Halo Movie: Co-starring Master Chief
Thursday, January 17th, 2008 - 10:55am
I know it's Halo, and Master Chief is the main character of the games, but I find myself agreeing with the Bungie guy. Let me play back seat writer and explain why. Feel free to do the same.
*SPOILERS ABOUT HALO GAMES AND NOVELS FOLLOW*
After finishing Halo 3, I really had no clue what happened. I saved something, I think. Possibly even finished a fight. I remembered a Gabe post on Penny Arcade where he did some investigation and was surprised to learn that Halo has a great universe and backstory that is laid out in the books. The problem with Halo 3, he says, is the creators expect you to have read these books. For example, I was unfamiliar with 'glassing' until the Elite glassed (half of?) a continent on Earth in Halo 3.
My interest piqued and spotting the Halo novels on Grenn's book shelf, I have recently read the first three. This includes Fall of Reach, The Flood, and First Strike. (I'll get to Ghosts of Onyx but I need a break.) To my surprise, the books are good. Not well written, necessarily. In fact, I just felt bad for the author while reading The Flood. What a miserable job to have to adapt Halo 1. However, Gabe was correct. The Halo universe is much more interesting than what the game presents. I would highly recommend reading, or at least finding a summary, of The Fall of Reach. It explains the Spartan program and makes Master Chief's ability to kill so many Covenant and Flood in the games believable. (The Covenant don't even believe the Spartans exploits are true for a long time.) Also, the beginning of Halo 1 makes sense after the book. So, when they mention Reach in one of the first lines, you now know what they're talking about.
Whilst reading, the movie was always in the back of my mind. Halo 1 wasn't well suited for a book narrative, nor do I think it would be for a movie. So, the conclusion I came up with was to make Master Chief take the backseat. At least, for a while.
My reasoning for this is best explained with an example from The Fall of Reach. At this point in the story the only combat situation we've seen the Spartans in was their first real mission when they were teenagers and did not have their armor and the Covenant weren't on the scene yet. Flash forward several years and the Covenant are attacking a human colonized planet. There are only a few marines left after an attack on their base. They call in for support and are told they're receiving one drop. One. Against an army. The Pelican lands. The hatch opens. And out walks the Spartans. 7 feet tall. Their armor shining in the sunlight. The marines are awestruck. They only need one drop.
It's this mythic quality that applies to the Spartans, especially Master Chief, that I would like to see preserved in the film. For as long as reasonably possible, that is. Seeing the Master Chief's heroics from afar in some scenes in the novels was much more satisfyingthan other parts where the read is up close.
Like Bungie, though, I making one assumption in order for the scene in my example to work. I'm assuming you've played Halo, so you know how bad ass Master Chief and the Spartans are that the sight of them exiting the Pelican is significant and powerful. Considering the movie is called Halo, I think my assumption is better than Bungie's.
A criticism I can level at this idea is that I didn't like Transformers because the humans were in the driving seat and the robots were riding shotgun. I don't think this completely discredits putting Master Chief in a supporting role. I just think that there are lessons to be learned to do it properly.
(Sooooooooo long. I'm sorry. I could go on and on. There's more that I think should be done in the movie than just removing Master Chief from the main role. I'll add further thoughts as discussion leads towards them. Assuming anyone has anything to say.)
JUST PUZZLED YOUR ASS UP, SON! -Mr Crinkle
No i agree that he needs to be a supporting character. For one he's the guy with all the action parts. He's the one that gets the job done, but a movie needs a story to arc through the action highlights. He can't do both.
Gamer Tag: Rantyr
He needs a supporting character who provide the necessary oogaba.
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs
Cortana isn't enough oogaba for you Gorilla? Since she's virtual, they could even re-use the expanding boobies gag from Terminator 3!
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."
You're right, I didn't think of it.
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs
Its kinda like how Batman is so much cooler in Justice League comics or as a guest star because we don't have to see the process by which he figures things out. He just shows up and kicks ass leaving overpowered superheroes like Flash, GL, and Supes to wipe their foreheads and say "Thank god Batman showed up. I thought we were in real trouble there."
It'd be interesting to see how it happens, is it just shots of him wiping up in the distance, or stepping in as Johnson almost gets shot. Or maybe he's only referenced. "Johnson, you and all the Marine Corps take North America. Master Chief'll come to back you up when he's done mopping up Asia and Africa." However, those epic slow-motion shots of SPARTAN-II's walking from/through rubble/explosions/dropships/smoke might get a tad annoying.
I'm an Uncle!!! -8/20/07
Scrub wrote:
ICO: General Fancypants l Steam: Grenn[GWJ] l WoW: Goquelyrslf, Grendwar l XBLA: GWJ Grenn
THIS
IS
KENYAAAA!
Elysium: The democratization of the web ... has installed an illusion of a digital first amendment that protects speech no matter how poorly spelled or stupid.
XBL: E Munnie
elementsofmeaning.blogspot.com
Using this technique as a way to introduce the SPARTAN's and explain their importance, though, might not be a bad idea. Something along the lines of the scene in H3 where Johnson brings Chief back to the base and we hear the wounded soldiers dialog comes to mind.
There's honestly so much backstory to this universe that they shouldn't have any trouble coming up with main characters.
I know some of the H1 fanboys hated the fact that the Arbiter was introduced in H2, but I'm hoping they sort of do the same thing in the movie. Seeing things from both sides of the fight might be interesting. Not as the main story arch, but certainly included.
Halo has a storyline/setting that is profoundly generic and silly. A movie based on this stuff will end up being a pretty Saturday-morning CGI cartoon with wacky shiny aliens that will make for perfect "I grew up on this horrible crap" nostalgia for someone 20 years down the line.
A statement that bold pretty much demands you back yourself up.
I'll let someone else's post on Evil Avatar speak for me.
I rest my case.
It is a generic scifi universe, but the original storyline and the intended second storyline are not silly. Neither are the books by Nylund, although the tone there is somber, more in line with the Halo 3 ad campaign that didn't really jive with the game. Now the third game's storyline is embarassingly ridiculous, sure.
Sticking to the stuff that isn't stupid, you've got two fairly disparate themes/tones depending upon the source material. The games are very Jules Verne, centered around revelation, and are light on the horrors of war. The Nylund books, ad campaign, and live-action shorts are way more All Quiet on the Western Front, with some political commentary, and traditional character building. It will be important for them to pick one rather than straddle the line. I think the gamey side of it is better told in game form and books, but the more realistic side could easily be adapted in a way similiar to what McChuck described. That's the one I'd prefer to see, but I can see where movie execs looking for a summer blockbuster might prefer the lighter side instead.
The only reason to dislike the Arbiter is because he represents the elites no longer being adversaries for the Master Chief. This was a huge downer on the latter half of Halo 2's gameplay. Story-wise it's fine. In fact, it would be kind of interesting to see how much of a parallel you could draw between how a common soldier sees a Spartan versus how they see an elite. Though one is hero and the other enemy, the Spartans are much closer to the elites in terms of upbringing, ability, stature, and mentality than they are to normal people.
The games present the common soldier's take on Spartans as awe-inspiring and thankful for the help, but the books present a more common theme of alienation that I think would be more interesting. The Chief and the Arbiter, side-by-side amidst marines would present more of a, "Must be this tall to matter on the battlefield" than a hope for victory.
Danjo Olivaw Lives
JazGalaxy's take is pretty accurate, but I think their mistake wasn't to attempt to broaden the relavence of the sequel's storyline, but they're inability to deliver on it.
Danjo Olivaw Lives
It seems having the Master Chief as a main character, he would be the reverse of a Michael Myers or Jason Vorhees, plodding around and killing off the "bad characters" instead of the "good characters".
Hmmm... a horror movie from a Covenant POV with the Chief hunting them down and killing them.. Mr Boll? Paging Mr Boll?
MaxShrek .. The reason you keep falling, is there is no bottom.
Horror Vacui
JazGalaxy is just plain wrong. His argument and all supplemental arguments revolve around his idea that Bungie started taking Halo seriously after its success. He played Halo on launch day when no one else wanted to. Yet, the Fall of Reach came out a month beforehand. Considering the backstory already presented in that book, I'd say Bungie already took the Halo universe pretty seriously.
Not to derail and be completely argumentative, shiho is correct about the genericness of Halo as presented by the games. The purpose of the thread would be to discuss how to validate the material presented in the games (shallow) and books (deep, or at least, deeper) into a good film adaptation.
In addition to what I said earlier about Master Chief, making the Covenant threatening would be a great boon. As we see them in the game, unless you play Legendary, they're pushovers. The Grunts are humorous (which I enjoy) and the Elites are anything but. Going back to The Fall Of Reach, the Covenant are ominous. And what you never realize in the games is how long the war has been going on and what losing a battle with the Covenant means. It means the planet gets glassed. This means they methodically criss-cross their ships from orbit firing plasma cannons at the planet until the entire surface turns to glass. And they've been steadily doing this for years and human extinction is right around the corner. These stakes are never presented very well in the game. Sure, the Covenant find Earth and attack at the beginning of Halo 2, but I didn't find myself caring. Chief kicked the Covenant's ass in 1, and he'll do it in 2. Nevermind that the Chief needs ground under this feet to be effective. That he's had to retreat constantly from ground victory because the Covenant are about to glass the planet he was protecting. The movie needs to express this very real fear of humanity's existence pushed to the brink with no hope for victory.
JUST PUZZLED YOUR ASS UP, SON! -Mr Crinkle
That's "your case"? That war isn't a f*cked up occurrence to be taken seriously? That religion can't be the driving cause (insane though it may be) of war? That humor on the battlefield is impossible?
I've watched a man accidentally blow his finger's off and laugh about it hysterically while they wrapped his remaining knuckles so he didn't bleed to death. I've seen guys joke about losing all hearing in their right ear because they fired off their M252 and forgot their ear plugs. I've listened to guys sing "Kumbaya" in the middle of a firefight just because they thought it was funny. If you can't joke in a fight you will literally go insane. Don't give us this sh*t about the marines in Halo not acting "like marines" because they can still joke. All it does is prove you don't know what you're talking about.
You want easy 1-dimensional stories worthy of a Saturday cartoon go ahead and complain. Halo isn't Doom. It isn't Unreal. It isn't TF2*. Not all of the bad guys are the "ultimate evil out to rape and pillage de Earth!" and some can, shockingly, end up being allies. The Halo universe isn't a pinnacle of classic military sci-fi, but don't try to act like it takes itself too seriously.
This is supposed to be a site for mature gamers. I don't know about everyone else but from reading the books, seeing the backstory grow in complexity, recognizing the pained expressions in the ad campaign, and appreciating the "war is hell" attitude you civs so often gloss over I'd call Halo's story "mature". As far as I'm concerned that's not a negative.
*And just for the record that's not a slam on TF2. Let's face it though: it's Pixar with Guns, not a war story. Unreal though... it's about nothing more then seeing how realistic you can blow some shiny-assed uberman to hell and back so consider it an insult if you must.
I fear where this may be going and would like to avoid a response taking the conversation further off topic. So, Series, could you possibly relate your thoughts on humor in combat back to a possible film portrayal? Personally, I think Bill Paxton needs to be a marine. "Game over, man, game over." The elites are already a conglomeration of Aliens and Predators that a little more deliberate borrowing couldn't hurt.
JUST PUZZLED YOUR ASS UP, SON! -Mr Crinkle
I put up that guy's entire post because I didn't want it to look like I was cutting it up for my own nefarious purposes. Maybe I should've. I really don't care about the points you think he makes about war, and they certainly aren't the core of my (or his) argument. His point is that the storytelling of Halo is entirely silly and subpar. It's not what it tells, it's how it tells it. It's not about whether religion can start war, it's about how poorly the concept is sold, and how idiotic the writing and design is for many of the characters involved.
If Star Wars Prequels feature enormous battle sequences and I call their storytelling silly, does that mean that I think our military is silly ? Or what all wars are silly ? No, it means that I believe these movies's stories are complete crap. Nothing more, nothing less.
Not to get all personal, but it appears you're not having a good day at wherever you're stationed. I deeply sympathize with our troops, which I assume means you, and maybe Halo is an important gaming landmark for you which helps you get through really bad times - because it portrays a war - and maybe love blinds, which is why you refuse to see the game's storytelling for what it is. It's not about plausibilities, it's about writing and design and atmosphere (which, by the way, is completely different from the live-action "flashback" TV ads Microsoft was running - the only other recent occurrence of such profoundly unflattering difference in atmosphere that I can think of, was between Hellgate London CGI movies and Hellgate London in-game).
Sorry shihonage, didn't mean to come off as an ass. Well, maybe a little
My point is that, first and foremost, military fiction tends to march to a different tune. Halo is, in my eyes, military fiction. Sci-fi sure, but still a soldier's story. The games are more "silly" than the books and backstory but that's probably only because the games can't realistically include the backstory. Hell even the grunts imp voices is explained in a realistic way you can forgive (tiny size and different atmosphere) in the stories.
Maybe it's my own past experiences clouding my judgment; I'm willing to accept that. Quite honestly I much prefer Mass Effect to Halo and consider the Star Wars movies (but not the stories) to be complete crap, but each does it's own thing well. You see Halo as silly; we'll just have to agree people see things differently.
Oh, and shihonage: we're soldiers, not eggshells
Argue away bud. And McChuck: I'll back off on the personal... sorry to make things uncomfortable.
Awww damn I think I killed the thread. My bad.
I think there can still be more to discuss, Series. It's just that it's late. Also, given the title of the site, many post mostly from work. Not that I would ever do that.
I think Shiho's own words are in agreement with what I said, which in turn is in agreement with what Gabe said. The storytelling, not necessarily the story, in the games is poor. This doesn't mean the movie is necessarily doomed.
As I said, it's late. Time for me to get ready for bed and do a bit of reading.
JUST PUZZLED YOUR ASS UP, SON! -Mr Crinkle
The way things look and behave often cannot be changed because it is a key component to this specific universe. I.E. if you got these silly-looking aliens in Halo, and your goal is to make a GOOD movie, shouldn't you make them look half-decent and therefore make a radical change to their design - both visual and audio design ? If you do, you may not be making a Halo movie anymore.
Should Master Chief always walk around in a helmet in a GOOD Halo movie ? Of course not. But if he takes it off, it creates a discrepancy between movie and game. Should his suit remain "faithful" to the game ? Should one include silly references to dialogue and/or events which have place in a videogame but not in a quality film ?
In my opinion... the storytelling and the universe/setting are closely tied and in order to make a good Halo movie one would need to step so far away from key Halo "assets" that it wouldn't walk, look or talk like Halo at all. It would be more like Battlestar Independence Day Galactica of Warcraft, or something - and frankly I'd rather someone with cajones make exactly that.
I hope Master Chief takes off her helmet in the movie.
Your friendly neighbourhood hair splitting singularity.
Aperture scientist is my alter ego.
(I hate badies)
Easy there, tigers.
Here are some things I think would help a screen adaptation:
Elysium: The democratization of the web ... has installed an illusion of a digital first amendment that protects speech no matter how poorly spelled or stupid.
XBL: E Munnie
elementsofmeaning.blogspot.com
You just can't be satisfied by helmet removal, can you? Gotta lose the chest plate, too. Unless the helmet stays on.
JUST PUZZLED YOUR ASS UP, SON! -Mr Crinkle
"You can leave your hat on."
Elysium: The democratization of the web ... has installed an illusion of a digital first amendment that protects speech no matter how poorly spelled or stupid.
XBL: E Munnie
elementsofmeaning.blogspot.com
Which enemies are too goofy to make the transition, in your opinion? I thought the brutes in the live action shorts were promising, and I don't see anything wrong with the elites or jackals. The grunts serve a specific role in the game that doesn't need to be in a movie, so it doesn't matter what they look like. The prophets are really goofy, but also don't necessarily need to be in a movie, nor do I think anyone would mind if they were drastically redesigned to not have face testicles.
Danjo Olivaw Lives
What's defined as good here?
I certainly wouldn't want any Halo movie that aspires to be an oscar-winner. I see the best translation of a game (where you slaughter enough covenant to populate a city) to be a summer movie.
Transformers and Die Hard this summer were really silly, even stupid at times, but packed with action and explosions and fun to watch (for me). I think any Halo movie should shoot for the same.
I agree I even thought Transformers was really good, if Halo can strive for hitting something like Transformers did than I am all for it, unfortunately I don't see them doing it especially after how blah I felt the story was in Halo 2 and 3 but they could make it really good as well, I guess time will tell.
Xbox 360 Live Tag: Lothar71 PSN - Lothars
"With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility"
Mex refering to Actresses:
Make no mistake, I'd hit them all so hard that my pelvis would have to be classified as a deadly weapon, I just don't think they're all
Transformers ? Really good ? Giant weightless robots doing Le Parkour with no shot remaining on the screen for over 0.5 seconds ? Apparently now all a studio needs to make a really good movie is a CGI department. Not a good CGI department, either.
I certainly hope that one day a videogame movie will come out that sets the bar higher than that and doesn't rely solely on ever-increasing amounts of polygons to sell itself.
"This CGI bullsh*t is the death knell of cinema. If I'd wanted all that computer game bullsh*t, I'd have stuck my dick in a Nintendo." - Quentin Tarantino
I really feel similar to Mr. Tarantino here. I stare at enough polygons when I play videogames. When I go to a movie theater, I need to see something more than polygons throwing themselves at me.
You and Tarantino are always like that!
Xbox Live tag Gorilla800lbs