.

 

[Mike Harvey]

It is a billion dollar film. Just no one has the guts to make it.

Peter Jackson is supposedly still at the helm... and given his treatment to Lord of the Rings, he could probably pull it off. Problem is no one wants to pay for it, that and Jackson is pre-occupied with Halo: Chronicles. It'll get done, just not anytime soon.

 

[dougspice]

As far as I know, Jackson was never slated to direct it, just produce. Neil Blomkamp was to direct.

 

[dougspice]

Also, the reason these things don't get made isn't anything to do with guts... as you've said, everyone is perfectly aware that it's basically profit waiting to be made. But if you've ever worked for any big client you know that the more stakeholders there are, the harder it is to get anything done. From Microsoft/Bungie's perspective, there's a lot more money to be made on the games side of the Halo franchise. Why risk screwing that up with a movie that barely benefits them?

That's how I'd be looking at it, anyway. If I had an IP worth billions I'd make sure it was kept close.

 

[btownproductions]

And shame on them for only thinking in terms of a big budget film.

I thought the fan made Halo movies had a cool look to them, something different than the Hollywood norm. They almost seemed to have an uber-realistic feel to them, which I thought was refreshing to see for a change. And it wasn't exactly a massive budget either.

EDIT: I'd still much rather see a HL movie made, it's a much more interesting story in my opinion...