Neill Blomkamp to Direct Halo Movie

[fitbabits]

Gamasutra (http://www.gamasutra.com) is reporting that Neill Blomkamp will be directing the Halo movie.

Read more here (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=10418).

An official statement from Microsoft has revealed that the motion picture based on Bungie's Halo franchise will be helmed by Neill Blomkamp, a short film and commercial director making his feature film debut with the movie.

A native of South Africa, Blomkamp directed the acclaimed 2005 short film, Alive in Joburg, that depicted a future in which extraterrestrials have become refugees. Last year, Blomkamp also received three Clio Awards and a Visual Effects Society Award for his television commercial Citroen-Alive with Technology.

..........

"As a gaming fan, I'm excited to bring Halo's premise, action and settings to the screen with all the specificity and reality today's technology can provide," said Jackson. "Fran and I are intrigued by the unique challenges this project offers, and we're delighted to be working again with our friends at Universal, and with our new ones at Fox and Microsoft. With Neill on board, I'm even more excited by the potential of this project."
So there you go!

[bapenguin]

Well...with a solid production team hopefully he does well on a blockbuster. Everybody needs their first shot!

[J Arcane]

Alive in Joburg was really, really cool. Nice to see the director getting some big screen work.

I still wish they'd make a movie of Alive in Joburg. IT was just a sweet concept.

[Karas]

This could be a huge mistake, or a brilliant idea....

[Mdot23]

interesting. i hope it works out for the best.

[King Drewsky]

At least it's not Uwe.

Is there anyway to see the short film Alive in Joburg currently? Heh, knowing the current state of the internet, I should be seeing links to a YouTube version of this film popping up all over in the next 24 hours.

[Zanzibar]

With Jackson as Exec Producer, I really, really doubt this will suck.

[Reanimated]

Should've gotten Ridely Scott.

[J Arcane]

http://www.archive.org/details/ALIVE_IN_JOBURG

You can DL it there.

[CaptStu]

Joystiq has it streaming.

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/09/halo-director-chosen-movie-out-summer-08/#comments

[Dag-Sabot]

Man, Uwe is gonna be so choked, the franchise practically has Uwe Boll written all over it! But i kid. This piece of news will likely mean i will actually go to see this movie.

[Kelegacy]

This is going to suck.

[fahrvergnugen]

Is the Citroen commercial they're referring to the one with the dancing transformer?

[bapenguin]

Joystiq has it streaming.

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/09/halo-director-chosen-movie-out-summer-08/#comments

Whoa. That's pretty cool looking.

[SexualChoc]

You can put whatever names you want to a movie like this, but no one is ever going to be completely happy with it. I can only hope it remains faithful to the lore and looks good.

[CaptStu]

Whoa. That's pretty cool looking.

It does have an interesting vibe. I guess we'll now see what he can do with a large budget.

[tombofsoldier]

And... it goes from promising to crap. This is the precise reason I hate Hollywood, why I truly despise them. They take valuable IP properties, good story ideas, and the possibility of a quality movie, and they totally blow it all. They turn it over to Jery McNutjob, give him $20, and tell him too make a movie. Then they wonder why no one goes to see movies anymore.

[Atepsflame]

Is the Citroen commercial they're referring to the one with the dancing transformer?

Yes. Yes it is.

[Balthasar]

Well...with a solid production team hopefully he does well on a blockbuster. Everybody needs their first shot!
I don't think you can call it a blockbuster before it is even cast. Actually, I'd be willing to bet cash on it doing poorly. I would be shocked if this movie comes out better than mediocre.

[digitalErich]

After watching that short, I'll take a gamble and give this guy my $8 when the Halo movie opens.

[Mondopest]

I just hope this director "gets" Halo and it's universe. That would be something really necessary to the success of the film. Next thing you know Master Chief is fighting a Giant F*****G Spider because....spiders are the fiercest hunters in the animal kingdom... ;)

[J Arcane]

And... it goes from promising to crap. This is the precise reason I hate Hollywood, why I truly despise them. They take valuable IP properties, good story ideas, and the possibility of a quality movie, and they totally blow it all. They turn it over to Jery McNutjob, give him $20, and tell him too make a movie. Then they wonder why no one goes to see movies anymore.
Umm, have you actually, you know, seen any of the director's work?

Or is this just standard knee-jerk Internet trolling?

[kid cabelgo]

Umm, have you actually, you know, seen any of the director's work?

Or is this just standard knee-jerk Internet trolling?

My guess would be the latter. He probably saw the title, didn't read anything or any of the previous comments and posted his two worthless cents.

Hooray internet!

[Ludoc]

I was really drawn in by the short. If he can pull me into the story in a couple minutes of grainny low budget filming I'm willing to give him my seven fifty for the real thing I really hope he's a gamer and has put some time into Halo.

[Wyrm]

I loved the short. I wish I'd seen it sooner. Cool stuff. This is going to be really hit or miss I think. He could do a wonderful job, or it will just be terrible. Only time will tell.

[Dag-Sabot]

Umm, have you actually, you know, seen any of the director's work?

Or is this just standard knee-jerk Internet trolling?

Ill go with the latter as well because he didn't realise it was a big budget flick and misspelled Mr. McNutjob's first name.

[DropD98]

I will only be concerned once I start seeing some of what they start showing they've done on the movie. I also have complete faith in Peter Jackson's ability. I imagine it will either be a great summer blockbuster, or a decent flick with some minor nitpicks. I already know that some people are just waiting to tear the movie apart saying that it sucks, worst movie ever, they screwed it up, etc, etc. I like the story and the idea behind the flick, so I will definitely spend my money going to see this.

Edit: Forgot to add that this director they picked looked like he might just get the whole concept of 'Halo' and do a very good job directing this film. Who knows, this guy could be the next Spielberg for all we know.

[EternalGamer]

I would much rather see the budget of Halo go to a fully expanded version of that short. That "Alive in Joburg" was very cool. Halo the movie just seems like a really retarded idea. The aliens in Halo have some interesting personalities in game, but I have no idea how those would translate into a realistic type film.

[Balthasar]

I would much rather see the budget of Halo go to a fully expanded version of that short. That "Alive in Joburg" was very cool. Halo the movie just seems like a really retarded idea. The aliens in Halo have some interesting personalities in game, but I have no idea how those would translate into a realistic type film.
You already know how this would translate. Go watch Doom. Now add more unintentional humor because the "Halo universe" involves such belief-suspending rules as not allowing the main character to ever be out of that costume.

[Freak705]

That short was really cool. The aliens in the bio-suits reminded my of the flood carrier forms, stumbling around like that :p I liked the short a lot, so I'm interested to see what he'll do with it.

[Royal Fool]

I liked the Citroen commercial.

[cppcrusader]

I may regret asking this, but what exactly is there to "get" about Halo? Don't get me wrong, I thought Halo and Halo 2 were really good games, but there's nothing overly complicated about the plot, nor was there anything in the plot that hasn't been done before in on form or another. The story was just told really well. Granted that giant plant thing made little sense, but other than that we're not dealing with an overly complex beast here.

[Dag-Sabot]

Then there are the halo books.

[Roc Ingersol]

Things that need to be gotten...
AI Rampancy
Master Chief is a badass: he doesn't show his face, he doesn't learn life lessons, and he doesn't have big emotional moments.
Covenant are badasses: they're ruthless, worthy opponents who inspire fear, not bumbling idiots (panicked grunts notwithstanding)


Things that need to be forgotten...
The Arbiter
Audrey 2 (3?)

[Sense Field]

Remember Peter Jackson before LOTR? Yeah thats what I thought... No one really did. I have full faith in Neill and think that we may just get a good movie out of him.

[The Letter 3]

I have to give Microsoft some credit for choosing this director. They didn't take the "safe" route and choose some director whose proven himself or at least done decent in the sci-fi genre. Instead, they reached out to a promising young director, even though he has never produced a feature length film. Bravo to Microsoft for taking a risk and giving the Halo movie a chance to be more than a popcorn sci-fi flick.

[Zeal]

Movie fucked. No longer interested.

[Manzy]

Well, they still have a good writer with the script, and I can tell because he has written a script before. I hate giving people chances, I like knowing their track records before hand. I mean, shit, it's $8.50 on the line!

[Zeal]

This guy has 0 directorial credits on IMDB.com. The script obviously sucked so bad that no one wanted to do it.

Also, Bungie previously said they would not do a Halo movie unless they could get the director of Alien, which was Ridley Scott.

lol the lies never end.

[Deathbane27]

New Zealander producer, South African director... something tells me we're not shooting in Kansas anymore. :p

[Sl1pstream]

Remember Peter Jackson before LOTR? Yeah thats what I thought... No one really did. I have full faith in Neill and think that we may just get a good movie out of him.

I do and both Braindead and Bad Taste are great. Didn't see Meet the Feebles as I'm still looking for the DVD.

[kid cabelgo]

Things that need to be gotten...
AI Rampancy
Master Chief is a badass: he doesn't show his face, he doesn't learn life lessons, and he doesn't have big emotional moments.
Covenant are badasses: they're ruthless, worthy opponents who inspire fear, not bumbling idiots (panicked grunts notwithstanding)


Things that need to be forgotten...
The Arbiter
Audrey 2 (3?)


This would generally mean that he is an absolutely horrid candidate for a main character. I'm optimistic though. I think they can pull it off, but it's definitely going to be tricky having a main character that is barely human.

[Bone]

Here's another short by the director, called TempBot:
http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1301
(cameo by Wonder Woman!)

I have high hopes for this. I really like the director's sense of humor and mood.

[atariv8]

Directing faux documentariy shorts and a dialogue driven feature film are two differrent animals. It looks like the action will be cool, we'll just have to see how the "talking" scenes are directed. Now the guy who directed the new Dawn of the Dead was a commercial director only and I thought the remake kicked ass. Here's hoping...

[Zeal]

At least this guy knows how to utilize visual effects in a manner that makes them appear realistic.

I'm still not happy with a no-name helming a major trilogy, though.

[atariv8]

Maybe Peter Jackson will pull what Steven Spielberg did on Poltergiest with Tobe Hooper and ghost direct(no pun intended). Peter probably wanted a less "seasoned" director so he could influence things a bit more. I'm sure Ridley would have been less prone to suggestion. Of course Ridley Scott's Halo would have been pretty sweet...

[Schnoogs]

With Jackson as Exec Producer, I really, really doubt this will suck.

How do you figure since his last 4 movies were the most over rated pieces of film ever.

Like we really needed a 3rd version of King Kong.

Look at Jacksons track record...he was handed the most popular fantasy novels of all time with over 50 years worth of conceptual imagery. How could you not make an average or above average movie.

Then he made a remake of one of the most famous movies of all time.

I guess Halo is right up his alley since the idea has already been fleshed out for him. The man cant think on his own or make anything original.

[Manzy]

How do you figure since his last 4 movies were the most over rated pieces of film ever.

Like we really needed a 3rd version of King Kong.

Look at Jacksons track record...he was handed the most popular fantasy novels of all time with over 50 years worth of conceptual imagery. How could you not make an average or above average movie.

Then he made a remake of one of the most famous movies of all time.

I guess Halo is right up his alley since the idea has already been fleshed out for him. The man cant think on his own or make anything original.


Hey, give him props for Dead Alive - goriest movie evar!!11111

[Royal Fool]

At least this guy knows how to utilize visual effects in a manner that makes them appear realistic.

I'm still not happy with a no-name helming a major trilogy, though.
You're never really happy about anything... :rolleyes:

[Bone]

I love how people assume Lord of the Rings was just an easy thing to pull off, like any random jackass could print out the trilogy, grab a camera and make it half as good as what Jackson did.

[Schnoogs]

I love how people assume Lord of the Rings was just an easy thing to pull off, like any random jackass could print out the trilogy, grab a camera and make it half as good as what Jackson did.


Theres at least a half dozen if not more that could have done it. It's not just a coincidence that the most popular fantasy novels of all time went on to be big commercial hits.

Look at Harry Potter...they've had at least 2 directors and they've all been hits. When you've got winning material its hard to mess it up.

[J Arcane]

Yeah. Cause never mind that the art direction alone was some of the most incredible ever seen in a film. Those movies were only a feat of visual worldbuilding matched only by the literary world building of the original source.

It's not like it's hard to make a visual masterpiece or anything. I bet Uwe Boll coulda done it.

:rolleyes:

Welcome to the Internet, where random schlubs on a message board are so obviously superior to the finest minds in entertainment.

[Schnoogs]

Yeah. Cause never mind that the art direction alone was some of the most incredible ever seen in a film. Those movies were only a feat of visual worldbuilding matched only by the literary world building of the original source.

It's not like it's hard to make a visual masterpiece or anything. I bet Uwe Boll coulda done it.

Welcome to the Internet, where random schlubs on a message board are so obviously superior to the finest minds in entertainment.

You do realize that Peter Jackson was the director and not the art director. The concep artists for that movie drew ideas from decades worth of Lord of the Ring merchandise, book covers, etc.

What kind of a genius gives the director credit for the art direction when he wasnt even nominated for that or given credit for that....


Art Direction by
Joe Bleakley (as 'Peter' Joe Bleakley)
Philip Ivey (as Phil Ivey)
Rob Outterside (as Rob Otterside)
Mark Robins

Do you see Jacksons name in there???? Didnt think so.

[Balthasar]

I have to give Microsoft some credit for choosing this director.
Microsoft most certainly did not choose this director. They likely have little to no imput in that part of the process. The movie industry in the U.S. just doesn't work like that. There's no way anyone would work with them if Microsoft suits tried to dictate things like director and casting. Microsoft's primary role in this is funding, and very little more.

[J Arcane]

You do realize that Peter Jackson was the director and not the art director. The concep artists for that movie drew ideas from decades worth of Lord of the Ring merchandise, book covers, etc.

What kind of a genius gives the director credit for the art direction when he wasnt even nominated for that or given credit for that....


Art Direction by
Joe Bleakley (as 'Peter' Joe Bleakley)
Philip Ivey (as Phil Ivey)
Rob Outterside (as Rob Otterside)
Mark Robins

Do you see Jacksons name in there???? Didnt think so.
I think you fail to understand just what the role of a producer and director is in a movie.

[Balthasar]

I think you fail to understand just what the role of a producer and director is in a movie.
I think you do too if you think a director or producer have that level of influence over art direction. Hey, did you know over 90% of directors don't even get to edit their films? Do you even comprehend how much of a movie is actually made through the editing process?

[Schnoogs]

I think you do too if you think a director or producer have that level of influence over art direction. Hey, did you know over 90% of directors don't even get to edit their films? Do you even comprehend how much of a movie is actually made through the editing process?

Thank you...at least someone around here understands the process.

[J Arcane]

I think you do too if you think a director or producer have that level of influence over art direction. Hey, did you know over 90% of directors don't even get to edit their films? Do you even comprehend how much of a movie is actually made through the editing process?
Have you ever watched any of the interviews with Peter Jackson about how involved he was in the production of those movies?

[Balthasar]

Have you ever watched any of the interviews with Peter Jackson about how involved he was in the production of those movies?
It doesn't matter, man. There is no director alive that has the ability to micromanage to that level. You are clearly not understanding just how massive a process one of these movies are, let alone three. There is no way humanly possible he could sit down with the artists and draw out all of the storyboards for every scene and guide them through creating the visuals (and I'm just talking about art direction, completely ignoring the rough tedium that is 3-D modeling and CGI processing). There's a reason most movies have credits that last 3-5 minutes. Those credits don't even announce everyone that worked on the movie, just the principles. Peter Jackson's role is likely no more than okaying the work that was labored by others, maybe giving them a pep talk and letting them in on how he sees a particular scene. That's not "art direction."

Edit: Even the actual look of the movie itself, the colors of each frame, are misattributed to the director. While some directors have much more direct influence and control over this aspect of their movies than others (David Lynch, for example), very few directors ever do more than hire their cinematographer (who is really responsible for the "look" of the film). It's like if you draw a rough sketch of the painting on the Sistine Chapel, and then hire someone else to paint over it who shares your "vision."

[Schnoogs]

Have you ever watched any of the interviews with Peter Jackson about how involved he was in the production of those movies?

In the interviews it showed jackson sketching all of the concept art, then sewing every costume, then composing and conducting the score, editing the movie, creating the sound effects, and finally rendering every frame of CG.

Gee buddy..you exposed the big hollywood lie. The 200 people they list in the credits is giant scam. The director does everything.

Rolls eyes for about an hour until they explode.

[PhilR8]

Please, Arcane, do not feed the trolls.

I admit, when I first read this story I did a WTF?!?!? and was pissed. After watching all of this guy's short films, though, I have become very excited. Two hours are a lot different than five minutes, to be sure, but the man has a background as a skilled visionary, judging from Alive in Joburg and his other stuff. I was impressed with what I saw and imagined a Halo movie shot in this psuedo-documentary/realist aesthetic and quickly achieved an erection.

The problem is, what can we realistically expect? How tight of a leash will Peter Jackson hold him on? The Halo movie has transformed from a project I was very skeptical about into a project I am very excited about.

[atariv8]

Wow, I just learned on this thread there is absolutely no need for a director...let me go tell our production boutique to drop all the directors they represent. Although it takes a team to create a commercial, feature, etc. it REQUIRES a lead. The director may not edit the film themselves (I am an editor and I've saved or improved many a project), but he or she sure as shit has input. Directing several shorts and a few spots myself (just for background info no bragging); there are hundrends of choices that are made that change the feel or look of a film. Peter Jackson didn't draw the material but I know he chose the specific art he liked for a particular scene. I repeat, it takes a team but the director/producer is the lead. Sometimes when the same team is not on the same movie the movie stinks. This happens with bands all the time.

[Bone]

Look at Harry Potter...they've had at least 2 directors and they've all been hits. When you've got winning material its hard to mess it up.
They may have all been hits, but the best one was directed by an independent director with artistic vision. The rest have been OK.

When you've got winning material, it's hard to mess it up? Do I really have to bring out the list of bad movies based on excellent books?

[Manzy]

I'm usually more of a fan of the script-writers than the directors. Luckily, there are directors who write the scripts to their movies.

[Schnoogs]

Wow, I just learned on this thread there is absolutely no need for a director...let me go tell our production boutique to drop all the directors they represent. Although it takes a team to create a commercial, feature, etc. it REQUIRES a lead. The director may not edit the film themselves (I am an editor and I've saved or improved many a project), but he or she sure as shit has input. Directing several shorts and a few spots myself (just for background info no bragging); there are hundrends of choices that are made that change the feel or look of a film. Peter Jackson didn't draw the material but I know he chose the specific art he liked for a particular scene. I repeat, it takes a team but the director/producer is the lead. Sometimes when the same team is not on the same movie the movie stinks. This happens with bands all the time.

thats what we've been saying. Imagine the director is Captain Kirk. Sure he's an awesome leader but he relies on his great engineer, his great science officer, great physician, etc.

Directors obviously have input in everything but they rely HEAVILY on the talents of their team. Noone was saying you dont need a director but what we are saying is that just because Peter Jackson is involved in something doesnt ensure anything since we have no idea what the team will be.

[Schnoogs]

They may have all been hits, but the best one was directed by an independent director with artistic vision. The rest have been OK.

When you've got winning material, it's hard to mess it up? Do I really have to bring out the list of bad movies based on excellent books?

List any movie you want that is based on something as old and as popular as LOTR. With as many years worth of concept art, merchandising, book art, etc.

My statement still stands...there's at least a half dozen directors in Hollywood who could have done those movies as well if not better. Peter Jackson was given a gift...

[atariv8]

My point is the director is the one and only person that can take responsibility for the way a film looks and feels. In the end he is the decision maker. I feel that Peter Jackson is the only one that could have made the movies as they are now. Like them or not, those movies would not have been the same without him. He's definitely skilled in leading a big budget team and successfully directing actors in order to create high standard results. Hopefully his skill plus the artistic vision of the Halo director will be a good combination. That doesn't mean Peter shits gold bricks, but the combination has a lot going for it and I feel better that Jackson is involved instead of someone else.

Anyway, there is commercial success and artistic success. Like the Harry Potter films, which were all commercial successes, I think the last one is the only one that can be considered and artistic success which was due to the director.

Lastly, I loved The Frightners and hated King Kong.

[camberiu]

Should've gotten Ridely Scott.

James Cameron....If there is someone who can do HALO justice, the person is James Cameron.

Just compare Alien (which was great) with Aliens (which was MIND BLOWING).

[Schnoogs]

James Cameron....If there is someone who can do HALO justice, the person is James Cameron.

Amen to this post

[Balthasar]

Wow, I just learned on this thread there is absolutely no need for a director.
I'm not clear how you determined that based on what was said. I'm pretty sure what was said was that the director does not make the movie by himself, and cannot (and should not) be given primary credit for all that is good in a movie. He has final say on shots pre-editing, but that doesn't mean he made everything in that shot. He is the lead (to a large extent), that is correct, but he is not a one-man band. That was the point of my and Assassin's comments. In most big budget commercial movies, the role of the director tends to be a lot less than you seem to acknowledge, though. Besides having little to no editing privilages, the producer often usurps their power over the tone and general direction of a movie, sometimes (maybe often) controlling things like casting and script writer. While I certainly respect that you may have some experience directing, I doubt you can challenge the validy of my comments on the heirarchy/beaurocracy of American Cinema.

[Balthasar]

James Cameron....If there is someone who can do HALO justice, the person is James Cameron.

Just compare Alien (which was great) with Aliens (which was MIND BLOWING).
I agree that Cameron would have been a great boon for this movie. It might actually be worth a damn if he was helming it. But I think you underrate Alien if you think it is simply "great" compared to Aliens. I think they're both pretty amazing for pretty different reasons.

[Bone]

My statement still stands...there's at least a half dozen directors in Hollywood who could have done those movies as well if not better. Peter Jackson was given a gift...
In my opinion, Peter Jackson gave us a gift.

[J Arcane]

I agree that Cameron would have been a great boon for this movie. It might actually be worth a damn if he was helming it. But I think you underrate Alien if you think it is simply "great" compared to Aliens. I think they're both pretty amazing for pretty different reasons.
All the Alien movies are great, just for entirely different reasons. The trouble is that a lot of people can't just accept that each one is a different kind of story told in the same universe. Too many expectations that each will be exactly like the others.

I always liked that about the Alien movies.

[Balthasar]

All the Alien movies are great, just for entirely different reasons. The trouble is that a lot of people can't just accept that each one is a different kind of story told in the same universe. Too many expectations that each will be exactly like the others.

I always liked that about the Alien movies.
Well, I wouldn't go that far. The third movie was just fair/okay, but the fourth? I paid good money in high school to see that, and I can't say I left feeling like I got my money's worth.

[J Arcane]

Well, I wouldn't go that far. The third movie was just fair/okay, but the fourth? I paid good money in high school to see that, and I can't say I left feeling like I got my money's worth.
I saw it in high school too. I thought it was a good fun, semi-brainless action romp. It was also, unbeknownst to me at the time, my first expsure to Joss Whedon, and while the producers went over his head a lot in that movie, his sense of humor definitely came out in the dialogue.

[atariv8]

What I'm disputing is the notion that directors are interchangeable. There's a difference between taking responsibility as the main decision maker and actually doing something yourself. My point is, if you would have replaced Peter Jackson on that movie, and only Peter Jackson, and put in another director, they would not have been the same movies period. Yeah editors, grips, cinematographers, etc. can do a whole lot more than what they're paid for. It was the editor that came up with the opening to the movie "Crash" that may have been the best way to set up the tone of the movie. Trust me I'm an editor by profession and I'll take as much credit as possible. But there's a whole lot that happens after pre-production and before post-production in the area called production where things can go bad if director isn't talented. That's discounting the fact a good director is heavily involved in all three aspects.

I think we all agree that a director can't do it alone, which I've stated, what I don't agree with is that a project wouldn't be different if a director was replaced or that any director could take rich source material and make it good.

Watch the newest Exorcist movies and you'll see what two different directors do with the exact same script and crew. (Both suck by the way, but there is a huge difference between the films)

[Balthasar]

What I'm disputing is the notion that directors are interchangeable.
Well, that's certainly not my argument.

Watch the newest Exorcist movies and you'll see what two different directors do with the exact same script and crew. (Both suck by the way, but there is a huge difference between the films)
I had heard the remake wasn't bad.

[cppcrusader]

I had heard the remake wasn't bad.

There was an Exorcist remake? How did I miss that?

[atariv8]

I think he's talking about the alternate version to the prequel. In a nutshell Paul Schreider was hired to make the Exorcist prequel and the studio hated his rough cut so much they fired him and hired Renny Harlin. Renny Harlin took the same script, crew, and most of the original cast and made it all over again. He only used some of what was previously shot. Renny's version tanked and in order to try and make some money they quickly cleaned up Paul's version, with his help, and released it on DVD. I thought both movies were horrible(though Paul's version might of been good if given the proper post budget and time), but it's an awsome film study on how 2 directors tackle the same material.

[cppcrusader]

I think he's talking about the alternate version to the prequel. In a nutshell Paul Schreider was hired to make the Exorcist prequel and the studio hated his rough cut so much they fired him and hired Renny Harlin. Renny Harlin took the same script, crew, and most of the original cast and made it all over again. He only used some of what was previously shot. Renny's version tanked and in order to try and make some money they quickly cleaned up Paul's version, with his help, and released it on DVD. I thought both movies were horrible(though Paul's version might of been good if given the proper post budget and time), but it's an awsome film study on how 2 directors tackle the same material.

Ah, I wasn't aware there was an alternate version of the prequel. I thought the prequel in itself was a bad idea.

[atariv8]

It turns out two bad ideas don't make a good one...