According to reports hitting the Internet over the weekend, Quentin Tarantino was lined up to take directorial lead in a movie incarnation of Valve's Half-Life FPS. The rumour began life on GameSpot, where the site reported, “GameSpot editors spoke with a person who has many contacts within the Los Angeles film industry. The person in question said that the hot game-movie crossover project du jour was Half-Life, Valve Software's groundbreaking shooter.”
The site continued, “While news of a Half-Life film would be hot by itself, what the film insider said next was more scorching than a habanero enema. He/she said that Pulp Fiction director Quentin Tarantino had been hounding Valve executives to bring the game to the big screen, and that he was currently in negotiations with the developer.”
As it turns out, the insider GameSpot was in talks with was actually a big fat liar, which is a shame really. As Valve chief Doug Lombardi explained, “As much as we'd love to meet with him, we've never been contacted by Mr. Tarantino nor his people. We've had many conversations with folks in Hollywood, but have no commitments for an HL movie at this time.”
Now, we see this comment as somewhat of a red herring. There must be plans for a Half-Life movie and Valve must have been speaking to Hollywood types. The fact that Lombardi refers to Tarantino's 'people' is all the proof we need.
In all seriousness, there has been buzz from the land of cocaine and plastic breasts that puts a Half-Life movie in theatres at some point in 2007. Though given everyone in the Land of Broken Dreams lies most of the time, we really don't know what to think.
The site continued, “While news of a Half-Life film would be hot by itself, what the film insider said next was more scorching than a habanero enema. He/she said that Pulp Fiction director Quentin Tarantino had been hounding Valve executives to bring the game to the big screen, and that he was currently in negotiations with the developer.”
As it turns out, the insider GameSpot was in talks with was actually a big fat liar, which is a shame really. As Valve chief Doug Lombardi explained, “As much as we'd love to meet with him, we've never been contacted by Mr. Tarantino nor his people. We've had many conversations with folks in Hollywood, but have no commitments for an HL movie at this time.”
Now, we see this comment as somewhat of a red herring. There must be plans for a Half-Life movie and Valve must have been speaking to Hollywood types. The fact that Lombardi refers to Tarantino's 'people' is all the proof we need.
In all seriousness, there has been buzz from the land of cocaine and plastic breasts that puts a Half-Life movie in theatres at some point in 2007. Though given everyone in the Land of Broken Dreams lies most of the time, we really don't know what to think.
Read More Like This
Comments
DoctorDee 23 Jan 2006 10:48
1/17
That's a low down dirty rotten shame. Tarantino's penchant for bad (hammy, over) acting and s**t (wouldn't look out of place in a comic book) dialogue would have made him perfect to direct a video game conversion.
He the most over-rated thing in Hollywood. And despite Kill Bill "Vol. 1" being a great movie, it wasn't for the acting or the dialogue. And "Vol. 2" restored the karmic balance.
He the most over-rated thing in Hollywood. And despite Kill Bill "Vol. 1" being a great movie, it wasn't for the acting or the dialogue. And "Vol. 2" restored the karmic balance.
Jay 23 Jan 2006 13:53
2/17
I have to agree - kind of like Robbie Williams, in the fact that people generally agree that he's great, without seeming to have actually put any thought in on the matter themselves.
As for the movie, however, I reckon HL (well, 2 anyway) would be much more suited to a Lost/Invasion style mini series.
As for the movie, however, I reckon HL (well, 2 anyway) would be much more suited to a Lost/Invasion style mini series.
more comments below our sponsor's message
DoctorDee 23 Jan 2006 14:11
3/17
Jay wrote:
As for the movie, however, I reckon HL (well, 2 anyway) would be much more suited to a Lost/Invasion style mini series.
Is anyone watching/enjoying Invasion. I'm watching, but it seems like a bit of a trainwreck.
It seems to be ploughing on, down the tracks, derailed and with no-one at the wheel. The cast are all very pretty, expecially Alexis Dziena who I took to be a 15 year old with a preternaturally (and pretty) old head on her shoulders - but who turns out to actually be 21 years old. But the storyline just has no bite.
I see you bunched it with Lost, and while I am a massive fan of Lost, by 2/3 of the way through season one, I was thinking that it suffered from overly meandering plot, and no story development. The start of season two made me think otherwise, but of course, now, half way through season two... the meandering, non-developing malaise has returned.
LUPOS 23 Jan 2006 14:38
4/17
Jay wrote:
kind of like Robbie Williams
i like robbie williams....(provided we are talkign about the singer guy, and not soem director who im unaware of)... not because of his iffy pop music... or his dashing good looks... but because he made that video where he ripped himself to shreds straight down to the bone and all the lovely ladies smear his bloddy bits on themselves in extasy... fooking marvelous!
oh and i love pulp fiction and reservoire dogs... kbv2 was a downer... especially after that sweetness that was kbv1.
TwoADay 23 Jan 2006 15:22
5/17
DoctorDee wrote:
That's a low down dirty rotten shame. Tarantino's penchant for bad (hammy, over) acting and s**t (wouldn't look out of place in a comic book) dialogue would have made him perfect to direct a video game conversion.
He the most over-rated thing in Hollywood. And despite Kill Bill "Vol. 1" being a great movie, it wasn't for the acting or the dialogue. And "Vol. 2" restored the karmic balance.
He the most over-rated thing in Hollywood. And despite Kill Bill "Vol. 1" being a great movie, it wasn't for the acting or the dialogue. And "Vol. 2" restored the karmic balance.
Here's my take: 1 - Quentin would be a bad move for a HL movie. He doesn't "do" the kind of stories that I think would be necessary for that kind of movie. He's a pop-culture director. I find him entertaining for the most part, but his movies are more references to other movies or events than stand-alone original works.
2 - Quentin is not the most overrated. That would be Jerry Bruckheimer. he sucks. a lot.
LUPOS 23 Jan 2006 15:35
6/17
TwoADay wrote:
That would be Jerry Bruckheimer. he sucks. a lot.
ill surely be flogged by someone for this ... but kevin smith gets my vote.
i loved clerks.... but everythign since has been pretty so so at best. even dogma which i though had a decent story to it had soem of the worst god damn dialog i have ever heard... i felt liek that movie was written for the mentally challeneged all the characters where constantly being refered to by the role in the film instead of their names liek peopel are to efing slow to figure out that serindibity(sp?) in the muse!
not that i dont enjoy a good old fashion intoxicated viewing of jay and silent bob on ocasion. and the animated series was pretty good as well.
____
Jay 23 Jan 2006 15:41
7/17
DoctorDee wrote:
Is anyone watching/enjoying Invasion. I'm watching, but it seems like a bit of a trainwreck.
I was thinking that for about the first 8 or so episodes, but last week's (US) show finally seemed to get going, although I can't remember exactly why it was particularly gripping, but that's probably because I was too preoccupied with thinking about what I'd like to do to Alexis Dzenia...
DoctorDee wrote:
I see you bunched it with Lost, and while I am a massive fan of Lost, by 2/3 of the way through season one, I was thinking that it suffered from overly meandering plot, and no story development. The start of season two made me think otherwise, but of course, now, half way through season two... the meandering, non-developing malaise has returned.
As for Lost, I'm with you - the last few have been dull as hell, and even laughably idiotic in the case of last week's cliff-hanger, with the whole [SPOILER] "let's train everyone up into an army" horse s**t.[/SPOILER]
DoctorDee 23 Jan 2006 15:42
8/17
LUPOS wrote:
but because he made that video where he ripped himself to shreds straight down to the bone and all the lovely ladies smear his bloddy bits on themselves in extasy... fooking marvelous!
Robbie starred in that video. He didn't conceive it, write it, direct it, write the song, or play the instruments. (or sing ve feem toon)
So if you are gay enough to admire him for his dancing, and his tight buns, or even his totally inane middle-of-the-road pop stylings. Fair enough.
But maybe your admiration should go to Jonas Åkerlund, who did conceive and direct the video.
DoctorDee 23 Jan 2006 15:49
9/17
TwoADay wrote:
2 - Quentin is not the most overrated. That would be Jerry Bruckheimer. he sucks. a lot.
Burkhammer sucks. But NO-ONE thinks he is any good, thus saving him from over-ratedness.
LUPOS 23 Jan 2006 15:57
10/17
i have no admiration for his faux music... nor do i credit him with the video... i just did not know off the top of my head who the director was... and when i think robbie wiliams... it hink that video... adn that video is awsome.
also i cant help but have a certain level of admiration for someone who is so perfectly average looking and even a bit flabby drawing in the ladies like hes does. liek the damned pied piper minus the child predator overtones.
famous people are usually either very good looking and there for get ass... or they are very talented and get ass... he is neither... and still pulls it off.
______
also i cant help but have a certain level of admiration for someone who is so perfectly average looking and even a bit flabby drawing in the ladies like hes does. liek the damned pied piper minus the child predator overtones.
famous people are usually either very good looking and there for get ass... or they are very talented and get ass... he is neither... and still pulls it off.
______
TwoADay 23 Jan 2006 19:08
11/17
DoctorDee wrote:
Burkhammer sucks. But NO-ONE thinks he is any good, thus saving him from over-ratedness.
I doubt that no one thinks he is any good. Somehow, he makes very profitable movies, and keeps making them. He has, according to imdb.com, 9 movies in the pipeline. 9. You can't do that if you're not respected or don't have fans.
Although his "Amazing Race" TV show is relatively good as far as "reality TV" goes.
Kevin Smith is hugely overrated, but only by people who think they're "movie buffs." He's more of a one-trick pony than anyone else I can think of right now, but I would imagine if you walked up to someone and said "Kevin Smith" they'll say "Who?"
SPInGSPOnG 24 Jan 2006 07:59
12/17
Jay wrote:
I was too preoccupied with thinking about what I'd like to do to Alexis Dzenia...
[NUDITY WARNING]If part of what you'd like too do is see her naked. Then click this link[/NUDITY WARNING]
DoctorDee 24 Jan 2006 09:06
13/17
TwoADay wrote:
I doubt that no one thinks he is any good. Somehow, he makes very profitable movies, and keeps making them. He has, according to imdb.com, 9 movies in the pipeline. 9. You can't do that if you're not respected or don't have fans.
I disagree. Wholeheartedly. I accept that the Brickhammer makes the kind of movies that are popular. The kind of inane, bland, populist s**te that sells popcorn by the truckload.
But I disagree that anyone rates him. I would guess that he average Breckstammer movie-goer could not name three of his movies. He is not appreciated and adored as an auteur by an enthusiastic fanbase. He just supplies an endless stream of trite unchallenging pap for a bunch of people who go to see them for the grinning fools who star in them, and could not name the director/producer of any of them.
config 24 Jan 2006 10:34
14/17
DoctorDee wrote:
TwoADay wrote:
2 - Quentin is not the most overrated. That would be Jerry Bruckheimer. he sucks. a lot.
Burkhammer sucks. But NO-ONE thinks he is any good, thus saving him from over-ratedness.
Somebody must - they keep giving the fscker money, along with paying him to be "executive director" for TV shows. bleh.
DoctorDee 24 Jan 2006 10:53
15/17
config wrote:
Somebody must - they keep giving the fscker money, along with paying him to be "executive director" for TV shows. bleh.
No! He makes money. That's why he keeps getting the work. Same way Westlife kept making records.
If he stops making money, there won't be ANYONE in Hollywood saying, "Oh, but I'm such a fan of his work from an artistic point of view that I think we should fund his next movie despite it having no realistic chance of profitability."
He's a success. As in... sucking cess. And success equal popularity in Hollywood. But that still doesn't mean anyone thinks his stuff is actually good.
In fact, every argument here is "Someone (else) MUST think he's good". No one has actually come out and said "I think Gerry Shuckheimer is a talented film director and producer, and should win an Oscar for lifetime contribution to the film industry". He sucks, he perpetuates an industry that panders, pathetically and cynically to the lowest common denominator, and in doing so corrupts and devalues popular culture.
Quentin, who I am no great fan of, has vision and has integrity. He makes movies he would like, and the public happens to like them too. They are, in some small way, didactic, they are eclectic. Schleppheimer makes sewage.
config 24 Jan 2006 10:59
16/17
DoctorDee wrote:
He just supplies an endless stream of trite unchallenging pap for a bunch of people who go to see them for the grinning fools who star in them, and could not name the director/producer of any of them.
Indeed, but I reckon that sums up 99.9999% of movie goers.
I think you overestimate the number of people that base their decision at the box office/DVD rentals/PPV on the director, and personally I don't think there's a single director that makes me think "oh blimey, this new movie's directed by X, I must go see it".
That 99.9999% base their decisions on whether the movie shows Brad Pitt's abs or Kate Beckinsale's arse.
Doesn't almost every director's output will turn to crap some way down the time? Because at the end of the day, they can't resist the money being waved at them by the t**ts at the studios or they'll go so far up their own arse, what they figured was thought provoking is infact just a turd.
My guess is even Buttheimlich could direct an important, challenging movie, but instead he unashamedly sucks down money from the studios and produces garbage that sells like the hot cakes.
DoctorDee 24 Jan 2006 11:29
17/17
config wrote:
Doesn't almost every director's output will turn to crap some way down the time? Because at the end of the day, they can't resist the money being waved at them by the t**ts at the studios or they'll go so far up their own arse, what they figured was thought provoking is infact just a turd.
Luis Bunuel, Wim Wenders, Ki-duk Kim, Jim Jarmusch, Richard Linklater, Olivier Assayas, François Ozon, Tim Burton, Terry Gilliam, Ang Lee, Darren Aronofsky, David Cronenberg, Lars von Trier, Luc Besson etc etc etc.
My guess is even Buttheimlich could direct an important, challenging movie, but instead he unashamedly sucks down money from the studios and produces garbage that sells like the hot cakes.
I don't believe that he could. I don't believe that he would recognise an important script. He'd have passed up Broken Flowers because of the lack of explosions, Crouching Tiger because of the lack helicopters, In the Mood for Love because there was no "Lurve", Seom for the paucity of Aliens.
Lets face it, he has the ear and the wallet of Hollywood. If he had any artistic ambitions, he could realise them. He shows no interest in doing so.
I know the MAJORITY of the movie gong public do not choose their movies by the director. But those are not film lovers, just people with 90 minutes and $10 to spare.