David Jaffe: Uncharted movie director is a "f*cking dick" and "trained monkey", but the film will be fine

Mark Wahlberg, hmm? Excited about seeing him play a guy called Nathan in an unrecognisable film that just happens to have the word "Uncharted" in the title? No? Well don't worry. The Uncharted movie is going to be fine. David Jaffe says so. Twitter has proven this. Yeah, he's called out Director David O. Russell as "a f*cking dick", and complained of stale Hollywood thinking when it comes to adaptations, but he still thinks it'll all be fine. We think. Probably.

Discussing the obvious issue that Wahlberg neither looks, sounds, or has ever acted anything like Nathan Drake, and that David O. Russell has recently developed an unusual neurological disorder which causes him to involuntarily describe the plot of National Treasure whenever he tries to talk about the Uncharted movie, Jaffe sounds pretty chilled out. You know, like he usually does.

"I wish Uncharted fans would have faith", he word-squirted, "that Amy, the crew at Naughty Dog, and the peeps at Sony will only allow the Uncharted flick to happen if it lives up to the franchise standards. I get you may be suspicious of movie makers, but on the game side, none of those peeps I listed above have done anything to arouse suspicion that they are sell outs. Quite the opposite"

A fair point. The Naughty Dog crew are indeed one of the few teams blending mega-budget blockbuster game design with genuine nuance and artistic integrity at the moment. How much creative control is written into the movie contract though, is unknown. I'm guessing between "not much" and "HAHA! You want WHAT!?". As Jaffe himself admits, there are "necessary differences in entertainment mediums". That's something I'm always banging on about, usually in relation to bad video game storytelling that apes movie conventions. But changing an entire plot and casting an unsuitable actor seemingly just because of star status? Seems unnecessary to me. And Jaffe, despite the above, seems to agree:

"At the same time, movie makers often get stuck in a tired way of thinking. In this case, the antiquated idea is: 'we have to have STARS to open the movie!' District 9, Lord of the Rings, Spiderman 1, and Avatar say 'hi'. Knight & Day, How Do You Know, and The Tourist also say 'hi', albeit with much less fervor"

Good point, well made. Thje idiotic obsession with big-name actors flies in the face of countless massive hits, yet Hollywood continues to roll with it. It's the same sort of thinking that butchers movies for the sake of cutting down the running time, while three-hour epics like Lord of the Rings, King Kong and Avatar do mega-money.

And as for the bit you really want to read, the bit where Jaffe goes all off the hook and gets sweary and up in someone's face like a big sweary man, it relates to this:

Yes, that was Uncharted movie director David O. Russell gracelessly dismissing a fan's concerns. While making it quite clear he doesn't know who Nathan Fillion is. Breathe, internet, just breathe. I'm just going to let Jaffe run with this one:

"What a f*cking dick. I mean, given the guy's reputation, it's not surprising. If a fan comes up to you who is clearly interested in what you are doing - even though he may disagree with your way of doing it-there is a gracious way of handling it. And you should not only handle it graciously because it's good PR for your movie (especially when a f*cking video camera is in your face and your core fan base is super internet/youtube/viral savy) BUT because it's just good mother f*cking manners. On a Hollywood set and in a Hollywood agency you may be a big deal. Out on the street though, you are just a trained monkey who is there to entertain the people when they see fit (be it with movies or games or songs or comics). So f*cking stop with the attitude. I hate that shit."

You have opinions, you say? Opine away.




  • deadpool9 - December 22, 2010 5:05 p.m.

    @Rivenscry - You don't bother to read the posts above yours, do you? :/
  • brochacho - December 22, 2010 11:53 a.m.

    whatever i meant invincible not invictus -_-
  • ChuckB - December 22, 2010 9:28 a.m.

    I don't think he was in Invictus.
  • Rivenscry - December 22, 2010 4:22 a.m.

    Why has no one mentioned Shooter yet? That was actually pretty decent, wasn't it? And as for District 9, I think he was talking about Peter Jackson as the producer, that was the pull for a lot of people... besides, it wasn't even that great...*ducks*
  • TheyCallMeTheMeatMarket - December 22, 2010 2:05 a.m.

    My wife pointed out to me that David Boreanaz (Booth on "Bones") would also make a great Nathan Drake. Sorry what were we talking about again?
  • BazyLastard - December 22, 2010 1:44 a.m.

    I can't simplify this any more: if you don't like this movie, don't buy a ticket to go see it. Any talk is only "heard" insofar as the listeners think it will help their box office numbers.
  • deadpool9 - December 22, 2010 1:05 a.m.

    Mark Wahlberg? He was excellent in The Departed. In fact, he got nominated for an Academy Award. He also made Shooter and Boogie Nights solid movies. He was terrible in terrible movies such as The Happening, Max Payne, and Planet of the Apes. The Perfect Storm, Four Brothers, Three Kings, and We Own the Night were decent efforts of his. He was better than Joaquin Phoenix (so great in Gladiator) in the latter. Long story short, Wahlberg is a decent actor. Right for Nathan Drake? I don't think so. But don't diss Wahlberg as a terrible actor. He only sucks when it's a badly written movie. If we're stuck with him, just pray that the writing miraculously hits a home run, or the movie is screwed.
  • mrm1138 - December 21, 2010 11:37 p.m.

    @DriveShaft, I wouldn't call Russell a "shit director." Three Kings was pretty excellent, and I don't think it could have been made by a shit director. That said, he does sound like a dick--Wahlberg is one of the few actors to ever work with him more than once--and it doesn't seem like he knows or cares much about the IP. I was actually a little excited at first when I heard he'd been picked as director because I liked the out-of-the-box thinking. (After all, this is a guy who made his name directing stuff that was decidedly not mass-market studio fare. Even the aforementioned Three Kings is pretty indie-minded for a studio release.) Unfortunately, the decisions he's made since then have proven him to be a poor choice. (Unless De Niro ends up playing Sully. That would be good casting.)
  • DriveShaft - December 21, 2010 9:21 p.m.

    So Mark Wahlberg ruined Max Payne, my favourite PS2 game, and now hes about to destroy Uncharted, my favourite PS3 game. And with a shit director to boot? I just hope Uncharted 3 doesn't get dragged down with this catastrophe
  • Spybreak8 - December 21, 2010 9:02 p.m.

    Haha I love the photo, perfect.
  • RicePuddingUK - December 21, 2010 8:34 p.m.

    If a video game film adaption is to work, they need to STOP recreating the GAME in MOVIE form but instead take the game universe and characters and add a new story to it. Like the Hitman film, sure it was mediocre but it didn't recreate the story of one of the games (and thus messing it up) instead it took the characters added a new story to its universe, set in between or after the games.
  • brochachojenkins - December 21, 2010 7:38 p.m.

    yuppp thats me in the pic and thanks for the love ;)
  • ventanger - December 21, 2010 7:32 p.m.

    lol... Now now child, we're all nerds. Is that a greased up Guido douchetard for your avatar?
  • Amnesiac - December 21, 2010 7:30 p.m.

    Brochacho, your posts cost me IQ points. Carry on.
  • brochachojenkins - December 21, 2010 7:16 p.m.

    @ventanger suck it you nerd , the point of your comment is?? Please excuse your self from this forum and go play with your wii
  • MajorPonch - December 21, 2010 7:02 p.m.

    I really like Mark Wahlberg, but we've already seen what happens when he is cast as a character he looks and sounds nothing like. Max Payne, anyone? Not only that, but Nathan is the obvious choice because he is pretty much the physical manifestation of Nathan Drake, AND they have the same name. Hell, I'd rather see Johnny Knoxville play Drake, for God's sake. I don't understand what this man is thinking and I can clearly see that he doesn't understand the source material whatsoever. The least he could do is "loosely" follow the plot of the games, rather than completely changing it into something that is going to be the same, run-of-the-mill adventure flick. I won't hold my breath that this will be good, but I'll probably end up seeing it due to my fandom anyway.
  • brochachojenkins - December 21, 2010 6:56 p.m.

    @razorwiretensho i see your point and im not saying your wrong ,and not true have you seen The Fighter ? i thought it was pretty good But just cause he doesnt look like him or sound like him doesnt mean he cant act like him ,hes an actor for a reason same could be said about tomb raider , angelina jolie acted like and looked the part but wasnt any good , and the opposite of what your saying the new batman franchise with christian bale , before he made batman he played in the machinimist and american physco and after you see those movies you cant say he can be batman ,but now you cant look at him without saying batman
  • ventanger - December 21, 2010 6:56 p.m.

    All you Uncharted fans... this movie is going to hurt. It's really going to hurt. Be prepared for a deep hurting. What happened to the term "box office poison"? If that was still a term that movie producers heard of, Mark Walhburg would be selling corndogs at a food court in Burbank. And brochachojenkins, your comment is so incredibly stupid and full of spelling and grammar errors, it would make a hilarious dramatic reading, you dumbass.
  • razorwiretensho - December 21, 2010 6:37 p.m.

    @ brochachojenkins And look at the "good" movies you listed. I'm sorry, but "marky mark" hasn't made a good movie in about 10 years. And he looks nothing like Nathan Drake. And sounds nothing like Nathan Drake. And acts nothing like Nathan Drake. See a pattern here? This dick-hat of a director only cast him as the lead because it's a name he knows, which turns alot of movies into complete drivel. "Hmmmm, better not go with this guy who can actually act, better pick Arnold because everyone seen that one movie" is killing the industry. And everyone who goes and supports it is only helping make things worse.
  • Denrok - December 21, 2010 6:04 p.m.

    OHMYGODHOWCOULDHENOTKNOWWHONATHANFILLIONIS???????????!!!!!!!!!! But seriously, that dude seems like an ass-hat of the highest order.

Showing 1-20 of 39 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000