f13.net

So I watched "The Mist" the other day.  You know - the Frank Darabont film that you've had for ages in the US but only got released in the UK a couple of weeks ago.  Well, anyway, half way through it, during all the exposition about what exactly was going on, I thought to myself "Hey - this is Half-Life told from the point of view of people living in the area around Black Mesa."

Soon I discovered that this rock thing was true - Jerry Le Lewis was the devil and Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet.  I also found out Half-life was originally going to be called Arrowhead and was, in fact, inspired by the very same Stephen King short story that Darabont adapted for the big screen.  Who knew?  (Well, not me, obviously.)

Fortunately, Uwe Boll has yet to get his grubby Germanic hands on this ever-so valuable IP and Gabe Newell has stated previously that he'll never sell the rights to the property unless he's totally satisfied by the script.  So I got to thinking (anything to distract me from writing my own magnum opus about tentacled beasties and the end of the world): in amongst all this recent talk about another Doom movie and updates about Gore Verbinski's take on Bioshock, how would I do Half-Life: The Movie?  More specifically, what would Gordon Freeman actually be like as a character?

It would be hard to have him mute all the way through the film like he is in the game but what would he be like?  Obviously clever - an MIT graduate and all that but would he be all Edward Norton "Bruce Banner" or Nicholas Cage "Stanley Goodspeed"? How does he know how to handle weapons so well or is that something he just picks up along the way? Is he the straight man or does he wisecrack like John Mclane?

Then there's the whole Xen thing! Frankly, the last act of the original game wasn't that great but would it work in a film? Do you have him facing off against the Nihilianth or do you change it? Do you spend so much time on Xen or bring it back to earth earlier?

Denzel Washington cast as Gordon Freeman.  I think you should write the weapon thing as a natural affinity but not overplaying it.  Gordon shouldn't be a commando, he should be a regular guy who rises to the challenge.  Not a wisecracker so much as an everyman, like Peter Parker.

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/39720/celebrities/hugh%20laurie/1188664574674.jpg

Perfect.

Wallace Breen - ??
Barney Calhoun - ??
Odessa Cubbage
Arne Magnusson
Gordon Freeman - Hugh Laurie
G-Man (Half-Life)
Father Grigori - Dave Attell (http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3693975296/nm0040995) (hope he can pull of the russian accent)
Doctor Richard Keller
Isaac Kleiner
Judith Mossman - Rene Russo (http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1647483392/nm0000623)?
Doctor Rosenberg
Adrian Shephard
Alyx Vance - Halle Berry
Eli Vance - Morgan Freeman
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Half-Life_characters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Half-Life_characters)

Only problem with Hugh Laurie is age.  Freeman is meant to be 28 in HL1.  On the other hand, seeing him in an action role would be excellent.

Mind you, Charlie Sheen in The Arrival?

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3135/2738818441_ca2508a15d_m.jpg)

Or Jake Gyllenhaal

(http://www.usmagazine.com/images/slideshows/jake_beards.jpg)

I've thought long and hard about the cast of a half-life (2) movie.

Father Gregori should be Rade Serbedzija.

Alyx Vance should be Shannon Sossamon. There's no reaosn they can't make her hotter. Halle Berry is too old.

Judith Mossman - well, who cares.

I came to Morgan Freeman as Eli Vance as well.

Barney should be Greg Grunberg.

I'd put Jeff Goldblum as G-Man if he could possibly pull it off, he can't. As such, Liev Schreiber with a bit of makeup to make him look a twee bit older.

Edit: Jake or Charlie Sheen would suck. ^_^

I have decided that steve buschemi needs to be in this movie, please match him with a character.

Schild - if you can find a Hugh Laurie-but-younger actor for the role of Freeman, the job of casting is yours. I'm not sure about Morgan Freeman as Eli Vance, though - what's wrong with keeping Robert Guillaume?  Apart from the fact he's nearly dead.  

Judith Mossman would have to be Michelle Forbes.  She did the voice and the model was based on her. Also, Louis Gosset Jr. is the only person who can do the voice of the Vortigaunt.  And Ellen "GlaDOS" McLain will be the computer voice (and Overwatch).  Casting anyone else would be a crime.

Anyway, this wasn't about the cast - it's about the film.  Doom sucked donkey's balls but Half-life is absolutely ideal for a movie conversion.  Even the pitch writes itself: Die Hard in a top secret, underground laboratory.  With aliens.

EDIT: Steve Buscemi can be Gordon Frohman (http://www.hlcomic.com/).

I would love to, but he doesn't fit, at all.

(He could easily play Kleiner)

Robert Guillaume.  He has the perfect voice for it.

Robert would work fine. I mean, there's a lot of old black dudes who could play that part. The only 2 that I'm particularly concerned with are Grigori and Barney as they're side characters with a lot of lines when no one else is around while they talk. As such, they're important.

Actually, Steve Buscemi could have a cameo as Chet, the Laboratory Assistant (in HL1) or Chet, the Civil Protection volunteer (in HL2).

I'm telling you, he could easily play Kleiner. Easily. Otherwise, I'd give it to some other guy that looks like a bag of bones. Not like it's a dynamic character.

Come on - Robert is the only one who can play that role. For obvious reasons.

A movie version of HL2 would have Grigori only as a bit-part.  He's a great character in game but his role does nothing to move the story along.  Unless you dragged him out of Ravenholm, he'd probably have no more than a scene or two - if that.  Ravenholm in the game works great as the "scary" level but is redundant in terms of pushing the story forward. If I were writing it and wanted to keep it in then I'd consider putting Nova Prospekt in Ravenholms suburbs and have Grigori as the person who can help Freeman get access.

Barney is a very important character but his character growth happens between the two stories.  He's going to be the one who is inspired by Gordon Freeman during Half-life and grows to be the person brave enough to infiltrate the CP in HL2 and become a leader willing to storm the citadel.  If Freeman is portrayed as the straight man then he can also add some light comic relief - as long as it's not in an annoying Shia LeBifStek kind of way.  Greg Grunberg is good but seems a little too self assured for HL1 Barney.  Simon Pegg on the other hand...

Buscemi as Kleiner I can see in terms of over zealousness but not in terms of aging old science nerd. Someone like Ian Holm, perhaps.

You're all on crack, Robert Downey Jr. is a bad shave away from being Barney's spitting image, voice and mannerisms.

Buscemi should play Lamar.

I saw the thread title and got all excited.   :mob:

Ray Wise would make a cool G-Man (he plays Satan on Reaper). As for Freeman, his character should be more subdued and crafty, like Del Toro in Traffic. I don't mean cast Del Toro as Freeman, just that his character should be like Det. Rodgriguez. That guy was always in over his head in a gargantuan situation, but he did the best he could with what he had.

edit: House would make a good G-Man.

My work here is done.

I was actually a little relieved, considering the level that most VG films rise to.

Merle Dandridge, who does the voice for Alyx, looks the part too.

(http://www.xbox.com/NR/rdonlyres/33EA7E7B-8C22-46F6-B615-A73200F8D13A/0/ilmMerle2.jpg)

Robert Culp could do a live action Wallace Breen as well as he did the voice acting for him.

G-Man - John Malkovich
Barney - Greg Grunberg (plays Matt Parkman in Heroes)

Cameo - Rick Moranis as a Black Mesa Scientist

Gordon Freeman is a tough one though.

Hugo Weaving as the gman!  he might make a good wallace as well.

(http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/6982/hl3tp4.jpg)

 :awesome_for_real:

Fuck yeah. Weaving as G-Man.

The movie itself should be dark, claustrophobic and raw. Production values should be in line with Alien, Blair Witch Project, 28 Days Later. The predominant feeling should be one of unsuspecting bystander caught up in unexpected events, rather than polished Hollywood film crew making perfect film of well-choreographed stunts and special effects.

It's also the kind of thing that could work well with some good unknowns. You'd need actors who could really play their parts, not just play themselves which seems to be what so many Hollywood actors do these days.

What? 

Shoot the film on 32mm for the $33 million (inflation adjusted from 1979), 16mm B&W for $60k or on Mini-DV (Canon XL1) for $8 million.  The production values of those three films, as well as the shooting methods, are so widely disparate that they're entirely not like each other.

Aside from anything, the only thing I'd want from Blair Witch is the marketing department and the equivalent financial success.  The film itself was fucking awful and totally devoid of any redeeming features (apart from a soundtrack CD that was compiled and released after the film had become a hit).  Now if you'd said Cloverfield - which is about unsuspecting bystanders caught up in unexpected events - then yes, that would be better.  Shot on a mix of HD cameras (including home user quality Panasonic HVX2000s as well as the more high end, broadcast quality Sony HD cameras) for $25 million, it's a still relatively low budget and precent decent production values but gets away with a lot because of the hand held shaky cam effects.

But you can't get away from having lots of special effects and stunts.  It's Half-life - he's fighting against creatures from Xen for half the story and soldiers for the other half.  It's a mix of horror (wondering around dark rooms and having headcrabs and zombies jump out scaring the crap out of you) and action (outside in the desert daylight going all Jack Bauer on the special forces). The final act of the game takes place on a different planet - the budget for those effects alone are going to be phenomenonal!  If anything, Jim Cameron's Aliens should be a kicking off point. Ripley starts out as a bystander of sorts but by the end of the film is able to kick ass AND chew bubblegum at the same time - very much like Gordon Freeman.

Make up your fucking minds.  Are you making a movie out of HL or HL2 ?

Personally I'm thinking about Half-life.  It's got a good hook, can be done on a fairly modest budget and, more importantly, it's the first one.  It sets up a lot of the characters who come back in HL2 as well as setting up the world and laying the ground work for the Combine invasion.  The story is more straight forward too. You've got more scope for adding incidental characters and taking scenes from both Blue Shift, Opposing Force and Decay as well.

Actually that's a good idea, a film based on the original half-life needn't just focus on Gordon Freeman, but could also have the Soldier and Security guard plotlines woven through.

Trouble is (and I've always thought it's a good idea) you're kinda remaking Resident Evil.

The film will end up kinda the same.

But with less zombie dogs.

Whatever happens, if you make a Half-life film then the likelihood is that fans of the game will hate it because things will have to get changed.  It's inevitable because you're using a different medium and a different approach.  Things that work well in game may not work so well in a film (see my thoughts before re: Ravenholm) and things must be different. 

Half-life would work well as a film because it plays out in a cinematic way and has a story that has strong narrative elements that could translate well.  It's not just basic "shoot everything that moves until you get to the end of the level" like Doom was.

Anyway, "kinda remaking Resident Evil" isnt' actually a problem if it ends up being a better film.  It's not going to be the same story.

I liked Resident Evil.

I actually typed Cloverfield in my list but deleted it because I've not seen the whole film, just clips. Also, I didn't necessarily mean low-budget, I meant that I thought it should have a gritty, realistic feel to it, which is why I chose those 3 examples. Possibly not the best phrased explanation of what I meant but whatever :p  You actually described what I was thinking much better with your Cloverfield example. I should get round to watching that.

Special effects and stunts have to be there ofc, but I don't want them to be *obviously* effects and stunts - much more Tremors than Matrix, if you get what I mean.

Yeah. I just got wound up by you mentioning Blair Witch - that's a red rag to a bull topic with me. I fucking loathe that film - even more so because of everything that it stands for.

Puking because of Motion Sickness?

If so, I agree.

Oddly enough I saw it kind of randomly. I had no idea what it was about and hadn't seen any of the hype about it. It was on an ftp server I had access to at the time and I saw it and thought "never heard of that, need something to watch, download". Scared the shit out of me.

When i found out about all the bullshit surrounding it afterward I was vaguely bemused. Watching it again was total meh. I think it works *once* and only if it's a complete unknown. But it's definitely not something anyone should ever seek to emulate in filmmaking.

Er, anyway, /derail.

One thought that has occurred to me - do we really NEED a Half Life movie? I mean the game itself was practically a movie anyway. Would there really be anything much to be gained? I suspect that it would run the risk of losing far more than it would ever gain compared to the experience of actually playing it.

I watched Blair Witch alone in a movie theater.  Being the only person in a theater sitting in the center... let's just say, it was the scariest movie experience I have ever had.

Maybe I'm just broken, but I didn't find Blair Witch the least bit scary, disturbing, or anything, other than boring as hell.  If I remember right, I fell asleep during the movie.

Probably doesn't help that the first movie I recall seeing is Alien, when it first came out.

1. This is a purely academic exercise.
2. They're different media, therefore different experiences. The film may well appeal to people who don't play video games or haven't played these games. (I've seen Resident Evil and Silent Hill but I've never actually played any of the games and actually have no intention of doing so although that is nothing to do with having seen the films).
3. You can ask the same question about any adaptation. Did we need an adaptation of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" Did we need another Batman film this year (or any Batman film ever?) Did we need to make a film out of "The Godfather"?  Perhaps what we do need is an adaptation of a video game that not only works but is actually really fucking good.  Perhaps Half-life is the right IP for that.  Perhaps it isn't.


EDIT:

No. No, you're not broken.

Why bother making a new live-action movie? Take all the cutscenes, string in some first-person action bits that move the story along, and cut it together as a CGI film. Fuck, the game itself is just a movie with some interactive bits thrown in, it doesn't need to be remade.

Maybe if you took that and MST3K'd in Gordon's dialog you might have something.

OK, good points, carry on! :P

And briefly (last time I promise) back to the Blair Witch thing, it probably scared me cos I'm a total wimp about scary movies. I love them, but they scare me lots. Watched The Descent yesterday, alone in the house with all the lights off and quite drunk. Crap film but got me a good scare factor going :)

I brought my younger cousins to see Blair Witch Project (they were 10, 11 & 13 at the time) thinking the flick was going to scare the bejeebus out of them. The two girls talked about ponies for an hour and a half and the thirteen year old fell asleep. The Descent, on the other hand... that movie is freaky.

Okay, cast someone unknown (who can act like a motherfucker) as Gordon, fill the rest of the cast semi-known and mid-range people, that would be awesomely meta. But...good lord.

The G-man?

Creepy? Speech patterns from hell? Gaunt?

(http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/2444/christopherwalkenin9.th.jpg)

Unless it's the totally disjointed, HEV-cam Cloverfield Half-Life, there's simply no alternative. In which case, you just keep Gordon as a mute audience-replacement, lest he turn into Hub. And the rest of the casting doesn't matter, as people are seen in shaky half-shots.

EDIT: Spel is hard.

G-Man?  Walken's Brooklyn accent would distract no end.

I was thinking Wayne Pygram

(http://www.treebeard.net/k57/farscape/waynepygram.jpg)

Played Scorpius in Farscape and also Moff Tarkin in Revenge of the Sith

(http://www.coolwatersprods.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/WAYNEPSIGNATURE.jpg.w180h229.jpg)

Yea, anyone involved in Star Wars shouldn't be allowed to work in sci-fi again. or else we end with stuff like Jumper. or Farscape (HUR HUR).

Damn. I'll have to can one of my current projects then.

Quite possibly one of my favorite actors for his role as scorpy.

(http://www.bravesbeat.com/bravesjournal/bristol/archives/scorpius_001.jpg)

I think for a Half-life movie, it'd be better to skip the whole Xen and Nihilant crap. Start the movie in the train in City 17 just like the game and have flashbacks quickly going into that cascade resonance. Question is just how to package all of Half-life 1 in small flashbacks, especially how the G-man relates to it, since you've practically torn the facility up and are known for that with key characters in City 17.

--edit: Also, hell no to a HL1 movie. It'll end up being the generic "oh shit experiment gone wrong base full of monsters gotta fight my way to the outside" scifi movie.