Slashdot Mirror


Peter Jackson to Executive Produce Halo Movie

e03179 writes "According to Reuters, 'the Oscar-winning creative team behind the The Lord of the Rings films, including director Peter Jackson, has been named to run the production of the upcoming film based on Microsoft Corp.'s blockbuster Halo video game, the company said on Tuesday.' The film will be shot in New Zealand and Jackson's production and post-production studios will be used. World-wide release is set for mid-2007 by Fox and Universal. The then rumor was started by Gamespot two weeks ago and was previously covered by Slashdot." Okay, *now* I'm interested. More details available on the Bungie site.

7 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. What I want to know by overshoot · · Score: 1, Interesting

    is whether MS insisted on Jackson replacing his Linux-based renderfarm with one running the new supercomputing version of MSWindows.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:What I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      uhh why would they and why are you modded as insightful??(think carefully before you answer, most CGI farms are custom built solutions and Microsoft has very little to do in that area.. see Pixar etc)
      Lord of the Rings was most likely done on RedHat or Fedora btw: http://www.massivesoftware.com/requirements.html

      Besides, don't you think Microsoft would have already gotten it leaked to the press and spun it to say how much more superior their software was?
      This is just typical /. Microsoft hate-mongering.. is that tin-foil hat nice and tight or do you have anything to support such a rumor?

      Hmm sounds like the same kind of crap /. was spewing around the time it was announced Microsoft was buying Bungie about how this meant that no version of Halo would EVER appear on the Mac after that...
      Guess we know how that all turned out..

      http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000 06IQTH/103-7401908-0239846?v=glance

  2. Re:Yaup by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Halo is the perfect example of how Microsoft can buy a great product and put it's name on it like they had crap to do with the development.

    Or, like Disney with a Pixar film. Or American Airlines with a Boeing aircraft. People who put a product out in front of that product's consumers/users generally have their name associated with it. But I suppose you're the sort that never reads the credits, and assumes that no one else does, either. Do you really think that MS's cash, audience, game platform, etc., has nothing to do with the success of the game? I think Pixar's work is fantastic... but I know that the success of say, the Toy Story franchise, is at least partly owed to Disney's professional marketing teams - even though they didn't color a single pixel. Don't pretend that marketing isn't important. Great games with no marketing frequently fail. Mediocre games with lots of marketing often get results. But great games with great marketing really attract an audience, and that's why it's done. Disney coughed up a lot of money into marketing and distribution in its partnership with Pixar, just like MS does with the games they front. Of course, things with Pixar/Disney have gotten a little rough lately. That will definitely be too bad for Disney, since only Pixar can do what Pixar does.

    Come on, admit it. You're worried that Jackson will make a very cool (or at least, successful) movie, and that MS will get a little street cred buff as a result of having been involved with the product's successfully large audience.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  3. Re: Hell Froze Over by OctoberSky · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, accoding the the Inquirer and Amazon.com its actually going to come out in December. I suck at HTML Link

    Thats the game, not the movie. Surprised Slashdot didn't link this, but its understandable since it's vaporware.

  4. Re:And Peter Jackson wouldn't want to ruin his nam by Mr+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yeah, and Spielberg "produced" over 100 movies in under thiry years by caring deeply about the artistic integrity of each one.

    I wouldn't quite call it selling out yet, but it's how the Hollywood game is played.

  5. Re:Yaup by CardiganKiller · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Add the so many million that Microsft lost on the X-Box, I know I cost Microsoft a cool $76 by only purchasing Halo 2 and a $10 copy of GTAIII with my X-Box.

    Profit loss per XBox: $100 per $199 console.
    Units sold since 2001: Approx 15M.

    Let's say the loss of $1.5B is wildly exaggerated because Microsoft began selling their unit for $150 at some point in time (I don't remember when). Well consoles bought at $150 lose $50, assuming their manufacturing process didn't get any cheaper. If all 15M consoles were bought at 15M, then that would make a loss of $750M.

    Now, I've also heard that buying more than 10 games for your XBox will profit MS from the royalties or whatever such fees exist for developing on their platform. According to this survey, Only 50% of XBox unit owners purchased more than 10 games. Let's be statistically illogical and say this cuts their losses in half, now we're still at $375M.

    This magically makes the profit of the XBox and Halo2 combined come out to -$125M. Now we have a reasonable profit goal for Peter Jackson to achieve with this movie. He can probably take a bigger nap than he did making King Kong. I actually saw the whole video documentary of Bryan Singer having to come in and direct for Peter Jackson 'cause he was napping on the couch. It was superb.

  6. Halo Movie? What a sad and sorry waste. by Qbertino · · Score: 1, Interesting

    How about a true Ringoworld movie, not some lame rippoff.
    That would actually be something really cool.
    I trust Peter Jackson to do a really good Hard Science Fiction flick. But Halo as a movie sounds like some really one-dimensional hollywood action crap even Jackson can't resque.

    Ringworld on the other hand does have some real movie potential.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca