A live-action Halo is a terrible idea, as is a live-action Avatar.
Some media is so ingrained in its spectacle that to make live action work, you’d have to spend Marvel levels of money on special effects, and why? When animation is right there.
Sure, you might be able to appeal to a larger audience, but how’s that working out for you?
A live-action Halo that was proud to not follow the games was a terrible idea. They did not care at all about following the source material, they did not care about wanting to make something good for Halo fans. If it had been better executed it could have done well.
I really don’t get why studios do that. They pick some well known franchise to attract the fans of that franchise, but then either figure they can do something better or that fans won’t care if they aren’t able to stick to the original story?
And so often that “better” they go for is really just different. And there’s nothing wrong with telling a different story, just don’t try to slap the franchise name on it for the name recognition.
Funny thing is, in some cases they could still do both by just making a new story in the same universe, either one that happens before the video game or after it (and fans would love references to events in the original story in the latter or foreshadowing events to come in the former). Though it’s still gotta be a good new story that follows the rules of the universe it’s set in.
And to add insult to injury, after seeing the result of this over and over, people walk away thinking movies based on video games can only suck making things harder for those who would do them right.
Halo has worked live action in the past, albiet for shorter durations (Halo 3 and ODST both had really well done live action ad campaigns, plus there was Forward Unto Dawn).
The problem is Paramount completely missed the mark in terms of tone and faithfulness to the source material, and it seems like they didn’t even try. They just went “Big green guy punches aliens, that’s what those gamerzz like, right? We can do that for a few million bucks.”
It wasn’t even that. If they had just gone for a grittier more realistic take it would have been fine on visuals and effects. The acting though was cringe worthy at times and the writing wasn’t any better. It just wasn’t a fun show to watch.
The helmet thing is at odds with how our film industry works. Actors really are paid commensurate to their popularity and if your big role doesn’t have your face on it then you don’t get paid as much. So either you have to hire an A lister who doesn’t mind, (the Mandalorian did this and there was still tension), or you settle for a modified helmet or having the helmet off whenever you can rationalize it.
Not that I think it should work this way, but could always just pick a lesser known actor willing to settle for a paycheck to be “David Prowse’s Darth Vader” and then dub them over with someone more famous who is paid a lesser amount of money to be “James Earl Jones’ Darth Vader”.
I think a live-action Avatar could do well. I haven’t watched the Netflix show, but at least the bending in that one actually looks like they’re doing something.
A live-action Halo is a terrible idea, as is a live-action Avatar.
Some media is so ingrained in its spectacle that to make live action work, you’d have to spend Marvel levels of money on special effects, and why? When animation is right there.
Sure, you might be able to appeal to a larger audience, but how’s that working out for you?
A live-action Halo that was proud to not follow the games was a terrible idea. They did not care at all about following the source material, they did not care about wanting to make something good for Halo fans. If it had been better executed it could have done well.
I really don’t get why studios do that. They pick some well known franchise to attract the fans of that franchise, but then either figure they can do something better or that fans won’t care if they aren’t able to stick to the original story?
And so often that “better” they go for is really just different. And there’s nothing wrong with telling a different story, just don’t try to slap the franchise name on it for the name recognition.
Funny thing is, in some cases they could still do both by just making a new story in the same universe, either one that happens before the video game or after it (and fans would love references to events in the original story in the latter or foreshadowing events to come in the former). Though it’s still gotta be a good new story that follows the rules of the universe it’s set in.
And to add insult to injury, after seeing the result of this over and over, people walk away thinking movies based on video games can only suck making things harder for those who would do them right.
Exactly, they hated Halo fans and wanted to make something to spite them and it turned out to make no money and they’re all out of a job.
Just like Saints Row 4 and Volition…
Yep, these companies are so dumb, and then they go under. It’s impressive really. They just end up being out of a job and nothing to show for it.
Halo has worked live action in the past, albiet for shorter durations (Halo 3 and ODST both had really well done live action ad campaigns, plus there was Forward Unto Dawn).
The problem is Paramount completely missed the mark in terms of tone and faithfulness to the source material, and it seems like they didn’t even try. They just went “Big green guy punches aliens, that’s what those gamerzz like, right? We can do that for a few million bucks.”
It wasn’t even that. If they had just gone for a grittier more realistic take it would have been fine on visuals and effects. The acting though was cringe worthy at times and the writing wasn’t any better. It just wasn’t a fun show to watch.
And one where MasterChief doesn’t remove his helmet at every opportunity and doesn’t have sex with the first sketchy woman he meets.
The helmet thing is at odds with how our film industry works. Actors really are paid commensurate to their popularity and if your big role doesn’t have your face on it then you don’t get paid as much. So either you have to hire an A lister who doesn’t mind, (the Mandalorian did this and there was still tension), or you settle for a modified helmet or having the helmet off whenever you can rationalize it.
Karl Urban got the right idea in Dredd
Not that I think it should work this way, but could always just pick a lesser known actor willing to settle for a paycheck to be “David Prowse’s Darth Vader” and then dub them over with someone more famous who is paid a lesser amount of money to be “James Earl Jones’ Darth Vader”.
Should’ve done A New Hope and just gotten Steve Downes voicing him.
I legit like the live action avatar. It isn’t the best thing ever, but I am actually legitimately enjoying it and it’s changes.
Agreed but the action is noticeably impacted by the move to live action for sure
I think a live-action Avatar could do well. I haven’t watched the Netflix show, but at least the bending in that one actually looks like they’re doing something.