Halo's Arms Race, or when live-action is more dead than CGI
by Scott Jon Siegel 
{ Jul 12th 2007 at 12:09PM }
Moore introduced the footage as "a chance to see what they've been working on, and a new chance to believe." It's a fuzzy statement, to be sure, and one that was not clarified once the live-action spot, and the keynote, ended. Admittedly, we were perplexed. Was this an indication that the Halo movie was back on track? Or something else?
Bungie later clarified the matter on their website, giving the footage a name ("Arms Race"), and describing it as "the first digital short depicting humanity's struggle to save Earth." Further clarification came from the forums of fansite Bungie.org, with an official Microsoft e-mail confirming "Arms Race" as the first in a series of short films being released throughout the summer, leading up to Halo 3's September release on the Xbox 360.
So no more mystery: the short piece was not a teaser trailer for the Halo feature-length film. Nor was it, as several of us surmised, a last shot at convincing film studios that the franchise had the fortitude to reel in those Hollywood big bucks. No, "Arms Race" is nothing more than the beginning of yet another marketing campaign for the megaton, über-anticipated, HALO 3.
And we couldn't be more relieved.With its teletype terminal commands, and reckless blending of copious CGI effects with scant real-world elements, "Arms Race" would be more at home on the Sci-Fi channel, rather than inviting comparisons to Bungie's stellar in-studio work, produced almost always out of real-time, in-game models.
Aside from the few assembly-line shots of sniper rifles, the only things live-action about "Arms Race" were the barely-breathing actors, trying to look rough and tough despite being dressed in ridiculous, ill-fitting costumes and standing next to purple explosions.
Yes, Blomkamp has made a few arthouse flicks. But what fewer people mention is his day job as a 3d animator for television shows like Smallville, Dark Angel, and Stargate SG-1. What might be fine on broadcast cable over an analog signal just doesn't fly in high-definition, viewed on a flat-screen monitor or an HDTV. The seam between CGI and live-action in his work is entirely transparent, and despite Blomkamp's best attempts to mask the short's shortcomings with quick cuts, it's still readily apparent when something's real, and when it's just a big blue screen.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
SuiXide @ Jul 12th 2007 12:14PM
...I personally thought it was good, but whatever floats you guys' boat...
Fenrir @ Jul 12th 2007 9:08PM
I thought the CGI was excellent and subtle; it's hardly 'obvious' like the author makes out. Maybe he's had too much to drink and the alcohol has taken him to a whole new level of alertness and bitchiness.
Ihya @ Jul 12th 2007 12:14PM
So I guess they watched Aliens a great deal before making that.
Zeouterlimits @ Jul 12th 2007 12:15PM
Youch!
Joystiq came down hard...
I can certainly see where ye are coming from...
And Shawn Elliot from GFW/1up had a few 'choice' words to say about it on todays 1up Yours podcast..
Stevo @ Jul 12th 2007 12:16PM
I don't really give a flying *&^% what it was for, all that matters is that it was badass and I get to see more of it.
Robert @ Jul 12th 2007 12:17PM
yes, it was kind of crappy. But I wouldn't be surprised if we got a real trailer for the movie in September when Halo 3 is released. It reminds me a little of how crappy the teaser trailer for Transformers looked compared to the actual trailers from the movie.
tituspullo @ Jul 12th 2007 12:21PM
i think it would make a decent sci-fi tv show. i would buy into a halo tv show more then i would a halo movie. all they would have to do is base i ton halo wars and follow members of a squad.
Harold @ Jul 12th 2007 12:22PM
Probably the dumbest thing I have seen in any conference. I especially thought it was funny that Peter Moore was the ONLY person clapping afterwards. Talk about a swing and a miss.
Tony @ Jul 12th 2007 12:22PM
I really don't see what was so terrible about it. It just shows some guys preparing for a battle... I would say some of the building aspects of the devices and vehicles they'd be using came off well.
And, in addition, since this obviously is NOT for some movie, you can't expect some sort of Hollywood production values. Big movies like that can cost 100,000,000 bucks for a reason.
a ham sandwich @ Jul 12th 2007 12:25PM
yeah im not sure why joystiq is coming down on this video so damn hard. the cg was so good i thought it was real. after all peter moore did say "live-action short". ease up guys will ya? i thought it was pretty good.
Brandon @ Jul 12th 2007 12:25PM
I am releived that I'm not the only one that thought it felt like a bad scifi channel original.
I would expect WETA to do better than this. It also in a wierd way reminds me of all those 3DO cdrom full motion video games.
Brandon @ Jul 12th 2007 12:26PM
sorry, i meant "live action", not full motion
razer @ Jul 12th 2007 12:41PM
Did MS steal your lunch money Joystiq? You've put more crap up on your website needlessly bashing whatever MS is doing. First it was the completely fictional 3 red light story that has now spread to several websites and discussion forums and now this unneeded bash on what I thought was a decent short film. Do you watch many short films? Usually their production value isn't that of a blockbuster. I think you guys need to turn off your laptops and get some FN sleep! The 48hrs of no rest has made you a bunch of jackass's.
john @ Jul 12th 2007 12:57PM
"the completely fictional 3 red light story "
Really? People are still denying that the red light problem exists?
razer @ Jul 12th 2007 1:09PM
John: Not the Red Light information in general. But the specific story where Bethesda didn't have an AV cable plugged into an Xbox 360 which will cause red lights to flash. Suddenly it become a headline.
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/11/overheard-e3-evidently-they-do-fail-sometimes/
john @ Jul 12th 2007 12:42PM
Were they trying to be funny at the end? Because I laughed.
NorCal05 @ Jul 12th 2007 12:45PM
The only weak point to the video was the end scene, with the electric flash. Other than that it was very good, and would have been better with a bigger budget.
ericdrum @ Jul 12th 2007 12:48PM
Mr Siegal, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Evan @ Jul 12th 2007 8:16PM
just for that I will go buy billy madison on HD DVD!
Grindstone @ Jul 12th 2007 12:49PM
I thought it was a nice prologue to an eventual movie. I'm not saying it was great, but it served it's purpose to garner interest. And according to Bungie, we can expect these as we gear up for the game release. You don't have to watch them, but I will.
Grey Fox @ Jul 12th 2007 1:00PM
I actually liked that too but damn Joystiq, you guys are pretty harsh on it.
Odds Bodkins @ Jul 12th 2007 12:51PM
I liked the video. I didn't think it was anything more than a TV spot for HALO 3...I thought it was obvious that it wasn't a teaser from a movie.
I think some folks are just reading too much into things at this year's "E3".
Jake @ Jul 12th 2007 12:57PM
Jesus Christ Joystiq, it was just a commercial. You are bitching because it didn't have big budget blockbuster smash hit Peter Jackson quality effects and polish? I am sure given 50-100 million dollars they could have done a lot better.
Though I believe them that the clip is mostly for marketing, it definately has the dual purpose of trying to get interest for a movie.
And for the record, I liked it for what it was.
Sachmo @ Jul 12th 2007 1:01PM
What the hell? That was the dumbest post I've EVER read on Joystiq. If I wanted to hear a fanboy rant I would just talk to myself in a mirror.
PS: I love how you put the rant after the break, but we caught you're stupidity ;)
Navillus @ Jul 12th 2007 1:03PM
I thought it was pretty good. Just be happy Uwe Boll didn't make it!
incrediblebulk92 @ Jul 12th 2007 1:05PM
Um I thought the obvious explanation was the other halo game that their making, not halo 3 or halo wars.... I seem to remember it being something like an interactive movie
Oh and I thought it was pretty cool, not really gonna sell any games but cool nonetheless
mandarin @ Jul 12th 2007 1:13PM
Lotta guys, gear and vehicles...
Just one soldier???
Someone skimped on the actor budget...
austin @ Jul 12th 2007 1:35PM
Obviously our blogger is from the school of thought where "different is bad." If it doesn't look super expensive/obvious CGI like spiderman, transformers, or a final fantasy cutscene, it's no good.
This and most of Neil's directorial efforts (which I doubt this blogger has even seen) have a simple and realistic feel to them that most "produced" and cliched hollywood efforts all miss.
You can disagree with his directorial and stylistic choices, but please do not mistake his understated, subtle, and intelligent style for incompetence.
I bet the Halo movie was moving in this direction, and was axed because some hot shot exec could not grasp what was going on (much like this blogger).
I'd be interested to see poll feedback on this "short"
ibelli @ Jul 12th 2007 2:01PM
I am going to whole-heartedly disagree with you guys' assessment here. I would challenge you guys to pick out which shots in this short are actually CG. I think you would be surprised about how much of this stuff is practical. -- and if it IS actually CG, then thats some pretty mean texture work and flawless chroma blending. On the other hand, the feel and energy of the piece is where you feel the budget. The music is under inspired, the text cuts are dated, circa 1992 and the shots of the live actors were pretty lame. You r arguments about the difference between television and movies, I can agree with, but I was actually impressed if anything by how expensive this was to put together, even if it IS largely computer generated, which I believe it largely isn't -- if not, that means a lot of practical models, and practical models are expensive. The guns the rifles, the Warthogs; that stuff looked practical to me.
drewshack @ Jul 13th 2007 9:37AM
It's good to see this kind of response to an unecessary and short-sighted post.
potato @ Jul 12th 2007 1:58PM
I don't get the negativity here. It's pretty clear from the short that everything in it was a tech demo or screen test - an exercise to work out the kinks in the technology and methodology that will eventually be used in the real film.
The only thing that looked downright amateur was the explosion at the end, and that's mostly because the guy was just standing there. If it were a couple guys behind cover firing at an off-screen target, it would look downright badass.
Personally I'm looking forward to the movie. If it looks anything like this but with a bit more polish, it will be frickin' sweet. The CGI here is stellar - not overstated and not in-your-face, and blends very well with the live action elements.
The costumes could use some work... those armor pads don't look like they fit well at all, but given a full film's budget I don't expect THAT to be a problem.
WebPimp @ Jul 12th 2007 1:55PM
Couldn't agree more with Joystiq, especially after watching Transformers last week, this is weak in comparison as to what can be done. Then again, how much of a budget did he have to do this?
Calder @ Jul 12th 2007 3:06PM
While I'm sure it's cool to make fun of Blomkamp based on his day job, his short films thus far have been pretty damn slick. I'm still convinced that he's the guy to make the Halo movie, should it ever move forward.
stracenska @ Jul 12th 2007 2:05PM
Man, this Siegel guy's got no taste. If this was crap to him, he must have loved "Doom" and "Bloodrayne". Heaven forbid a director with an alternative vision to the norm of current video game movies be allowed into the club. I couldn't care less for Halo in general, never play it, but after watching that short I actually wanted more. Opinions like Siegel's are the reason Uwe Boll gets continuous work.
Angel of Death @ Jul 12th 2007 2:18PM
Actually, I'm thinking that Michael Bay may not be a bad choice to direct Halo: the Movie. I was pretty skeptical about Transformers, but it was actually a decent movie. In fact, it was one of the only movies where the audience actually applauded and cheered at the end (and not because it was finally over!).
AoD
Specter @ Jul 12th 2007 2:26PM
I liked it, it reminded me of the one other short i've seen from Blomkamp, in the style it was made. If you guys liked this google video Neil Blomkamp and watch his movie about a South African Invasion. It's called Alive in Joburg, and is seriously surreal.
lupos @ Jul 12th 2007 2:34PM
Wow... does no one get that they are implying that the soldiers, just like the guns and jeeps and pelicans, are just weapons. Just there to serve a purpose. The implication is these guys have never lived in a world without war and having grown up like this are now emotionless machines that can be mass produced like every other part of the military. The expressionless faces during the shave, the not flinching when a mortar round lands next to them and most blatant of all... the freaking bar codes on their necks!
Part of my day job is spell checking the translation on hentai games but that doesn't mean it's indicative of my abilities.
ssuk @ Jul 12th 2007 2:42PM
... Damn Joystiq. That was rough. It's a short film made on a shoe string. You ain't gonna get the same results as a multi-million dollar movie. Sheesh.
Angel of Death: Micheal Bay doesn't need another big franchise lingering under his ego. He's an alright director, but he's mostly just hot air. I'm sure if not Speilberg was in on Transformers, that film would have ended up sour...
WebPimp @ Jul 12th 2007 3:39PM
You'rr probably right about the fact that transformers could have sucked if it wasn't for the involvement of the 'berg.
Hatchetforce @ Jul 12th 2007 6:01PM
This isn't a prologue to an eventual movie or even THE eventual movie - HALO. Did no one get this? This is part of the unnamed HALO project form Peter Jackson of which Jackson siad last year "It isn't a movie and it isn't a game." I think it will be like a modern day version of Steel Sharks where player decisions adjust the course of the movie.
Matthew Walsh @ Jul 12th 2007 2:57PM
Lupos hit the nail on the frick'n head. Scott Siegel, I couldn't disagree more with your rant.
nath225 @ Jul 12th 2007 3:01PM
Maybe Joystiq is just run by a bunch of Ninty/PS3 fanboys? There's been un-needed hate to Microsoft from Joystiq over E3. I mean, these guys have the privilege to go to E3, what most gamers would give a finger to be able to do, and they're blogging about some guy who didn't set up a 360 correctly?
Griffon2k @ Jul 14th 2007 8:34PM
Was this guy even looking at the same short? I can understand how you can get turned off by the poorly done green screen type (a homage to the Alien movies, which Bungie has openly said has influenced Halo), but the rest of the short looks almost seamless between the CGI and the real thing. I don't believe they spent the money to actually have a factory build real Warthogs and Sniper rifles and ODST gear, but the short makes it very convincing that this stuff was really being made. Extras (Actors actually get at least a line of script)aside, if this is the vision they have for a Halo film, it's on target. Aliens meets Saving Private Ryan almost. The Human element is clearly there. If they show Covenant in any of the shorts, that's where the typical flashy, Hollywood effects might fit.
nelson @ Jul 12th 2007 3:58PM
from bungie.net:
"A collaboration between Bungie Studios, director Neill Blomkamp, WETA Workshop and Origami Digital LLC, brings the first digital short depicting humanity's struggle to save Earth."
Hi folks, Origami Digital did the CGI, so give them your undeservedly harsh criticism. WETA workshop, the guys that make the armor, weapons, and props, were involved, not their CGI arm, so let's all take a breather. Sheeesh.
Brian @ Jul 12th 2007 4:05PM
Damn Scott, you could PRETEND to be objective. Your statements are so contradictory of all sane thinking that you've become transparent and your bias is showing. I think you need another post where you pretend to like something from MS again.
brokenscope @ Jul 12th 2007 4:21PM
The only part that bothered me was that final part with the explosion. Everything else looked good, but it didn't seem as polished as possible.
I would suggest looking Blomkamps other works.
dolbex @ Jul 12th 2007 4:25PM
Personally, I thought it was fantastic. Posted my impressions here: http://www.newspail.com/editorials.php?fid=12
Jeffery Russell @ Jul 12th 2007 5:37PM
Stick to reviewing games. This piece was done beautifully. Blomkamps short has a great pace, beautiful cinamatography, and the best effects money can buy. Sure the uniforms and explosion reak of Starship Troupers, but I like that. Halo has always been a little cartoony anyways. I really hope this helps the film get a green light.
Jay @ Jul 12th 2007 8:48PM
Has anyone else noticed that as of July 5th, IMDB states that FOX has "purchased filming rights and says the project will go on"?
Also, wow Joystiq, too much hate. I almost peed myself when I watched that clip.
ccooper @ Jul 12th 2007 6:31PM
The short was amazing for what it was; a short film depicting events and or a scenario.
Give the guy a break; it was not even two minutes. This man needs to be the director of the film though. Without any doubt after watching his other short films and this halo tease; that he is perfect for the job.
The movie needs a fresh face and fresh outlook as the director. He will do it good and people need to chill with the comments.
You do realize that it'll be a movie and not a game..right..no movie will ever be like their game counter part (not to the truest degree anyways); so see it for what it is and not for what it wasn't.
Rather have a better film based on a good game then a over bloated cgi filled non sense that trys to mimic the game a little too closely.
looks good and bill just needs to front the film already and get the ball rolling on it.