Ubisoft is taking a non-traditional route in its marketing of this fall’s “Assassin’s Creed 2”. The company previously announced plans to create a series of short films revolving around the game. Now it’s divulging details.

The first of three episodes will debut on Oct. 27 on YouTube. Each will revolve around Giovanni Auditore da Firenze, the father of the game’s main character. And each will give background on the title’s story and universe, as well as introduce some of the side characters – both friend and foe – that players will encounter in the game.

The films were developed by Ubisoft’s Hybride Technologies – the visual effects studio behind the films “300” and “Sin City”. (Ubisoft bought the company last July.) They’ll blend live action with CGI, one of the Hybride’s specialties.

It’s part of an ongoing movement by the publisher to expand its franchises into new mediums. That makes sense when you consider “Assassin’s Creed 2” has cost the company over $30 million to create.

At E3 earlier this year, Ubisoft CEO Yved Guillemot said as production costs continue to rise on new games, Ubisoft will focus on ways to amortize those expenses by reusing animations and graphics in multiple mediums. Video has been an increasingly important priority for the company.

Financial advantages aside, this could be a good way to whip up interest in new titles and build good viral campaigns for new games. It might not work so well with, say, the “Raving Rabbids” franchise, but imagine the fun Hybride could have with Sam Fisher as “Splinter Cell: Conviction” get closer to launch. 

Let’s say you’re a game developer who’s hoping to transition your franchise to the film world. Do you submit a written pitch? Perhaps a live action mock-trailer? Nah…

If you’re Jordan Mechner, creator of the “Prince of Persia” games, you cut together gameplay elements to create your vision of what the game can bring to the film. In this case, lots of gymnastics and gravity-defying techniques that have become the game’s signature.

The trailer, which was successfully pitched to Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney, tones down some of the mystical elements of the games and focuses on action and romance – two elements that resound well with a mass audience. 

The film, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, will be released next year.

On his blog, Mechner details the 20-year struggle to get a “Prince of Persia” game greenlit. The trailer (embedded after the cut) was put together in just one week, using footage from the PS2 version of the “Sands of Time” game.

Why not just use one of the existing trailers Ubisoft had put together to market the game?

"The game marketing trailers were very specific about certain story points that weren’t in the movie (freeze, fast-forward, sand monsters, visions)," he writes. "Co-producer John August and I didn’t want to confuse the execs by showing them a different story from the one we were pitching."

A quick note for those of you who don’t read the daily edition of Variety cover to cover. My colleague Marc Graser breaks work that Twentieth Century Fox has teamed with Electronic Arts to turn “Spore” into a computer-animated film. “Ice Age’s” Chris Wedge will direct.

EA Entertainment's Patrick O'Brien and Lucy Bradshaw, VP of Maxis Studios, will serve as executive producers. Will Wright’s name is nowhere to be seen, though.

Read more about it here.

One of the stories I missed while away for my long weekend was the delay of Universal's "Bioshock" movie.

As Michael Fleming reported in Variety, Universal simply became uncomfortable with the budget that would be needed to fulfill the vision of John Logan's script and director Gore Verbinski's pre-production.

That too-high budget being reported is $160 million, though I've been hearing from sources it was in fact substantially higher: The film was going to need over $200 million for production. Universal balked, Verbinski felt he couldn't come in much lower, and now they're at a standstill.

Apparently there was a substantial amount of work happening on "Bioshock," especially on the early art and visualizations side. There was even some early casting in the works.

But that's all on hold now. The pre-production staff has dispersed and Verbinski is left talking with Universal about whether there's a cheaper version of "Bioshock" to be had.

One question undoubtedly on the studio's mind is "Bioshock's" mature themes. If the film was going to be anything like the game in its horror elements and weighty moral issues, it would have merited an R rating and appealed primarily to adult audiences. After the relative failure of Warner Bros. "Watchmen" adaptation, which has grossed only $107 million so far, Universal would have to be concerned. If it's going to spend anywhere close to $200 million or more, it probably wants a PG-13 film that isn't so heavy it would scare off the teenagers and young adults who drive so much of the ticket sales these days.

But don't count "Bioshock" out. As Fleming reported, it's not at all unprecedented for movies to be put on hold and then go back into production with a new budget. It's certainly in Universal's financial interests to do so. As I reported when the film deal first got made last year, the studio will have to pay publisher Take-Two substantial penalties if the movie doesn't happen.

"The reason I structured it the way I did is to make sure it gets made," Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick, a former movie executive, told me at the time. It looks like his dealmaking savvy is being put to the test.

One of the most critically beloved games of all time has started its path to the big screen.

"Shadow of the Colossus" is being set up at Sony Pictures by producer Kevin Misher ("The Interpeter," "The Rundown"), sources have confirmed (news first broke at the Hollywood Reporter).

"Shadow" was published by Sony Computer Entertainment, making this a rare example of content cross pollinating between the conglomerate's studio and games division.

The movie will be written by Justin Marks (Disney's in-development "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li'), who, I should admit, is a friend (as is Misher's development executive Kevin Chang, who played a key role in putting the project together).

Though it sold decently -- enough to keep the development team behind it, which also made "Ico," at work on a new title -- "Shadow" is best known for devoted praise by critics and fans of "games as art" (including me. It's one of my all time favorites). It's arguably the most emotional video game ever made.

It's also not an obvious candidate for a film. The game is an extremely solitary experience, as the main character, a young man named Wander (though you'd never know his name from playing the game) rides through a mysterious land on his horse Agro, slaying 16 colossi in hopes of bring the girl he loves back to life. As anyone who has played "Shadow" knows, it ends on a truly tragic note.

I understand the folks working on the project are planning to have some of the characters who appear only momentarily in the game, such as those who try to track down and stop Wander, play bigger roles in the film. And despite the game's somewhat "artsy" cred, they're hoping "Shadow" will be a "Lord of the Rings"-style fantasy tentpole.

As always, I do want to remind excitable gamers that getting set up a studio is still very far from actually making it to the big screen. Nonetheless, this is a pretty exciting first step for a not-too-obvious candidate for videogame-to-movie translation

Electronic Arts seems to have a plan for its new M-rated properties: launch a direct-to-DVD animated movie with the game and develop a big budget feature film to expand the franchise in the long run.

"Dead Space," of course, had its animated DVD movie "Downfall" (below left) that came out along with the game in October. A feature film is being developed by Temple Hill Productions, the company behind "Gears of War" and "Twilight."

"Dante's Inferno" (above right) is further ahead on the theatrical feature path. It has already been set up at Universal Pictures and has a writer penning a script. Today comes news that Film Roman, the Starz Entertainment unit behind "Dead Space: Downfall" is also doing a direct-to-DVD version of "Dante's" that will come out with the game next winter.

 The only details about the "Dante's" project to come out are that separate anime studios are being tapped to create the nine different levels of hell.

News was revealed today as Starz is apparently looking to sell both animated movies to international TV buyers at the MIP market this week.

We all know the drill with video games that become movies and vice-versa. If it starts as a game, the movie comes out several years after the game first becomes popular and, in an effort to reach a mass audience without alienating the core fans, usually ends up pleasing no one. If it starts as a movie, its gets licensed 15 months before release, giving the developers barely enough time to get a game out, let alone one that's high quality.

Some folks in Hollywood are trying to find a new way around that conundrum. The formula is simple: Get some geeky producers, video game developers, studio executives, etc. together at the creation of a property, before there are any dollar signs, release dates, or unit sales to get licensing folks' attention, and develop it for multiple media all at once.

Today comes a really intriguing example of that new approach: Fox Atomic has made a deal with production/management company Union Entertainment and developer Zombie Studios to turn the tactical military game "Blacklight" into a movie and comic book (that's concept art from the project around this post). You haven't heard of "Blacklight?" That's because it's in early development at Zombie, the Seattle-based maker of "America's Army" and the upcoming "Saw." It doesn't even have a publisher yet.

Union, which specializes in putting together games, movies and comics (they made the deal for "The Darkness" game and have the video game concept "Zero G" set up at Fox) took at look at "Blacklight," saw the multi-media potential, and helped sell it to Fox Atomic, the studio's youth-skewing division.

Fox Atomic is now developing "Blacklight" as a movie and comic book and has hired Jason Dean Hall to write the feature script and also create the world that will be drawn on for all media. Meanwhile, Zombie is taking the momentum of a movie deal with it to seek a publisher. Union is attached as a producer on both the game and movie side.

I got on the phone today with everyone involved to find out how this unusual project got put together and what it might mean for the future of games and movies. The conversation included Zombie co-CEO and "Blacklight" creator Mark Long; Fox Atomic development director and comics editor-in-chief R. Eric Lieb; and Union's president Richard Leibowitz, Creative Director Dan Jevons, and manager Dmitri Johnson, who are attached as producer and executive producers, respectively. Here are some excerpts:

Ben Fritz: First tell me what exactly "Blacklight" is and how it was created.

Mark Long: About a year ago, I started thinking about where we were going to go next. We specialize in military [first person shooters]. I began thinking about a team tactical shooter set in the near future. A near enough future that it could be based on science fact, not fiction.

When you have the ability to come up with fantasy weapons, games almost design themselves because you can come up with fun things. But when you're in the tactical realism category, it's really hard. For instance, try to find one real weapon somebody hasn’t already put in a game. That’s how we decided on a covert ops team set 25 years in the future that's given the mission of hunting down and capturing or killing the former commander of their team.

 It's kind of a "Heart of Darkness" story. You deal with your dark self and the repercussions of your policies in a region. It's set in the imaginary city of Balik, Kajikistan. We chose that region deliberately so we could have a Romanesque architecture that has fallen into ruin. Now, 25 years in the future, it's covered with ubiquitous banal advertising. Think "Blade Runner" meets Bulgaria.

BF: And what's different about your game from, say, the Clancy titles or "Call of Duty?"

It's official: "Street Fighter: the Legend of Chun-Li" is a flop. Even given a perfunctory release on 1,136 theaters, its estimated weekend gross of $4.65 million and per screen average of $4,093 is lame, albeit not disastrous.

Box Office Mojo has a useful chart of video game-to-movie adaptations, on which "Chun-Li" comes in no. 23 of 28. Amongst the movies that beat it: Uwe Boll's "In the Name of the King," "Alone in the Dark," and "House of the Dead"; "Wing Commander" in 1999; and "The Wizard" in 1989 (yes, folks, that's in non-inflation adjusted dollars).

And, yes indeed, it came in well behind the 1994 Jean Claude Van Damme "Street Fighter" classic, which bowed to $6.6 million.

Keep in mind, however, that a weak performance in the U.S. doesn't necessarily mean "Legend of Chun-Li" is a big money loser for financiers Capcom and Hyde Park. For a movie like this, domestic release is basically a tool to support the places where it really makes money: Overseas (especially Asia) and DVD. With a budget I've heard estimated at around $30 million, the movie could still end up doing OK, even if not many people in the U.S. actually want to go to a movie theater and pay $10 to see it.

Given the bad reviews, soft opening, and the genre, it's pretty reasonable to expect this movie to take a giant drop next weekend. But it may have a trick up its sleeve in the form of "Watchmen." Yes, logic would tell us that the young male audience that might be interested in a "Street Fighter" movie is a lot more likely to see "Watchmen." However, the latter movie is rated R, while the former is PG-13, unlikely to sell out, and unlikely to raise eyebrows if, say, a 15 year-old boy buys tickets (as opposed to, say, "Madea Goes to Jail." So if teenagers are looking to buy tickets and sneak into "Watchmen," "Street Fighter" could benefit.

As for our contest, we currently have an exact tie between PhilVillarreal, who guessed $4.5 million, and DJ, who said $4.8 million. We'll have to wait for the final weekend box office number tomorrow to declare the winner

Update: The final total is $4.72 million. Congrats to DJ.

Fox's decision to not show "Street Fighter: the Legend of Chun-Li" to critics was the first sign it's not too hot on the movie's box office prospects. Now comes another: It's only opening at 1,136 theaters.

I covered box office at Variety for a while, so I have a decent sense of how studios open movies. 1,136 barely counts as a wide release. Typically you'd expect a movie that a studio, and exhibitors, think has any decent box office prospects to open at over 2,000 theaters (unless it's an indie film that slowly grows on the strength of buzz and reviews, which "Street Fighter" obviously isn't).

With that few theaters, an opening in the single digit millions is pretty much a certainty, which is certainly not what financiers Capcom and Hyde Park were hoping when they started production, even if the budget is relatively small.

But how low will the opening weekend box office be? Initial buzz amongst gamers is pretty bad and the first review out there, from IGN, is devastating ("Chris Klein delivers one of the most laughably bad screen performances of the decade" is being a favorite line), so it's hard to be optimistic. I took a bet with an industry friend last night with an over/under of $5 million. I was willing to bet $20 it will exceed $5 million, although I don't think it'll be by much.

Anyone else want in on that action? Here's an incentive: Whoever comes closest to guessing the actual opening weekend box office of "Chun-Li" will win a copy of "Street Fighter IV" (for Xbox 360). Guesses must be in the hundreds of thousands (so "7.6 million" is an acceptable estimate; "$4,423,583" is not) and you must be within at least $500,000 to win. Also, you must post your estimate by midnight, pacific time, tonight. I don't want anybody who gets access to the opening day gross cheating.

(The winner will be based on the final gross reported on Monday, not the Sunday morning estimate)

Update: Variety has a somewhat kinder review, calling the film "Neither the best nor the worst of movies derived from videogames" and noting that the "Well-adorned production... looks sharper and more colorful than the rudimentary revenge plot demands." Read the whole thing here.

Update 2: The final gross is $4.72 million. Congrats to DJ.

In my time covering film development at Variety, one thing I've learned is that when an actor or producers says they're planning to make a movie, that doesn't always mean it's happening. Which is why I've been a bit skeptical at 50 Cent's widely reported claim to be developing a film based on THQ's "Saints Row," apparently made during a conference call today to promote his game "Blood on the Sand."

Sure enough, I checked with THQ, and the publisher would only confirm that "it's something he has expressed interest in."

Well, anybody can be interested in making a movie. Pretty much every producer in Hollywood is interested in making a "Grand Theft Auto" movie, for instance. I'd like to make a "Street Fighter" movie focused on Chun-li in which she's suddenly half-white (damn it!).

But to do anything, you actually have to get the rights. Let alone get a good script, set it up at a studio, put together a budget, etc. etc.

So even in the annals of videogame-to-movie development, most of which never turns into an film at your local theater, consider this alleged news little more than a glint of desire in a talkative artist's eye

 For those of you holding out hope that "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li" might turn out to be good, here's a not-too-promising development: Fox won't be screening the movie for critics before it's released next Friday, the 27th.

Which means those who want to see it opening night will have to brave those treacherous waters review-free. Of course, in 95% of cases, not screening a movie is the studio's way of admitting critics are sure to hate it -- usually because it's bad, occassionally because it's a genre, like horror, that critics rarely appreciate.

(Full disclosure: I have seen "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li," at a private screening. But because the writer is a good friend, I can't objectively write about the actual content. I will write about the box office performance and reviews as soon as the film is released, though.

Update: On a related note, Leigh Alexander has an interesting column at Kotaku about why video game movies never quite work. I'm not sure if I agree 100%, but she makes a really good case.

The Interweb is all abuzz this week with the news that Angelina Jolie won't be playing Lara Croft in the new Tomb Raider movie in development at Warner Bros.

But, maintaining my role as the guy who rains on everyone's parade when excitement builds about some big movie-gaming deal, I do feel the need to note that that day when this potential movie casts, or attaches, a star, is still far away.

What has happened now is that Warner Bros. got the film rights to the character as part of its 20% investment in Eidos, a fact we didn't previously know. And one of the studio's top producers, Dan Lin, a former production exec, is overseeing it, which means it's got a good advocate behind it.

But right now, it's an open writing assignment. Which means the studio still has to find a good writer, see if it can get a good script out of him or her (or the person or people who do rewrites), attach a director, either attach a star or cast an unknown, and then approve a budget that would probably be over $100 million.

Keep in mind that "Bioshock" got set up at Universal last spring with a writer and director already attached and has so far made little progress. There's been no casting and it's not about to go into production. The same goes for various other games adaptations that have gotten at least to the producer or studio level in the past year, including "Lost Planet," "Mass Effect," "The Sims," "God of War," "Uncharted," "Army of Two," "Dante's Inferno."

So what's actually happening? There's the the upcoming "Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li," the in production "Prince of Persia," and the partially cast "Kane and Lynch." Beyond that, from what I'm hearing the next movie likely to cast and get a greenlight is "Gears of War" at New Line.

Meanwhile, there's nothing wrong with having some fun speculating about who should play a game icon. But treating it as actual news that Angelina Jolie won't be playing Lara Croft in a movie that's numerous steps, and dozens of potential missteps, from happening.

Last month I conducted a giveaway of the blu-ray version of Uwe Boll's lastest masterpiece "In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale," with one caveat: the winner had to watch the movie with Uwe's commentary playing and report back to us all on the, ummm, highlights.

Today seems like an auspicious day to share that report, since the both Uwe and movie received a rash of Razzie nominations (although "The Love Guru" got more, amazingly). Every video game player's favorite filmmaker himself got four nominations, as well as a special "career achievement" award, while "Dungeon Siege" also got four. My favorite, by far, is the nomination for "worst screen couple" of "Uwe Boll & any actor, camera or screenplay."

Cut Scene reader Aron Dunn was the unlucky winner of the "In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale" blu-ray and here's his full commentary on the commentary. Aron did fall asleep (twice!), but we I think he still deserves credit for soldiering on through this gruesome assignment. Trust me, it's worth reading, especially for the part about the four phone calls Uwe took during the recording:

---

Right off the top, I have to admit that I had an agenda in pursuing this opportunity to review Dr. Uwe Boll’s commentary track for this film. I’ve been fascinated by the public persona of Herr Doctor. He’s made a lot of critically unpopular yet financially viable films and courted controversy at every step of the way. He was even hailed for a short time as a boon to Canada’s film industry when he earned his citizenship in my country. I’ve listened to him speaking articulately and passionately both about his craft and his detractors and he has made some very reasoned arguments. As I said in the blog comment that secured me this assignment, I called him a “genius” because he “must have to work four times as hard as your average director to make a film as spectacularly bad as Bloodrayne.” I wanted to glean from this commentary track further insight into his process, creativity and artistry. It is with a curious mix of relief and disappointment that I can honestly say that I found none. 

I took this assignment very seriously and watched the film twice. Once for story and once for commentary and I fell asleep at virtually the same place during both screenings. It was right at the start of the epic battle that makes up the last third of this 2 hour and 42 minute director’s cut epic.

The insights found on Boll’s commentary regarding his choice of the material and process were thin on the ground. He liked the everyman quality of FARMER from the game on which he based his film. Since it was a top down “real time strategy” game, there was no story from which to adapt, so he had a Hollywood writer take a stab at crafting one, which he found too close to Lord of the Rings. A highlight for me was when he said a writer based in Toronto (my home town) saved the day and turned in a script he was satisfied with.

He talked politely about his cast. Jason Statham and Jonathan Rhys-Davies are gentlemen by all accounts. Burt Reynolds needs a lot of attention. That he probably shouldn’t hire method actors to play evil wizards was the subtext I took away from his clipped praise for Mr. Ray Liotta. For a director who’s courted as much controversy as Dr. Boll, he did nothing but pussy-foot around the obvious difficult on-set relations he had with some of his bigger name cast members. For someone who called out Jerry Bruckheimer, I expected bigger balls.

Apparently he loved shooting in Vancouver and the time he spent on the Stonebridge village set was among some of the happiest days of his life. The Orc stand-in Kruggs – who looked marginally more convincing than the lizard heads in V – took more than three hours in make up. What summed the whole experience up for me was the fact that Dr. Boll took four phone calls of several minutes duration, in German no less, about his other projects during the section of the commentary for which I was awake. Perhaps there were more during my nap. 

A passing acquaintance once said movie making was “just a bunch of overgrown children playing Action Man with a lot of money” and that has always stuck with me. It is that, but it’s so much more. There are thousands of creative, financial, logistical, and interpersonal decisions that a director must make during the course of a film while bringing an artistic alchemy to process to render all of the elements into a compelling story. I sincerely believe that Herr Doctor loves playing Action Man on set and he has most of the skills that are required to come in on schedule and on budget. For this, I tip my hat to him because you have to love what you do to get up and do this every day and anyone who earns a living doing what they love to do is very fortunate.  But, the artistic alchemy is missing. While I think he’s a savvy businessman, Boll the person appears to be as boring and uninspiring as Boll the filmmaker. Yet there is clearly an audience for his work.  He’s become his own brand and you have to respect that. Ultimately, I don’t want to live in a world where Dr. Uwe Boll cannot have a career because it means there is no hope for any of us to have our shot at success.

I officially had my scariest envelope opening of the year Monday when I discovered I had been sent Uwe Boll's "In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale," with its all-star cast including Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, Ron Perlman and Burt Reynolds, on Blu-ray. Perhaps there's enjoyment to be had watching the film ironically (and in high-definition, the way all Uwe Boll films are meant to be seen!), but I just don't feel ready for it.

However, I am intrigued by the director's commentary. What great insights on his filmmaking does Uwe have to share? Does he include any of his trademark thoughtful responses to his many critics? I want to know, but I don't want to have to watch the film to find out.

So... Are any Cut Scene readers up to the task? Here's the deal: Leave a comment explaining why you want "In the Name of the King" on Blu-ray. If you make the best case -- or you're the only person willing to go for it -- I'll send you the disc. But with the win comes responsibility. I'm hoping the recipient will listen to Uwe's commentary, write down the highlights, and email them to me so I can post them on The Cut Scene and share them with the world.

If you want to win and you're willing to take notes on Uwe's genius, leave a comment now. I'll pick a winner early afternoon tomorrow (Thursday, PST), so I can mail the movie before the holidays.

In today's Daily Variety comes news that "Pirates of the Caribbean" director Gore Verbinski, who is (gamers hope) busy developing a "Bioshock" movie, has optioned a second game-related project. This one isn't quite the stuff of gamers' dreams, though. It's based on an article from the Wall Street Journal and described by reporter Michael Fleming as follows:

The article by Alexandra Alter focuses on a married man who spends as many as 20 hours a day on a computer, existing through an avatar who is a thriving, musclebound entrepreneur. In reality, he is a diabetic, chain-smoking 53-year-old.

Apparently Verbinski and writer Steven Knight (who has some very classy credits like "Eastern Promises" and "Amazing Grace") hope to make a film "about the online fantasy role-playing world and its detrimental impact on the real lives of players."

OK, so gamers probably hope to see the more positive side of their lives portrayed. But it is a real side to MMOs. I actually knew a couple who broke up in part because of dozens of hours per week one person spent in "World of Warcraft" (I suspect that was a symptom of their deeper marital problems of course, but still).

So long as the movie (should it actually get made) portrays gamers as real people, not social misfits, I think it's a good thing. The identity split that comes when you spent more life as your avatar than yourself makes for interesting drama. It's a real problems some gamers face. Just as movies sometimes show the downside of professional sports and politics and other respected parts of modern life, gaming can and should get the same treatment. Mass media doesn't have the best track record of doing so respectfully, but it's worth hoping, especially since Verbinski, based on my conversation with him about "Bioshock," seems like someone who respects videogames.

At the least, it's a good thing that Universal (where Verbinski has a first look deal as a producer) thinks a story about MMO playing has the potential to be commercially succesful.

Full story: Universal, Verbinski plan to role-play

The movie rights to Electronic Arts' unannounced videogame "Dante's Inferno" have been bought by Universal. As Michael Fleming and I reported last week, it was a hot contest between U, Paramount, New Regency and MGM. It's a seven figure purchase price, assuming the movie actually goes forward. It's the second EA videogame Universal has bought in the past few weeks, along with "Army of Two."

For full details on the final deal at Universal, check out Fleming's story in tomorrow's Daily Variety.

And for full details on Dante's Inferno, check out this post from last week.

Variety  film reporter Michael Fleming and I are reporting in tomorrow's paper that four major studios -- Paramount, Universal, MGM and New Regency -- are bidding for the film rights to Electronic Arts' game "Dante's Inferno."

Never heard of "Dante's Inferno?" That's because EA hasn't announced it yet. But now that there's a bidding war going on, Michael got wind of the project and I helped him track down the details. Turns out that "Inferno" (the likely, but not yet definite title) is, as one would expect, a modern interpretation of the epic poem and will have players fighting their way through the depths of hell (maybe there will even be nine levels?). It's currently scheduled to be released late next year. (EA trademarked the name "Dante's Inferno" back in February for videogame, film and TV purposes)

We already know about a lot of the sequels coming up on EA's schedule ("Army of Too," "Dead Space 2," "Mercenaries 3," "Spore" expansions), but this is the first post-"Dead Space" and "Mirror's Edge" original property we've got details on, even though EA has been heavily touting its strategy of investing in new franchises.

The company has also been very aggressive this year in licensing its titles to Hollywood. "Army of Two" was just set up at Universal, "The Sims" is at Fox, producer Avi Arad optioned "Mass Effect," and there are even more in the works, if my sources are right.

As for "Inferno," hopefully I'll have further details soon when one of those studios wins the movie rights.

Update: A good source tells me the game is being developed at EA Redwood Shores.

Full story: Studios battle for EA game rights

Army of Two is the latest videogame heading to the big screen.

As Variety reporter Michael Fleming and I are reporting in tomorrow's paper (read the story here), EA has licensed the rights to Universal, which has set Scott Z. Burns ("The Bourne Ultimatum") to write the script.

In an interesting twist, EA is actually attached as a producer on the film (along with Scott Stuber, who was previously attached to produce the "Halo" movie, amongst many other projects). As I was writing yesterday, EA is getting very active in film licensing recently and being attached as a producer gives it a whole higher level of involvement in how the end product turns out.

It was only last month that EA licensed "Mass Effect" to producer Avi Arad (it's not set up at a studio yet). And of course there's "The Sims" movie at Fox, the initial pitch for which got less than stellar reviews from gamers. I wouldn't be surprised to see more in the near future.

Universal has also been getting pretty active in adapting videogames. It's the studio that's doing the "Bioshock" movie and it was previously involved in the doomed "Halo" film.

My colleague Michael Fleming talked to Burns and got this interesting quote about his take on "Army of Two" as a movie:

The ambiguity of these private military corporations lends weight to an intelligent thriller with relevance to what's going on in the world right now. You have contractors with their own agendas, and two guys whose friendship supersedes all the politics. I told EA right off the bat I wasn't a gamer, and that appealed to them because they didn't want to simply replicate the game.'

Given how "Army of Two's" story was received, that's probably a good thing. On the other hand, as I just reported, "Army of Two 2" (working title, I'll assume) is in the works and it's a safe bet that whatever EA has got cooking for the follow-up will influence the movie and possibly vice-versa.

Personally, I just hope the main characters have at least as many awkwardly gay moments in the film as they did in the game. Preferrably in those awesome skeletor masks.

I have a story in the most recent weekly Variety tied to the release of "Dead Space" about Electronic Arts' approach to developing new intellectual property. Specifically: Why are they making so much of it now? How do they make sure it's good? And why are they so actively licensing it to other media?

I recommend reading the article, of course. But there was a lot more in my interviews with EA Games label president Frank Gibeau and EA Redwood Shores (soon to be re-named) studio GM and "Dead Space" executive producer Glenn Schofield that didn't make the article. Which is exactly why the Cut Scene exists.

So here you go. Rather than a Q-and-A, I'm excerpting some of their most interesting quotes under topic headers, so you can skim and see what interests you.

Some of you may just want to find out if there's any hot news, so here are the things revealed in these interviews that you might not already know, though honestly, I don't think any of this is actually surprising:

-Gibeau says there is a "sequel idea planned" for "Army of Two" and also for "Battlefield: Bad Company." Which is as close to saying there will indeed be an "Army of Two 2" ("Army of Three?" "Army of Two Squared?") and "Bad Company 2" as we'll probably get until the sequels are officially announced.

-Schofield confirms that EA is "talking to movie studios right now" about a "Dead Space" film. Of course, as I'm always preaching in here, most new videogames are talked about in Hollywood as movies. The question is whether a deal gets done. Variety is looking into that right now, rest assured.

-He also says that EA and a publishing partner are "talking about ['Dead Space'] novels" and that they're also looking into the possibility of "Dead Space" toys. (The perfect gift to mess up your favorite 5 year-old's mind this Christmas!)

-Schofield were pretty casual about mentioning that a "Dead Space" sequel is already in the works (though it could of course be cancelled in the unlikely event that the game bombs).

Creating new IP

Gibeau: We found a few years ago that we had a set of problems where EA's reputation became one of just doing sports games, sequels and licenses and the market was reacting to newer properties like "Grand Theft Auto" and "Halo." We were serializing and overiterating. Also, internally, a lot of creative teams wanted to do their own stuff. They were fed up with following somebody else's rules.

That confluence of factors came into play and we said we need to methodically add new IPS every year and start to change the balance of the portfolio away from being overweighted on sports and movie licenses and toward things like "The Sims..."

Schofield: The focus the whole time [on "Dead Space"] has been on quality. It really has. When you're making a new IP, you're paranoid the whole time. You're not "Madden" You're not a license they just spent $20 million on. You are your own thing. If it's not good, you will be cut.

How new IP gets greenlit

Gibeau: I particularly look for what original core innovations are planned to bring to market. At greenlight, I only have a few rules. Typically, I like to look at ideas that work globally. I don’t like ideas that will only sell in

Europe

Ultimately, you look at the creative team. Are they proven? Do you have confidence in them? The decision  is ultimately based on, "Do you have confidence in those people to deliver or not? Business is the last piece. We typically look at R&D against forecast sales and competitive windows... We also bring into the process early on our global pub organization to get their commitment to get behind titles, so the sales guys don’t say, "I never saw this, I don’t believe in it."

[Who makes the final decision?] Ultimately it’s me and I bring our CEO into the process before the greenlight just to kind of get his ideas on the IP. We've got great feedback from him. Ultimately I make the call on whether to proceed. It's based on collaborating with the studio GM. Sometimes we say it's not time to put it in turnaround but it's not quite the right time [to greenlight]. Maybe the team’s missing key components. So you keep four guys on it to iterate a while longer and see where it goes from there.

Is all this new IP intentded to turn into franchises? Can new games compete commercially with big sequels?

Gibeau: If look at the year "Gears of War" shipped the first time, it was one of the best sellers. "Bad Company" has come out and done very well. "Army of Two" sold very well. We've got sequel ideas planned for those. I feel pretty good about that mix right now. "Assassin's Creed," while it was "Prince of Persia" in a different guise and re-imagined, busted into the charts as an original. In any given year we do have sequels. At one point in time those were originals.

Licensing to other media

Schofield: A lot of times you talk to an executive producer and they say "I'm not going to do that." I’m the complete opposite. I said from the start that if that stuff came up, I’d be for it. It's a way to tell more of your story...

We didn’t even put the EA logo on the comics because we wanted them to stand alone. We got some of the best writers and artists. We didn't approach it as a  marketing tool. This is a comic book. It stood alone, which is the same thing we did with the animated feature. We felt all along if they were not going to do game justice, were not the same quality, we were not going to do it.

With Starz [maker of the animated DVD movie "Dead Space: Downfall"], the first meetings were about doing a documentary on the making of a brand new IP. We knew we had one-and-a-half or two years to go and thought it would be cool to do a "making of." But with the cameras around we couldn't get the best out of our people.

So we said what about an animated feature? That would fit in perfectly and they have their Film Roman division...

There was a lot of coordination between the three products -- a lot of talking, a lot of meetings to get it all right. They had bright people writing. They asked questions I wouldn’t have normally had to answer making the game. But because they asked, because it was important to their media, it made our game better. One guy was like, "When they're cutting the planet, how wide and deep is it? How much does that planet weigh?" Some of that information is now sprinkled into the game. It adds more depth to the game.

The story is better because of the influence of the comics and movie. We have sprinkled details for those who see both.

We're talking right now about novels. We don’t have a toy deal yet, but we're but looking into that.

We're talking with movie studios right now. We have been all along. The difference with this is we need to go in and say, "This is not a $10 million movie." Sure somebody could make it, but that's not what we are looking for. It's an expensive movie. By doing this now, we could have a movie that bridges the gap between the two games.

[Asked how much involvement he would have in a movie]

What we’re doing, say, with movie producers is handpicking our producer. We get approval on the scriptwriter, director and those sorts of things. If we get a AAA director and writer, I'm not going to tell them exactly what to do.

Gibeau: Culturally, prior to [CEO] John [Riccitiello] coming back, extensions of our IP into vehicles such as film or books or TV was frowned upon. People thought it was a distraction to making great games and wedon’t engage in that. It's not something people were thinking about because of that bias. Riccitiello flipped that cultural issue on its side and said, "Look, we’re creating world class IPs here. Our fan base would love to experience or learn more about them in linear forms." And he set it up in such a way that everyone thought it would be additive or exciting as opposed to distracting.

Variety film critic Justin Chang calls the new "Max Payne" movie starring Mark Wahlberg "Stylishly made, armed to the teeth and ludicrous in the extreme." Justin, who's not a gamer but is very sympathetic to geek culture (he wrote my absolute favorite review anywhere of "The Dark Knight" this summer), describes the movie's implementation of the game's signature bullet time as "a hail of bullets that whoosh across the screen in delirious slow-motion," though he later adds, "needless to say, it’s not nearly as much fun as actually playing the game."

The plot? Justin describes it as an "increasingly risible story involving tattooed corpses, Norse mythology, demonic hallucinations and perhaps the weirdest cinematic reference yet to the 'war on terror." That doesn't mean he hates it though: "Before it derails with a climax that seems to have borrowed a few scenes from the 'The Incredible Hulk,' 'Max Payne' strives valiantly to imbue its hoary vigilante-thriller cliches and police-procedural tropes with authentic grit and emotion."

Justin's not too impressed with Mark Wahlberg's portrayal of one of gamers' favorite anti-heroes, saying that the man formerly known as Marky Mark gives a "guarded performance, which (somewhat surprisingly, given the subtle shadings of personality the actor displayed in “Shooter”) fails to make Max Payne the character much of an improvement on Max Payne the avatar."

The entire review's right here.

Starz Entertainment gave me three copies of "Dead Space: Downfall," the animated DVD tie-in to EA's new sci-fi/horror game, to give away to Cut Scene readers. If you don't know too much about it, or want to see what one of Variety's film critics think about it, you can read our review here.

I was trying to think of a way to give them away that requires some effort, but isn't some crazy over the top event involving you guys doing elaborate stunts just to get a DVD. So I figured, why not encourage some intelligent discussion? If you want to win, leave a comment making the case for the best ever videoggame tie-in. Maybe it's a "Resident Evil" movie, a "Halo" book, or even the old after school "Super Mario Bros." show. Or maybe you already know a lot about "Dead Space: Downfall" and are sure that this will be it. There's no right answer. You just have to make an intelligent, compelling argument. On Monday morning I'll read all the entries and pick the ones I found most convincing. Bonus points for brevity.

Just a few simple rules:

-If I know you, you're not eligible

-If you've previously won another giveaway on this blog, you're not eligible

-The movie's unrated and kind of gory, so please be 18 or older. I really don't have a way to check, but I don't want to end up pissing off some 12 year-old's parents

As promised yesterday, we've got a pair of "Dead Space" reviews for Variety readers, starting with the animated direct-to-DVD movie "Dead Space: Downfall," from Anchor Bay. It's essentially an introductory story to the game, telling the tale of the Ishimura up to the moment Isaac Clarke arrives (for true "Dead Space" fanatics, it actually bridges the comic books and game).

I asked one of Variety's film critics, Peter Debruge, to review the movie. He's not a gamer, though he's also not averse to games. His take? It's an all-out gorefest that fans of horror movie and the game might enjoy, but there's not much for anyone else to latch onto:

From the technique side, "Downfall" ain't half bad as small-screen animation goes, with the Film Roman team applying a macho "Venture Bros." style to the futuristic material. That said, it's hard to imagine non-gamers finding much to enjoy in watching the systematic wipeout of the Ishimura crew, which ends precisely when the game starts. Instead of treating this depressing no-one-left-standing story with the heroic-sacrifice bombast of "300" or "The Alamo," director Chuck Patton seems to have made "Downfall" if only to highlight all the ghastly ways humans can die.

Then again, this is a videogame tie-in. And while it's disconcertingly gory, Peter also says it's a step above many of its competitors, even ones with much bigger budgets and a theatrical release:

There's something fundamentally upsetting about a toon that expects audiences to cheer each time one of its human characters meets a grisly fate, although you've got to hand it to the "Downfall" team for the sheer variety of nasty ends they imagine. Likewise, the team deserves credit for the level of detail they've spent defining this world, making for an infinitely more satisfying experience than such retro-fitted vidgame adaptations as "Alone in the Dark" or "Doom."

You can read the entire review right here. And my review of the videogame is here.

One bit of news in this Kotaku interview with the person who I assume is Ari Arad (it says Avi, but then it says he's 33 and that his father is Avi, so I assume the interviewee is actually producer and former Marvel movie chief Avi Arad's son Ari, who works for him): That his company is producing a movie based on Sony's PS3 game "Uncharted."

Variety has written in the past that Avi Arad Productions is working on "Everquest" (already set up at Sony Pictures, "300" scribe Michael Gordon writing a script), "Lost Planet" (to be distributed by Warner Bros., David Hayter currently writing a script) and "Mass Effect" (no studio yet). But the Kotaku story also mentions "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune," which I didn't know Arad has also optioned. No info on any talent or studio being attached. But there's one more project in the burgeoning Arad videogame-to-movie slate.

GameDaily also has an interview with Stuart Beattie, who wrote the first draft of the "Gears of War" script for New Line, about the spec script he wrote for "Halo." However, since it hasn't been approved by Microsoft, let alone set up with a producer or studio, it's currently nothing more than a fan's dream, albeit a talented and well connected fan.

The blogs and videogame "news" sites are all reporting that Brett Ratner is directing Universal's "God of War" movie (here, here, here and here, for instance). Which is true... and old news.

Variety first reported this news way back on Aug. 11 and I even repeated it here on The Cut Scene on Aug. 28. It's not a huge deal, but reporting something as fresh when someone else reported it months ago isn't really the coolest thing for journalists to do.

Plus, consider this some minor self-cheerleading that I think Variety deserves for doing good original reporting way ahead of the pack.

(Had some additional comments that were a little snippy about other videogame journalists in here that I've since cut after reflecting on the fact that... well, they were a little snippy.)

It would be nice if videogame blogs didn't act like it's a big deal when one person says a videogame-to-movie adaptation is "not impossible." Most such adaptations are "not impossible." In fact, the vast majority of videogames that have come out in the past few years and enjoyed even a modicum of success have been looked at by some Hollywood producers and/or executives as a potential movie.

The fact that project director Haden Blackman said "never say never" about that becoming the next "Star Wars" movie doesn't mean much of anything, but of course lots of blogs got worked up anyway. Trust me, I could write daily on this blog about how somebody in the film business is thinking about maybe optioning some videogame. It's only worth even raising an eyebrow (or leaving a comment with your thoughts on how they "better not f*** this one up") if there is at least an option deal (as with "Mass Effect"), or better yet it's actually set up at a studio (like "Bioshock"). Then there is at least a better chance of it turning into a movie than pretty much every other videogame on Earth has.

Everyone who read them knows that videogame bloggers aren't exactly the most open minded, non-judgmental crowd. And everyone who knows the film business knows that getting good Internet buzz with the fans isn't exactly they key to huge box office. If you want a mass market hit, you need to please a much bigger crowd.

Nonetheless, the online reaction to Davis's revelation, in an interview with collider.com, about his take on turning "life simulator" "The Sims" into a movie is probably not a boost for the project. Here's the nutshell of what he said:

The Sims, as you know, you can control your imaginary world, right? And our movie, a young man, a 16 year old kid of a 14 year old kid and his friend get their hands on this thing called the Sims Infinity Pack, right, which kind of this very strange video game store which was there just for that moment, and seemingly wasn’t all that. But what they realize is that they can scan their world in, because this is the most life like, real Sims game ever. And as they are playing this they are all of a sudden realizing is what they are playing on the game is having an effect on the real world. So in effect, through the game, they are able to control their world. It’s wish fulfillment, and obviously it turns against them.

And here's what some of the videogame blogs are saying:

Destructoid: The Sims movie producer John Davis at least recognized that there’s a fundamental difference between the two mediums, although his plans to compensate for it don’t look particularly promising and mostly serve to highlight the pointlessness of bringing videogame franchises to film.

Newsweek's Level Up: [T]he logline of this in-development adaptation of The Sims is rather dispiriting. Not merely for its "Small Soldiers" meets "Jumanji" lack of originality, but also for having shifted the movie's focus to boys from girls.

Wired's Game/Life: Davis' idea might have made sense in 1982 -- assuming there was no completely unrelated videogame license unnecessarily tacked on to the thing -- but with our current, more cynical world, and no useful doppelganger for the gangly geekiness of Anthony Michael Hall, this idea just can't work

Joystiq: It's fucking terrible.

Of course, if you think videogame bloggers are judgmental, they're nothing compared to videogame blog commenters. That's where the real pain comes (trust me, I've been on the receiving end). Suffice it to say the online buzz isn't good.

Given that the "Sims" game franchise has appealed to a much broader audience than those who write and read videogame blogs, and the movie (should it ever get made) is certainly intended to do the same, maybe John Davis and Fox don't care too much about all this. But it probably didn't make their day.

"Mass Effect" has started its journey to the big screen. Numerous sources have confirmed that producer Avi Arad has optioned the rights to Bioware's sci-fi RPG from the developer's parent publisher Electronic Arts.

Turning "Mass Effect" into a movie, or at least trying to do so, is pretty much a no-brainer. Even those who didn't love it would have to admit that it has a lot more meat to its narrative than most games. You've got a hard-ass protagonist, a crusty bureaucracy trying to hold him back, a motley supporting cast, a hugely diverse (if a bit similar looking) bunch of settings, and an alien invasion fueled by technology that nobody but our hero fully understands.

Those are certainly a lot of standard elements for a science-fiction movie. Though "Mass Effect, rather intriguingly, has a main character whose look and personality and even gender can, to some extent, be shaped by the player. So the makers of a movie will have to figure out just who exactly Commander Shephard is.

Arad was for a long time the head of Marvel's movie business, where he helped start the new wave of actually good comic book movie franchises like "X-Men," "Spider-Man," and "Iron Man" (OK, there was "Spider-Man 3" and "Elektra" and "Ghost Rider," but there's still no denying Marvel movies are much improved). Now he runs his own production company and has been getting into videogame adaptations, starting recently with "Lost Planet."

Both EA and Arad declined to comment, but it's a good bet that Avi is right now trying to put together the elements to get a movie going, including a writer, director, and most importantly, setting it up at a studio. When and if that happens, we'll have a lot more insight into just what kind of a movie "Mass Effect" might be.

As for EA, this fits well into its strategy of turning its fully-owned games into multi-media properties (witness the "Dead Space" direct-to-DVD movie, comic books, etc.) Not that there was really any doubt when it spent $860 million to buy Bioware and Pandemic, but I'd say a movie deal is even more evidence that "Mass Effect 2" is in on the way from EA.

Related:

-Capcom making "Lost Planet" movie

-Gore Verbinski talks about making a "Bioshock" movie

I hadn't thought about this before, but it makes perfect sense that Activision Blizzard's clearance sale of all Sierra's assets would work well for Warner Bros. Now that ActiBlizzard is abandoning the F.E.A.R. franchise (it wasn't in that much vaunted list of five surviving franchises), WB was probably able to buy the name, presumably pretty cheap. And so the upcoming "F.E.A.R." sequel being made by Monolith Productions, developer of the original, and published by Monolith's corporate parent WB finally gets the "F.E.A.R." name back. The new name is "F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin." After going through a whole contest to let fans come up with a new "F.E.A.R."-free name for the game when it didn't own the rights, it's nice of Warner Bros. to keep "Project Origin" in there. The game comes out February 10, which is interestingly right about when "Turok" came out last year. Which perhaps makes sense, since based on what I saw at E3, "Project Origin" appears to be, like "Turok," a perfectly solid but not incredibly innovative FPS.

Also of note today, the producer of the "Max Payne" movie has an agreement with 3D Realms to develop a "Duke Nukem" movie, says Kotaku. Now all they need is a take on the movie, a funding source and/or a studio. It's a positive development for "Duke" fans, but not exactly a reason to start lining up at the multiplex in the next five years.

I'll be spending most of the rest of the day playing more "Spore" and "Rock Band 2" to finish those damned reviews, so apologies for light posting...

Back in May, Variety's Marc Graser reported on "Rush Hour" director Brett Ratner's new company Brett Ratner brands and its first (and as of then, only) client, Activision, for which the firm produced several ads that ran during "American Idol."

At the time, Ratner told Variety that he wants to make movies based on games, and as we've already reported, he's currently attached to Universal's "God of War" adaptation.

Now via MTV Multi-Player, we find out that he had another project in mind: "Guitar Hero: the Movie." Apparently the auteur has been working his connections over at Activision, but to no effect:

I'm trying to convince them, but why would you have a movie screw up such a huge franchise? Not that I would make a bad movie.

I think what Ratner meant to say, and what I'm sure Activision is telling him, is why risk making a bad movie? "Guitar Hero" games have grossed over $1.5 billion worldwide and are one of the key franchises on which the entire Activision Blizzard merger is based. The financial benefits of a hit movie are nothing compared to the money the game has made -- and, more importantly, Activision hopes it will make. But the negative impact on the the franchise's public perception if the movie is another "Doom" or "Super Mario Bros." could be pretty severe. So why take the risk?

Plus, Bobby Kotick and the Activision team strike me as pretty conservative business folks who wouldn't at all be tempted by the allure of working with Hollywood just for the sake of getting into a premiere and seeing one of their games on the big screen. Unlike certain other game companies that shall remain unmentioned.

JustJared.com has obtained this first photo of Jake Gyllenhaal on the set of what is, allegedly, Disney's "Prince of Persia" movie. But am I the only one who thinks he's looking more appropriate for another videogame-based movie... a classic of my childhood... a little interactive masterpiece called "Caveman Games?"

Think about it, Disney. I'm sure you could rewrite the script in no time.

(This shot, courtesy of Flickr, is from my favorite event in the game: the wife toss)

Scratch out that date on your calendar, "Prince of Persia" fans. Disney has pushed back its movie version starring Jake Gylllenhaal and directed by Mike Newell from June 19, 2009 to May 28, 2010. No word yet on the reasons. Apparently it's not a delay in getting started, since production has already begun.

As Dave McNary reports in tomorrow's Daily Variety, Legendary Pictures has come on board New Line's "Gears of War" movie to co-finance and co-produce.

Sound like boring Hollywood inside baseball? It is, in a sense. But it's also good news for fans who want the "Gears" movie to see the light of day and not end up another "Halo."

Legendary co-finances a lot of the biggest movies at Warner Bros., including a little film that came out recently called "The Dark Knight." Though it's no guarantee, Legendary doesn't tend to sign onto tentative, early development projects. And in fact, its agreeing to split the budget with New Line (which recently became a label within Warner Bros.) makes it much more likely that "Gears of War" will actually get made.

Thomas Tull, the head of Legendary, is not only a film guy, but also the co-founder of Brash Entertainment and very into videogames. Besides "Dark Knight," they have also co-financed "300" and "Batman Begins" and are adapating a property you might have heard of called "World of Warcraft." They know how to make movies aimed at the geek gamer crowd.

As we previously reported, Len Wiseman, who directed the fairly awesome "Live Free or Die Hard," is attached to direct "Gears." With a director and a co-financier, there's a lot of momentum behind the "Gears of War" movie now. If all keeps going well, I wouldn't be surprised to see it in theaters in 2010 (perhaps around the same time as a "Gears of War 3?").

Running in tomorrow's Daily Variety but online now:

Capcom is making a "Lost Planet" movie. The publisher is teaming up with producer Avi Arad, who used to run Marvel Pictures, and has a distribution deal with Warner Bros.

David Hayter, who wrote two "X-Men" movies and the upcoming adaptation of "Watchmen," and who of course we gamers know as the voice of Solid Snake in "Metal Gear Solid," is writing the script.

Arad is producing with his son Ari and partner Steven Paul through Seaside Entertainment, a production company they formed to make fantasy and sci-fi fare.

Capcom has been the busiest vidgame publisher in terms of adapting movies. It's got a fourth "Resident Evil" in the works with Sony, "Onimusha" with Paramount, and the new "Street Fighter" with Hyde Park (Fox is distributing). As with "Street Fighter," Capcom is expected to co-finance the "Lost Planet" movie. It's not clear yet if Warner Bros. will be kicking in the rest of the money or someone else.

Though the story was pretty cliched in the game, "Lost Planet" at least has one, as well as a cool visual setting (shades of Hoth), so there's no reason it couldn't be a good movie. On its face it certainly is a much more obvious adaptation than "Street Fighter."

No word on when the movie's coming out, though whenever it is, I'd say it's a safe bet it'll be along with the inevitable "Lost Planet 2." (Just as "Street Fighter IV" is probably coming out with the movie next winter)

Not to ruin any surprises, but for anyone wondering what's going to be the big announcement at Capcom's E3 press conference on Tuesday... now you know.

I'm back and catching up. Here's some of the big videogame news last week that I missed...

-Mario Puzo's grandson is suing Paramount to get a cut of the profits from the "Godfather" game.

-"Underworld" director Len Wiseman is now attached to direct "Gears of War" at New Line. This is good news, at least for those who want to see the "Gears" movie happen, since once New Line was downsized and folded into Warner Bros, there was reason to worry whether the project would survive. Apparently it is and by attaching a fairly big director, the new New Line is signalling it's still a priority.

-After the rather dismal showing exhibitor- and fan-wise at last year's E for All, IDG had some good news by announcing that Microsoft has signed on. With "Gears of War 2" coming this holiday season, that'll be at least one really big draw for gamers. And it's probably the reason why the show's October timing works well for Microsoft.

-EA's bid for Take-Two got extended for a fourth time and the latter company has finally reached a deal to turn over all the material the FTC wants to investigate the proposed agreement. And Take-Two chairman Strauss Zelnick continues to be uninterested. What exactly does EA think is the endgame in all this? Fascinating.

-Longtime EALA chief Neil Young, who has recently been heading up the mysterious new Blueprint group focused on developing new content in new ways, has left EA to work at his own company. I had been hearing he was unhappy and trying to land a new job for the past few months. Company vet Louis Castle is taking over Blueprint, which is in charge of the Steven Spielberg games, amongst other things.

Variety film reporter Marc Graser has helped me out with some reporting and we've confirmed that Disney, which publisher the "Turok" game, is apparently not developing a "Turok" movie.

The film is apparently being developed by Classic Media, an IP management firm that controls the rights to "Turok," along with Casper the Friendly Ghost, the Longe Ranger, and other old cartoons and comic books. (I haven't been able to reach Classic Media to confirm their exact plans yet.)

The absence of major studio involvement is one more reason for fans to be really cautious when reading all those crazy blog posts (all of which are based entirely on this one) about how Adam Beach's off-hand comment is proof that a "Turok" movie is happening. Without major studio involvement, raising the money to make a full on live-action film is even more of a challenge. It's possible, of course, or it's possible they're thinking low budget direct-to-DVD.  Classic Media did produce a direct-to-DVD "Turok" animated film that came out earlier this year (pictured left).

So, dear readers, this isn't exactly getting made in the way that "Prince of Persia" or even "Bioshock" are. Take all these reports with a huge grain of salt.

MTV is reporting that "Turok" v/o star Adam Beach said there's talk of turning Disney's first M-rated videogame into a movie. Here's the quote from MTV's movies blog:

“We just finished the animated movie and now we’re going into the feature film movie [which should lens] hopefully in a couple years. We’re about to set up meetings to develop a script and put it out there,” Beach enthused. “I’ll have to beef up, and be a good guy, and save the world!”

As is always the case with such projects, I'd advise fans to be extremely cautious. MTV"s headline ("EXCLUSIVE: Adam Beach to star in live action Turok movie") is the kind of over-the-top headline that people who don't know much about the movie business typically write.

What Beach actually said in the quote is that they are setting up meetings to develop a script. Keep in mind that there are dozens of meetings every day to develop scripts. Only a fraction of those turn into good scripts and a fraction of those actually get made as movies. And even that tiny faction often have big changes along the way in terms of talent, concept, etc.

All that being said, it's interesting that a "Turok" movie is even being talked about. And given that the game was published by Disney Interactive Studios, it's likely being developed (if it's even at that stage yet) by Walt Disney Pictures (under the Touchstone label, I'm sure, just as the game was).

We'll be looking into it here at Variety to see if there's anymore more to a "Turok" film than a few people talking. But I can assure you already that proclamations that it's happening and the star is set are a tad premature.

Related:
-Variety's review of "Turok"
-"Turok" released through Touchstone

Breaking news in Variety... Bruce Willis is confirmed to play Kane in Lionsgate's movie based on "Kane and Lynch."

I was a really big "Kane and Lynch" fan (if it only had online co-op it would have been one of my favorites of the 2007), and was particularly into the characterization and story, so I think it has real potential to be a solid movie.

It's also interesting to see Lionsgate taking it on. The studio is typically known for low budget stuff, but it's my understanding this will be their biggest movie to date. Bruce Willis doesn't come cheap, you know.

Now that we know Willis is the grizzled Kane, the question is who'll play the psychotic sidekick Lynch? Rumors for a while have been that Billy Bob Thornton would play the role, which is pretty much perfect casting as far as I'm concerned -- Willis and Thornton even look the parts. But according to Variety's ace film reporter Michael Fleming (who helped me break the "Bioshock" story last month), the studio still hasn't set anyone. Which means either that Billy Bob isn't close to having a deal or he's not going to do it and they're looking for someone else.

In other videogame-based movie casting news, Alfred Molina and Ben Kingsley are joining Jake Gyllenhaal in Disney's "Prince of Persia," Which makes sense, since they're probably the two most prominent older actors in Hollywood who can easily play Persian.

Related links:
-Willis Game for "Kane and Lynch" (hey, I don't write the headlines)
-Alfred Molina joins "Prince of Persia"
-Universal doing Bioshock movie, Gore Verbinski directing
-Variety's review of "Kane and Lynch: Dead Men"

So, after promises it would best "Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull" and subsequent worries it would only come out on four theaters, how much did Uwe Boll's "Postal" actually make on its opening weekend?

The world may never know. I just checked in with Variety's box office experts who put together our authoritative reports and it turns out wehave no clue. In good news for Uwe, apparently the final theater count for the movie around the country was 13, which is at least better than the four figure that got bandied about last week.

But Variety doesn't have a weekend gross for "Postal" and neither (I just checked) does Rentrak, the box office service that most entertainment industry pro's subscribe to. The reason is quite simple: Apparently Uwe Boll's self-distribution operation didn't report any numbers.

This is very unusual, even for movies that bomb. Any company that wants to be taken semi-seriously in Hollywood has to release its box office grosses at least to Rentrak, if not to the press, every week. Which is why we get accurate grosses even for movies that bomb like "Speed Racer." But for "Postal?" Nothing. Whatever the movie made, Uwe doesn't want us to know. And he doesn't even care that he's making himself look like an ass the next time he tries to get a movie released and somebody in Hollywood or at a theater chain asks "So what did 'Postal' gross?"

I'd venture to say the answer is "not very much."

Weirdly, I ended up finding out about this very unusual detail in a Variety story this week in GameSpot.

As it turns out, in the middle of an article from the Cannes Film Festival about Crystal Sky Pictures raising $200 million to invest in five films is this shocking detail:

Other films in the Grosvenor Park-funded slate include an adaptation of Richard Branson's memoir "Losing my Virginity," a bigscreen adaptation of vidgame "Pac-Man," and a sequel to John Woo's actioner "Hard Boiled.

Obviously the idea of making a "Pac Man" at all is exceedingly, well, weird, especially in the year 2008, when the little yellow guy isn't exactly too relevant. Hell, he makes the idea of a "Street Fighter" movie look positively cutting edge.

Crystal Sky is very well financed independent production company that has been involved in everything from the upcoming "Castlevania" film to "Ghost Rider" to "Baby Geniuses."

I'm going to try and get in touch with them and find out what's up with a "Pac-Man" movie, partially for all you guys, but mainly because I'm quite frankly fascinated.

Variety's Marc Graser has the scoop: Jake Gyllenhaal will star as Dastan, the lead character in Disney's adaptation of Ubisoft's "Prince of Persia."

Gemma Arterton (right) will be the female lead, Tamina. You probably haven't heard of her, but Disney is betting you will after she stars in the new Bond movie, "Quantum of Solace," this fall.

For those who don't remember, Mike Newell ("Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," "Four Wedding and a Funeral," and one of my all time favorite, "Donnie Brasco") is directing. Jerry Bruckheimer is producing (you probably know who he is) and it's scheduled to come out next summer.

Get all the details on Variety.com.

Lots of people in Hollywood have been itching to make a "Bioshock" movie pretty much since last August, as I wrote on here a few months ago.

Finally, that interest has turned to reality. Universal has struck a deal with Take-Two to make the "Bioshock" movie. "Pirates of the Caribbean" helmer Gore Verbinski will direct and produce. "Aviator" and "Star Trek: Nemesis" screenwriter John Logan will adapt.

If you haven't read it yet, get all the details in my story, which runs in tomorrow's Daily Variety and is already online. There are a lot of details there about the financial terms, how it's connected to the "Halo" movie, the key players, how the deal came together, etc., that I won't repeat here. Seriously, just read it.

For Cut Scene readers, however, I have more. Are you wondering how Verbsinski is going to treat your beloved "Bioshock?" Why he wanted to make it into a movie? How much he's collaborating with the game's creative director Ken Levine? I got on the phone with him today to get you guys some answers. Enjoy, and share your thoughts in the comments.

Me: How did this come about? What first got you interested in "Bioshock?"

Gore Verbsinski: I was hanging out a lot with Ken Levine talking about gaming in general and I heard from Ken directly that they were thinking about making a movie.

Of all the games out there, I think "Bioshock" is the one that's the most engaging. I think the whole utopia-gone-wrong story that's cleverly unveiled to players is brimming with cinematic potential.

Me: It's pretty obvious that the game has some amazing visuals that might look great in a movie. What about the story? Do you want to carry that over as well?

GV: Fans of the game will not be disappointed. Of course, it's just like anything else that you adapt. If you create a film from a game you have to break some of the game's rules and do the best job you can, because they're completely different. We can’t possibly put 30 hours of gameplay into a two hour movie. So we have to make some tough choices.

We want to take all the strengths from the property. Of all the games I’ve played, this is the one that I felt has a really strong narrative.

Me: Given all the effects that might might be involved, do you see this movie being as big and epic as "Pirates of the Caribbean?"

GV: I don’t think it'll be on that scale. Of course, with "Bioshock" there are no locations I can go to. We have to build it. We'll cleverly use matte paintings and all the technology we have to achieve a great deal of scale without actually building everything.

It's a much more intimate story than "Pirates." Although its an adventure, it’s a dramatic adventure. I see it more along the lines of "Blade Runner."

Me: You obviously have a relationship with Ken Levine. How involved do you expect him to be with the film?

GV: Right now I'm talking a lot with John Logan about it. But Ken and I speak on a regular basis in terms of what characters we feel are working well and where he feels things should be different in a movie. This is a great asset to pick up the phone and call. He has been very open to it. I look forward to continuing that relationship.

Me: The game has some very disturbing moments that present moral choices to the player in the form of the Little Sisters. How much of that do you want to present in the film?

GV: I think we'll go right up to the edge with the Little Sisters. I don’t want to soften it to the point where the core audience feels betrayed. At the same time, the gameplay is completely different than it will be for an audience watching.

The movie audience’s imagination is a lot more graphic if you let them imagine it. We'll have to be really clever with that.

Me: So given that, do you expect the movie would be rated R just as the game was M?

GV: We're prepared to make it an R-rated movie. I don’t intuitively see it as PG-13. The content and the graphic nature of the story itself is smarter than that. It's not for young kids.

The utopian references and the way the characters and world are drawn in that delightfully inspired Jules Verne and Ayn Rand style places the film in a more elevated realm. It's the realm of a graphic novel. It has to have that edge.

There's sort of that "Manchurian Candidate" psychological element in there as well.

Me: So should we expect to see a lot the same settings from the game?

GV: I hope we can take it to the next level. It's one thing that I think probably will change for the better. But only in the sense that in gameplay, everything's smaller because you have to build it all so players physically do things like ascend stairs. In a film we have time cuts. So we can make the places a little more vast and less claustrophobic

Me: Any thoughts on how you'll make the Big Daddys? Will they be CG created or can you make costumes?

GV: We could go either way. Typically when you get too burdened with animatronics, it slows down filming, especially knowing what we can do these days with computers. That being said, there's no substitute for an actor reacting. It's always a delicate balance. We'll probably end up with a hybrid.

Me: So is this the next project you'll be working on? When do you anticipate starting?

GV: I'll be starting to work on it immediately as soon as we get a script  that's worthy. We'll then move actively into pre-production. I wouldn’t put a time schedule on it so much as to say I'm jumping in with a full commitment.

Me: Will you be talking to the folks developing "Bioshock 2?" Do you see any crossover between the two or are you focused on the first game?

GV: The only crossover will be ensuring that we don’t do anything destructive to the IP.

Me: Since it's a first person game, we don't get to know the protagonist that well in the game. What are your thoughts on the main character of the film?

GV: I think ultimately he has to do with the concept of free will. We will be designing him on that idea. It will be a character who adamantly believes he does have free will.

Me: You recently spoke at D.I.C.E. and seem to be getting very interested in videogames in general. Besides the "Bioshock" film, are you interested in moving the other direction and getting more involved in making games?

GV: I’m continually fascinated with videogames as interactive entertainment: this idea that the audience is the protagonist. I think there is a whole form of narrative ready to be born.

It has been fun talking to different designers, going to Blizzard, meeting Ken. I hope to make it up to Valve. "Portal" is one of my favorites. For now, it's just an open dialogue about how far we can push this thing. 

The trailer for Uwe Boll's "Postal" just debuted on IGN and I suppose we should be fair... it looks really bad, but it's not quite the worst thing I've ever seen. If this were a late night cable movie or even direct-to-DVD, I might even say it looks like it has its charm. The Bush impersonator doesn't sound at all like the president, and the inclusion of Osama Bin Laden seems beyond insane, and seeing Dave Foley makes me cringe with sympathy, not laugh with fond remembrances of "NewsRadio" and "Kids in the Hall"... but still, at least it's cut like a real trailer and has a few vaguely amusing moments. That's honestly better than I expected after Bloodrayne. Maybe Uwe is actually improving?

Lots of people are talking about Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello's comments in the Financial Times today that are pretty confident/cocky about the status of videogames as opposed to movies and TV. They're also, I think, misguided if not totally wrong:

"The buzz in Hollywood, which I heard from some Hollywood folks . . . is people are worried whether Iron Man the movie is going to get killed by Grand Theft Auto the game," says the chief executive of Electronic Arts, the world's biggest video game publisher.

"I don't think I've ever heard of that before."

The 48-year-old believes this reversal of fortunes represents a big change rather than a blip: "There is more interest today from Hollywood to make movies out of our games than there is interest in our industry to make games out of their movies. There's a big reset happening now."

As to the first statement, it's undeniably true that people in Hollywood are asking to what extent the "Grand Theft Auto IV" launch is going to impact other media, including the opening of "Iron Man." I'll be writing a story about that as part of a "GTA IV" package coming soon. If it's the first time Riccitiello has heard talk like that, though, he wasn't listening too closely when "Halo 3" came out last year during TV premiere week, to take just one other example that had people in this town buzzing.

More importantly, however, that second statement is just not supported by the facts, I think. Sure, recently we've seen  "Resident Evil," "Doom," "Silent Hill," and there are projects like "Gears of War," "World of Warcraft," and EA's own "Dead Space." And a few big games like "Bioshock" and "Assassin's Creed" are, I hear, on Hollywood's radar.

But let's compare that to just the past six months of games based on movies or TV shows... "Lost," "Jumper," "The Spiderwick Chronicles," "Alvin and the Chipmunks," "The Golden Compass," "Pirates of the Caribbean Online," "Beowulf," "Bee Movie Game," various "High School Musical" games, "The Simpsons," an endless array of "Spider-Man" and "Star Wars" and "Lord of the Rings" games... Need I go on?

Just as illustrative: This summer there will be videogames based on movies like "Prince Caspian," "Kung Fu Panda," "Speed Racer," "Iron Man," "The Incredible Hulk," "Wall*E," "Space Chimps," and "Indiana Jones" (well, a Lego version of it anyway). How many movies based on video games? Ummmm... Zero.

It is true that Hollywood's becoming more and more interested in adapting videogame properties, though it has yet to do so really succesfully. But there's no evidence I can see that videogames are becoming less interested in adapting big Hollywood properties -- even at Riccitiello's own EA, home of "Lord of the Rings," "Harry Potter," "The Simpsons," and the Steven Spielberg deal.

So, something of a change in momentum? Sure. A "big reset?" I don't think so.

The producers of the "Street Fighter" movie have launched a new website to blog about production, which is ongoing right now in Bangkok. First revelation: it's called "Street Fighter: the Legend of Chun-Li." I knew the movie focused on Chun-Li, but I didn't know that was the name. Maybe everybody knew that and I'm just ignorant.

The first blog entry goes over the casting we already know about, notes that Michael Clarke Duncan stands out a bit on the streets of Bangkok, and provides a little snippet of a storyboard. There's also the promise of a new casting revelation coming soon.

Check it out here.

Update: It looks like the blog has since been taken down. Oh well, hopefully some of you got to see it while it lasted. And hopefully it will be back up for you to enjoy soon. I'll keep the link up in case that happens.

Update 2 (4/10): The site is back. But now it has a different logo for the movie title. Perhaps it got taken down the first time because someone at Capcom or Hyde Park or whatever didn't approve of the original logo. Unfortunately I didn't save the original.

[Note: Screenwriter Justin Marks, a friend of The Cut Scene, is back with another guest column. This one, cross-posted on GameSetWatch, is about why Hollywood's relationship with the videogame world isn't nearly as dysfuncational as many people think... and why we could see some good movies based on games coming soon.]

I remember when the new STREET FIGHTER movie was first announced.  The internet went ballistic.  And not necessarily in a good way.

On the very same day that someone was green-lighting a reboot of a franchise already believed to bear the mark of Jean-Claude Van Damme, Peter Jackson announced that his adaptation of HALO, a daring game series, was being dropped by the major Hollywood studios.  Boy, these guys just can't get it right.  They dump HALO and give us another STREET FIGHTER movie. Unbelievable.

Well, to quickly answer this criticism in biased terms, STREET FIGHTER isn't your ordinary game adaptation.  It's a gritty, realistic character piece (if I don't say so myself) that just happens to use characters taken from a video game.  All hype aside, it's going to be a very different game-to-movie adaptation and I urge everyone to go see it when it comes out next year.

But I don't want to talk about STREET FIGHTER right now.  It's worth discussing because I genuinely believe the producers on that film got it right, but maybe in another column.  For now I want to address a much larger issue that faces the gaming community... how to deal with this perception that Hollywood is pissing all over our favorite properties.

The relationship between games and movies is a tough one.  I've seen it firsthand.  As a lifelong gamer who was fortunate enough to find a corner in the screenwriting community, I've often straddled both sides of this fence.

For starters, and I hate to say this, but the fanboys used to be right.  There was a time when the movie business just didn't get video games.  No one had yet grown up on them. Filmmakers saw games as inane and often shallow experiences that didn't deserve serious treatment.  Thinking back to DOUBLE DRAGON or SUPER MARIO BROTHERS (shudder), it's not hard to see what the problem was.  The users of these games were pre-adolescent children (or teenagers who acted like them), so why should we make a serious movie for them?

But things have gotten better over the years.  A lot better.  Contrary to the message-board-driven fantasy that "Hollywood is screwing up my childhood," this mystical "Hollywood" is actually a real place, filled with executives and creative people who are now young enough to have grown up during the Golden Age of Nintendo.  I know this because I work with these people every day and play with them on Xbox Live every night.  I call it the Nerd Hollywood.  They're genuinely smart people.  And they genuinely want to make good movies.

For an analogy, think about the state of comic book movies a little more than ten years ago.  Before BLADE came out, nobody believed that comic books could be taken seriously.  Now we have franchises like X-MEN and BATMAN BEGINS.  That's because the people making those movies grew up on comics and knew they should be considered an adult medium.  The new generation had taken over.

And that's what's ready to happen in the world of game-to-film adaptations.  I'm not saying you should expect MARIO BEGINS in theaters anytime soon, but the time is upon us for some hot and heavy game movies.

And yet here's the rub.  The gaming world isn't holding up its end of the bargain.  Fans (and publishers, to some extent) are still resisting Hollywood with territorial reluctance, thinking that if they give away a game's rights to a studio, Hollywood will inevitably "piss all over our childhood."  Part of this is because there's been a past pattern.  That's fair.  But it's also because the game community fundamentally believes filmmakers just don't understand why games are so great, and if they would only directly and literally translate a game to film, it would succeed beyond all expectations.

Frankly, in the case of most games, this is just not true.  We all need to take a long look in the mirror and realize that there are very few mainstream game franchises that could stand next to the best comics of the 1980's, or the best movies ever.  And yes, SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS and PORTAL are hands-down better than most anything out there, but no one is playing those games.  What is the mainstream audience playing? HALO 3.

So let's talk about HALO.

First of all, I love the HALO franchise.  Master Chief's action figure is sitting on my desk right now as I type.  For any doubters out there, simply click here. HALO is the gold standard for our community.  Ethereal, epic, with great setpieces and some wonderful aesthetics.  We should all be so lucky as to make a game as good as that.

Master Chief has been trying to make it to the big screen for a few years now.  I've read the scripts. Some of them aren't bad.  But Hollywood, even Nerd Hollywood, has failed to green-light this film.  And it's not like they're throwing a bunch of hacks at it.  We're talking about Peter Jackson.  He's no slouch.  If they won't make HALO with Peter Jackson producing, clearly Hollywood is just out of touch with what the world wants, right?

Think of how great a HALO movie would be if they made it exactly like the game was (which is part of the deal Bungie has fought for).  Imagine showing up to the theater on Friday night to see the first showing.  Fade in.  Outer space.  A giant star cruiser sails into frame, dropping from it a flying convoy that descends into an alien planet's outer atmosphere.  We touch down in a foreign world and the door slams open.  Badass space marines jump out, pulse rifles locked, cocked, and ready to rock.  They engage in some funny banter, then march into a futuristic complex built by a community that's since disappeared.  After a few suspenseful minutes of "what the hell happened here?", the creatures start appearing.  Nasty aliens, who don't take no for an answer, begin to tear the space marines apart.  A wild gunfight ensues.

Sounds like a pretty cool movie, right?

That's because it already was a movie.  I just described the opening hour of James Cameron's ALIENS.

Ready for some heresy?  As great a game as HALO is, and as much as it deserves to be a true benchmark for this industry's success, when you take away the awesome gameplay and reduce it to character and story, we've really seen it before.  Don't start screaming on the message boards yet.  Take a long, hard look, because this is true of a lot of popular games out there.  On a story level, they often take place in familiar worlds and lack the character work (read: compelling enough to make a movie star want to be in the movie) that would elevate them above the level of a good genre film.

Peter Jackson probably has a bold vision for HALO, but he's going to have to do some bold-re-envisioning to make it work.  The standards that make a good game (complex sci-fi world, silent hero, more emphasis on repetitive action) are not the same standards that make a good movie.  Neither standard is inherently better or worse --- they're just different.  And that means a film adaptation can't just be a carbon copy of its source material.  It has to be inspired, sometimes with new ideas.  To inject these new ideas, the filmmakers risk pissing off fans who want the movie to be exactly what the game was.  And thus begins message board backlash.  Hence the Catch-22.

Why does the movie have to reach more than just the gamer audience? Because movies cost an awful lot of money to make.  HALO alone would cost roughly $200 million.  To gain its gross back, you'd have to generate about half a billion dollars' worth of revenue.  HALO 3, the game, made $170 million in 24 hours.  Break that down and it comes to roughly 2.8 million rabid fans lining up to buy it.  Multiply 2.8 million fans by the average cost of a movie ticket, 10 dollars, and you have an opening weekend of $28 million.  Let's even be generous and say half those guys brought a date.  $40 million opening weekend.  Spend $200 million dollars on that and you're looking at one of the biggest flops since ISHTAR.  People lose jobs.  Game over.

If HALO were to be a success --- and Peter Jackson's a smart guy, he knows this --- it's got to be more than a genre film. It's got to appeal to a much bigger audience than just us hardcore gamers.  Girls have got to see it.  Our parents have got to see it. They've got to see it twice.  And take the whole family.

So how do we solve this problem?   

We've got to look at adaptations as what they are... an opportunity to adjust the source material to suit it to a new medium.  A chance to take a great game and make it into a great movie.  That means as a game community, we've got to be open to new ideas being applied to properties that we consider perfect as-is.  And as a film community, we've got to be willing to take more risks.  To believe that a game should be considered art, and that a movie should honor that. 

IGN went all out and then some for April Fools, making a trailer for the non-existent "Legend of Zelda" movie that looks  like it could be a real trailer for a tentpole film. It's paced like one, has similar graphics, and the same kind of shots, music, voiceover, etc. Sure, the effects aren't quite up to par, the makeup on Ganon isn't great, and the guy playing Link is kinda ugly, but it's still really impressive. I particularly love how they integrated so many details from the game, like spin attacks and a quiet moment with the horse.

Also amusing on this April Fool's Day, blog The Minus World has "cast" a "Super Smash Bros. Brawl" movie. James Gandolfini as Mario, Ryan Seacrest as the Pokemon trainer, Artie Lang as Wario. Particularly inspired (and yes, these are kind of mean): Rosie O'Donnell as Bowser, Larry Wachowski as Zelda/Sheik, and my favorite, Richard Simmons as Diddy Kong. Take a look.

As most Cut Scene readers probably know already, Starz Media recently signed a pretty unique deal with EA to produce an animated TV/direct-to-dvd film tied into this fall's new sci-fi/horror game "Dead Space." We've seen lots of movies based on videogames before, of course, but usually they come out after the game's a hit. This is the first I know of that is being done "on spec" in order to be released along with the game. Starz is basically banking that EA really does have a hit franchise on its hands.

Since this deal is right where The Cut Scene lives (not physically, but philosophically -- you know what I mean), I figured you would all want to know more about it. So I got on the phone with Scott Greenberg, president of Starz-owned Film Roman, which is producing the "Dead Space" movie, to talk more about it:

The Cut Scene: How did this deal come about? Who approached who? Why did you find it interesting?

Scott Greenberg:  It got started a little over two years ago when I reached out to EA. We were looking for new sources of ideas. I believe and we at Film Roman felt that videogames -- the way comic books have become a source of stories in the past years -- games have the same influence. They're another great source to tap into.

But it had to be the right way to do it. I worked closely with two guys in EA's business affairs group. We got to know the different games. We had to find right product to start off. They want to get the motor going on original IP. They are the best at games we feel we're the best at animation. So we figured it would be a good match.

"Dead Space" is something they told us about from the get go. We started developing a film with them over a year ago as a prequel. I would go with them to every studio and meet people, see what games they have. Some don’t make sense as movies. There are a couple of others we have in development more as series for kids.

We really wanted to figure out how to develop together. They do their story and we do ours. Somebody have great experience playing game and also a great experience watching it for  more background. There will be enough links so gamers can enjoy it, but at the same time the film stands alone if you don't play the games. 

We had time to get to know each other and built trust. "Dead Space" is a game that's at the right place with the timing and we just worked closely to start develop script with their characters. It's a great one to launch off of. Then we'll do more hopefully

TCS: How did you come up with the story for the film? How much were they involved with it?

SG: They have a very detailed bible. It's basically "'Alien' meets 'Doom' in space." To get there, though, there's a whole mythology they built behind it. In the game there are planets with  markings that unleash holy hell. We said, "Is there a parallel story?" There was some mutual brainstorming. We said it would be really interesting to tell a prequel story. Where the movie ends, the game picks right up.

We found a bunch of writers who they met and interviewed. Together we picked Jimmy Palmiotti, who writes comic books. As we started doing our story, the development of the game was always evolving. That’s cool for us. As they're producing sound effects we're using stuff they have. We have their world and their designs. That's a huge jump start to take their assets. We had a meeting two weeks ago with their producer and our director going over some scripts storyboards.

On the marketing side, these guys are the best marketers out there. They're working closely with our sales people. This will be an event. Like a motion picture release. They're building a brand and we're coordinating that as we approach TV partners in the U.S. and worldwide. It will be a tie-in to the release of game. The whole thing will come out like a big "Dead Space" event. That’s exciting to me because it provides exposure for both sides. We'll help drive game sales and they'll help drive TV and  homevideo.

TCS: How will the windows work? What will the timing be from the TV debut to homevideo, or vice-versa?

SG: That's still being worked out. The goal right now is to release it on homevideo day-and-date with the game around Halloween. We'd premiere the movie on TV in mid-late September or early October. So it would be a short window. But it depends on the needs and wants of our partners. That's being worked out right now.

TCS: What would the rating be, since the game looks like it will be an M?

SG: On DVD we might be able to push it (to an R). The TV version has to be able to play in prime time cable.

TCS: Will the film be CGI ?

SG: There will be CG backgrounds. CG vehicles and CG props from the games. So the world is CG, they we are animating the characters and other things we insert in 2-D.

TCS: Is Starz fully financing the film? Is EA involved with that at all?

SG: I don’t want to comment on the deal terms. But it's a beneficial relationship for everybody.

TCS: Will you use the same voice actors as the game?

SG: Yes. And we are involved in the voice casting.

TCS: Might you sell the game and movie together as one package?

SG: Possibly. Everything’s on the table. Everybody is looking for the best way to market this.  Co-packaging is a possibility, but nothing is planned as of yet.

TCS: What's your overall goal for your relationship with EA?

SG: I want to do a lot of things with them. I hope this is the first of many. In my view, it's a long term relationship. I hope we can do more event movies. We're talking about animated series for kids. This could also move into the live action space for other parts of Starz. EA has a mandate to build properties and expand into the traditional entertainment world. We think it's smart to be in that space and we want to be there with them.

But we're not in business with them to sell games. We're not a marketing company for them. We're here to make great entertainment of our own.

[Interview edited for length, grammar, etc.]

As part of its presentation to analysts today, Take-Two Interactive presented a few "potential untapped opprtunities" in markets it hasn't yet entered, including MMO's and mobile, as well as licensing to "traditional" media or, I assume, producing itself.

On a slide that was part of its presentation, which I copied above, it even named some potential names, noting that "Bioshock" and "Civilization" could both make great MMOs and that "Bioshock" and "Carnival Games" could work as mobile games.

These are only possiblities, of course, and not reason for fanboys to start clearing space on their hard drives or buying a powerful new phone. Given the way analyst presentations work, I take it as more Take-Two demonstrating to those in attendance that it can move into these markets if/when it is ready, because it has properties that would translate well. It's not a hint that the "Bioshock" MMO is actually in development.

As for the "Bioshock" movie, that should be a big "duh" to Cut Scene readers. As I wrote last month, "Take-Two has been bombarded with  requests from producers and studios interested in obtaining the rights, agents interested in representing them, etc." The only question is which big name is going to get the rights. And whether Take-Two will try to get commercially/creatively involved itself, possibly investing its own money.

Also of note: Executive Chairman Strauss Zelnick said that online play is becoming increasingly important. "Not all of our games have been multi-player," he noted. "Going forward, the bulk of them will be."

My immediate thought? I can't wait to play "Bioshock 2" online multi-player next year. I want to be the Big Daddy.

Is Uwe Boll the gift that keeps on giving to journalists or what?

The infamously awful director of videogame-based movies like "Bloodrayne," "Alone in the Dark," and most recently "In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale," has apparently scheduled his new film, "Postal," to open against "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" on May 23. And horror website Bloody Disgusting quotes him in an e-mail boasting he's going to take down that over-the-hill hack Spielberg:

On the Indiana Jones weekend - May 23 - we will go out and destroy Indiana Jones in the Box Office! We all know that Harrison Ford is older as my grandpa and his time is up - would Michael Moore say! ... Spielberg gets sloppy. We saw that with War of the Worlds (why the fuck the older brother survived?) and also in parts of Jaws, E.T., Munich etc.! My performance in Postal as 'Nazi Theme Park Owner' outperforms easily Ben Kingsley in Schindler's List!

No official response yet from Spielberg, who is most likely furiously begging Paramount to reschedule his movie, or possibly just give up and release it directly to DVD.

For those not familiar, "Postal" and its better known sequel are ultra-violent PC games about an anonymous guy who, basically, "goes postal." They were published by obscure (possibly no longer around) companies Whiptail Interactive and Ripcord Games, which perhaps explains how Boll got the rights, since no legitimate videogame publisher would deal with him anymore, I assume. Here's the amazing description of the movie, which sounds very socially relevant, that Bloody Disgusting got:

Living on Social Security and unemployed, DUDE desperately seeks employment, but instead finds a life of violent action and adventure when he teams up with his UNCLE DAVE, a financially strapped cult leader, in an effort to rip off an amusement park, only to find that the Taliban are trying the same heist simultaneously.

Worth noting: The lifetime domestic gross for all of Uwe Boll's videogame adaptations, according to Box Office Mojo, is about $23 million. I have a feeling that's about what Paramount and Spielberg are aiming for on their opening Saturday with the new Indiana Jones.

Variety has the exclusive scoop:

Chun-Li: "Smallville's" Kristin Kreuk (right)

Balrog: Michael Clarke Duncan

Nash: Chris Klein

Gen: Rick Yune

Still waiting for the perfect Bison in the movie, which focuses on Chun-Li and starts production next month. Read all the details here.