Uncharted Movie: Hollywood ruins another game

X-SOLDIER

Harbinger O Great Justice
AKA
X
http://www.craveonline.com/film/articles/171259-exclusive-neil-burger-talks-quncharted-the-movieq


Now that Limitless director Neil Burger has taken over Uncharted, the adaptation of Sony's popular treasure hunting videogame franchise, we all have questions to ask. Is he going to be keeping any of previous director David O. Russell's work? Will he listen to the internet fervor to cast Nathan Fillion as Nathan Drake? And what makes Uncharted different from Indiana Jones or National Treasure? In our interview with the director for this week's DVD/Blu-Ray release of Limitless (look for it tomorrow), he had this to say:



CRAVE Online: Are you going to be keeping a lot of David O. Russell’s work…?

Neil Burger: No, I haven’t seen his screenplay on it. Mainly we’re beginning from scratch and going back to the videogame. Because there’s a lot of cool stuff, actually, from the videogame, if you know it…


CRAVE Online: Yeah, I’ve played them all.

Neil Burger: It’s really one of the most cinematic videogames, and one that has really developed characters. So, you know, there’s a lot of cool, really intense things that, if they work for the film’s story, I want to use them.


CRAVE Online: What differentiates Uncharted from similar film franchises like Indiana Jones or National Treasure?

Neil Burger: Well, I think Indiana Jones is, you know, fantastic. The grandfather of all those movies. But I think Indiana Jones is nostalgic. It takes place in the 1930s, and the later ones are a little bit later, and it kind of plays on that nostalgia. Whereas Uncharted is very much up to the minute, of the moment. It’s very “now” and contemporary and it has this sort of rough and very intense feel that a movie like The Bourne Identity has. It’s really up to date in its own way. The Bourne Identity isn’t your father’s Cold War movie and this is a very different kind of treasure hunt movie. It’s very real and it has kind of an insane, wild feeling that comes out of the character; Nate being this con man and a bit of a hustler, living by his wits,ballsy and capable of anything.


CRAVE Online: Are you aware of the internet campaign to get Nathan Fillion to star in the movie?

Neil Burger: I’ve seen a little bit of that, yes. That was brought to my attention. So, you know, I think he’s a good actor. I think there’s a lot of really good actors who don’t even look like [Nathan Drake] who could play it! Where we are right now is that we’re literally starting from scratch on the screenplay, and I think that once we finish it, then we’ll go to actors and see who’s available and who’s right for the parts. Whenever that happens.


Look for the rest of our interview tomorrow!
Holy shit, this actually..... doesn't sound AWFUL!!!!



X :neo:
 

Alex

alex is dead
AKA
Alex, Ashes, Pennywise, Bill Weasley, Jack's Smirking Revenge, Sterling Archer
It sounds like he's actually played the games. Cautious optimism.
 
Better, though I still think the game is more than cinematic enough on its own - and so similar to other adventure movies - that it doesn't need a movie, but it does sound better, at least.

Bourne Identity praise
Well I guess we won't be able to follow any of the fistfights...
 

The Twilight Mexican

Ex-SeeD-ingly good
AKA
TresDias
New director Seth Gordon says the movie should begin filming early next year:
http://spinoff.comicbookresources.c...ry-early-next-year-director-seth-gordon-says/

Take that with a grain of salt, though, seeing as this thing has been lingering in development hell for years already, and as no one has been cast.

All that said, it does sound like Gordon is a good choice for this:

Seth Gordon said:
“There’s some stuff that isn’t in the game,” he admitted. “I love the complexity and frankly the sophistication of the storytelling in the game, and we aspire to that — but don’t want to tell the exact same story, of course — so something that doesn’t break the rules of what it did but expands. Because I feel like the people who play the games and know them well don’t want to just see the same story told. You want extra shades.”
 

Carlie

CltrAltDelicious
AKA
Chloe Frazer
If I were casting the film:

Ryan Reynolds - Nathan Drake

Kristen Bell - Elena Fisher

Bruce Campbell - Victor Sullivan
 

Ami

Playing All The Stuff!
AKA
Amizon, Commander Shepard, Ellie, Rinoa Heartilly, Xena, Clara Oswald, Gamora, Lana Kane, Tifa Lockhart, Jodie Holmes, Chloe Price.
Claudia Black - Chloe Frazer? :awesome:
 

Carlie

CltrAltDelicious
AKA
Chloe Frazer
That's for the sequel not this one and nothing would make me happier if she was but I fear by the time they get around to the sequel she will be considered too old for the part if she's not already.
 

SoulReaper

Titties 'n' Beer
AKA
Lord_Graf
The Silent Hill movie begs to differ.

Its still not a great movie, and doesn't come close to the high standard set by the first 4 games. But still its by no stretch of the term, a bad movie.
Yes it does, it really was a terrible movie.

Making movies out of videogames was never a good idea, and seeing Hollywood is creative-wise deader than dead, why would we pay attention to such a thing as this? I don't get it. The world of cinema has so many treasures from the past, yet people mostly rely on modern crap such as this? Just because it's 'new'? Ofcourse there are still plenty of good movies made these days, but the fact that we give attention to stuff like this, means hollywood won't stop putting out crap like this. Wether it's videogame films, Asian or European remakes, or comic book films, all that terrible crap is still made because obviously they're still making a profit on that.
 

The Twilight Mexican

Ex-SeeD-ingly good
AKA
TresDias
Comic book movies as terrible crap? What decade are you living in? =P

And, really, the first "Silent Hill" movie was a legitimately fine film. It's the second that is awful.
 

Cat Rage Room

Great Old One
AKA
Mog
Yes it does, it really was a terrible movie.

Making movies out of videogames was never a good idea, and seeing Hollywood is creative-wise deader than dead, why would we pay attention to such a thing as this? I don't get it. The world of cinema has so many treasures from the past, yet people mostly rely on modern crap such as this? Just because it's 'new'? Ofcourse there are still plenty of good movies made these days, but the fact that we give attention to stuff like this, means hollywood won't stop putting out crap like this. Wether it's videogame films, Asian or European remakes, or comic book films, all that terrible crap is still made because obviously they're still making a profit on that.
Please break it down to us why these movies are objectively terrible.
 
Top Bottom