Your Uncharted Movie Nightmares Might Not Be True

The Uncharted movie sure sounds rotten. David O. Russell directing Mark Wahlberg and a family of archaeologists? Stupid! Good thing the game's developer is saying the Hollywood actor's claims just aren't true. Well, sorta.

"First of all, all that stuff was denied by David O. Russell," Uncharted 3 director Justin Richmond tells Joystiq. "He actually called us up and was like, 'I don't know what these guys are talking about.'"

Does Russell know what he was talking about with the LA Times? "This idea really turns me on that there's a family that's a force to be reckoned with in the world of international art and antiquities ... [a family]that deals with heads of state and heads of museums and metes out justice," Russell told the paper earlier this month. A force to be reckoned with? Metes out justice? Really?

'Cause that's what sounds dumb, not the Mark Wahlberg part and not even the Robert De Niro bit. But according to Joystiq, Wahlberg is not "anywhere near" being confirmed for the lead role as Nathan Drake.

Just put Mark Wahlberg — or whomever — in jeans and a t-shirt. Give him good lines and have him climb and swing on things and punch guys in the face. None of this drivel about "a force to be reckoned with" and "metes out justice". If Russell can do that, Uncharted might actually be, as Wahlberg said, off the charts.

Uncharted 3 interview: The difference with Drake [Joystiq]


    Why not cast Nolan North? He looks reasonably similar to drake and I have a vague feeling he could do the voice...

      Karl Urban? Just puttin it out there since he's a damn good lookalike for Drake...

    Yeh, the wrong actor can still look good with a well written script. However, the script doesn't look like it's going to be going to good places.

    James Roday would make the best Nathan Drake, if you don't know who he is google him.

    As much as I like Nathan Fillion, I think James Roday would play the role better, and he looks the part, Nathan is just a bit too old/chubby these days.

    Heaven forbid we all get disappointed and the Uncharted movie will be included in the disappointment of the year awards, like PoP. Don't like being cynical but I can't see the point to this endeavour.

    I don't understand the – quite frankly, OBSESSION – behind thinking that what O' Russell said constitutes the ENTIRE movie. Are people retarded? Seriously I wanna know.

    It seems really ridiculous that you'd think Russell would tell you the plot to the entire movie in a couple of words.

    Think about the game for a second. You've got Nathan Drake – treasure hunter, explorer, and a lover of all things antiquated – But he also spends a obscenely large portion of the game committing something equivalent to genocide. He kills hundreds if not thousands of people, and he doesn't seem to care much, but whatever.

    Could it not be possible — I say again — COULD IT NOT BE POSSIBLE, that David is merely describing, wait for it, AN ASPECT of the story? Of the main character? Y'know, something to justify how and why he can morally, in the eyes of the audience, get away with killing so many people? I seem to recall that even though Indianna Jones is a professor of history and explorer, he still gets away with killing quite the number of people during his adventures, did people care? No. Because one, it was the 1980's and two, Indy was an army man (from what I can recall).

    Justification people. Not Plot summary.

    Listen and interpret. Try to use these for the THINKING, and not rely on people to do that for you.


Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now